5 ms·

SpaceX is the one to get. It’s the next Tesla once starlink is fully operational.

by xwdv 6y ago

thoughtstheseus 6y ago
They’ve already announced an intention to spinoff that business line.
- bpodgursky 6y ago
  Almost certainly with a controlling share held by SpaceX proper. Owning SpaceX will still be a strong play on starlink. They aren't going to just sell it off for chump change.
- Answerawake 6y ago
  Was there a particular reason?
  - perlgeek 6y ago
    Being an ISP and being a launch company are very different business models, different regulations apply, different operational expertise is required and so on. If you're focused on getting to humans to Mars, running an ISP is a distraction, even if it comes with good cash flow. If you're running an ISP, getting to Mars is a distraction. It's better to separate thees two aspects into separate companies.
- nickik 6y ago
  This is wrong. Shotwell said once that they maybe do it. But Elon is clearly against it. Go check out the interview at the Airforce conference.
marvin 6y ago
Their market cap is currently 20X what Tesla's was when they IPOed, though. The biggest growth phase (in terms of percentages, likelihoods, risk) is behind them. What JPM is trying to do here, is really just extending the point where relatively normal people can buy their stock slightly downwards on the growth curve, slightly closer to the end of the hockey stick. Sarbanes-Oxley and the whole accredited investor situation is really a big shame when it comes to having an even remotely level playing field for long-term speculative investments. Except in very rare cases, where the public markets were the only option for getting enough capital fast, IPOs currently serve more as a dumping ground for companies that have finished most of their growth. Index funds that don't care much can take over from there. Okay, it's harder to get scammed, but you lose the ability to invest in the biggest growth companies along with that.
- tiborsaas 6y ago
  > The biggest growth phase (in terms of percentages, likelihoods, risk) is behind them. That sounds wrong to me, they haven't even tapped much into their potential yet. SpaceX is still proving that they are a reliable, viable alternative to government backed space access. To my feeling they are at 1-5% of their journey.
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    Their space launch business will fail hard if the launch market doesn't pick up soon - all their investor presentations and financial forecasts assume 50 launches a year, yet the reality so far this year is only ~5 actual paid launches from external customers. For starlink, I could imagine 75% of the world banning it simply because the network is run by a foreign company. Governments want to keep infrastructure locally owned and controlled. North America is a tiny fraction of the service area, and the only big funding sources on offer are the US government for serving rural communities, and the US government for military use worldwide. If both those fall through, starlink will fail. If starlink fails and the launch market doesn't pick up, SpaceX will fail.
    - tiborsaas 6y ago
      Fail hard is a bit hyperbole :) A company this flexible will find ways. They might do space tourism. A great enabler will be their Dear Moon mission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DearMoon_project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DearMoon_project I can't see how individual nations can ban Starlink. A small dish antenna will be indistinguishable from the rest of dish antennas: https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-internet-user-terminal-ground-station-possible-pictures-2020-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-in...
      - rcMgD2BwE72F 6y ago
        >I can't see how individual nations can ban Starlink. Tell me how Starlink will smuggle dishes in the country, and how will they customers pay the subscription?
itsoktocry 6y ago
>SpaceX is the one to get Hard to say. There are whispers that they bleed cash, which might be the real reason they don't want to go public: publicizing their financials. It's not that easy to make money launching rockets.

SpaceX is the one to get. It’s the next Tesla once starlink is fully operational.

by xwdv 6y ago

SpaceX is the one to get. It’s the next Tesla once starlink is fully operational.

thoughtstheseus 6y ago

They’ve already announced an intention to spinoff that business line.

bpodgursky 6y ago
Almost certainly with a controlling share held by SpaceX proper. Owning SpaceX will still be a strong play on starlink. They aren't going to just sell it off for chump change.
Answerawake 6y ago
Was there a particular reason?
- perlgeek 6y ago
  Being an ISP and being a launch company are very different business models, different regulations apply, different operational expertise is required and so on. If you're focused on getting to humans to Mars, running an ISP is a distraction, even if it comes with good cash flow. If you're running an ISP, getting to Mars is a distraction. It's better to separate thees two aspects into separate companies.
nickik 6y ago
This is wrong. Shotwell said once that they maybe do it. But Elon is clearly against it. Go check out the interview at the Airforce conference.

marvin 6y ago

Their market cap is currently 20X what Tesla's was when they IPOed, though. The biggest growth phase (in terms of percentages, likelihoods, risk) is behind them. What JPM is trying to do here, is really just extending the point where relatively normal people can buy their stock slightly downwards on the growth curve, slightly closer to the end of the hockey stick. Sarbanes-Oxley and the whole accredited investor situation is really a big shame when it comes to having an even remotely level playing field for long-term speculative investments. Except in very rare cases, where the public markets were the only option for getting enough capital fast, IPOs currently serve more as a dumping ground for companies that have finished most of their growth. Index funds that don't care much can take over from there. Okay, it's harder to get scammed, but you lose the ability to invest in the biggest growth companies along with that.

tiborsaas 6y ago
> The biggest growth phase (in terms of percentages, likelihoods, risk) is behind them. That sounds wrong to me, they haven't even tapped much into their potential yet. SpaceX is still proving that they are a reliable, viable alternative to government backed space access. To my feeling they are at 1-5% of their journey.
- londons_explore 6y ago
  Their space launch business will fail hard if the launch market doesn't pick up soon - all their investor presentations and financial forecasts assume 50 launches a year, yet the reality so far this year is only ~5 actual paid launches from external customers. For starlink, I could imagine 75% of the world banning it simply because the network is run by a foreign company. Governments want to keep infrastructure locally owned and controlled. North America is a tiny fraction of the service area, and the only big funding sources on offer are the US government for serving rural communities, and the US government for military use worldwide. If both those fall through, starlink will fail. If starlink fails and the launch market doesn't pick up, SpaceX will fail.
  - tiborsaas 6y ago
    Fail hard is a bit hyperbole :) A company this flexible will find ways. They might do space tourism. A great enabler will be their Dear Moon mission: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DearMoon_project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DearMoon_project I can't see how individual nations can ban Starlink. A small dish antenna will be indistinguishable from the rest of dish antennas: https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-internet-user-terminal-ground-station-possible-pictures-2020-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-in...
    - rcMgD2BwE72F 6y ago
      >I can't see how individual nations can ban Starlink. Tell me how Starlink will smuggle dishes in the country, and how will they customers pay the subscription?

itsoktocry 6y ago

>SpaceX is the one to get Hard to say. There are whispers that they bleed cash, which might be the real reason they don't want to go public: publicizing their financials. It's not that easy to make money launching rockets.