6 ms·

> ENGINEERED BY SPACEX It would be very interesting to see some kind of diagram depicting all of the corporate entities Musk is involved in and how each entity

by cj 2y ago

> ENGINEERED BY SPACEX It would be very interesting to see some kind of diagram depicting all of the corporate entities Musk is involved in and how each entity does business with one another. xAI just raised billions to help Tesla build out FSD (or at least that was part of the pitch). His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the most part. The closest comparison I can think of is Berkshire Hathaway (one person/group controlling multiple wide ranging private and public companies).

lupusreal 2y ago
Starlink and SpaceX have an even closer relationship than most other Musk companies; Starlink is a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX.
- tgma 2y ago
  > Starlink is a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX. Starlink is not a separate entity — it's a division of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. From Terms of Service[1]: > Your order for two-way satellite-based internet service (“Services”) and a Starlink antenna, Wi-Fi router and mount (“Starlink Kit” or “Kit”) is subject to the terms (“Terms”) of this Starlink agreement for the United States and its territories. These Terms, those terms incorporated by reference, and the details you agree to in your online order (“Order”) form the entire agreement (“Agreement”) between you (“customer” or “user”) and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (known as “Starlink” in these Terms). [1]: https://www.starlink.com/legal/documents/DOC-1020-91087-64?regionCode=US https://www.starlink.com/legal/documents/DOC-1020-91087-64?r...
  - jazzyjackson 2y ago
    I didn't realize SpaceX was just a nickname for Space Exploration Technologies Corp, TIL So the Terms of service is with SpaceX but apparently there is such a thing as Starlink Services LLC, but I'm just going off Wikipedia, all this corporate structuring is opaque to me.
    - tgma 2y ago
      > SpaceX was just a nickname for Space Exploration Technologies Corp It's slightly more than that: it's a legally recognized nickname for the actual entity, technically called a "Fictitious Business Name" (aka DBA, "doing business as") registered with the state. > there is such a thing as Starlink Services LLC One might register a bunch of shell companies in various jurisdictions, holding various assets and contracts during the course of business, for tax reasons, to limit the blast radius of liabilities and facilitate business (for example, retail gift cards, e.g. Amazon, are often issued by a separate legal entity.) I think there's a qualitative distinction there with what Berkshire Hathaway or perhaps Alphabet Inc. do with their separate businesses that are hands-off subsidiaries. It appears at the moment Starlink is very much intertwined with SpaceX and user contracts and the trademark are actually directly owned by SpaceX, so not sure what they are using that particular LLC for.
      - inemesitaffia 2y ago
        It's for users outside the USA
  - inemesitaffia 2y ago
    Outside the US, for Internet, your agreements are with Starlink Services LLC. Not with SpaceX
- kortilla 2y ago
  Starlink isn’t a company. It’s a product offered by spacex. Just like Falcon, Starship, and Dragon.
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    Starlink Services LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX.
paxys 2y ago
While your overall question is valid, Starlink is simply a division of SpaceX. There's no "relationship" to consider. They are one and the same.
- xiphias2 2y ago
  While it's true, SpaceX will raise money by making Starlink (the less important / easier business) public and keep SpaceX (the real business that makes it possible that Starlink depends on) private.
skissane 2y ago
> His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the most part. My understanding is that, given Tesla is a public company, any collaboration between Tesla and other Musk companies needs to be approved by the board (or maybe by other C-suite executives) without Musk in the room. Musk can come up with the idea for a collaboration, but then the decision that it is in the best interests of Tesla and all its shareholders to proceed with the collaboration needs to be made independently of him. By contrast, I don't think the rules apply as strictly to his other companies since they are privately held. The law cares a lot more about protecting shareholder rights in public companies than in private ones.
- Hamuko 2y ago
  Wasn't Musk pulling Tesla engineers to go work on Twitter?
- elAhmo 2y ago
  The board at Tesla is basically Elon’s buddies. There is no oversight or independence there, they do what he wants. If law was applied equality to billionaires as it does to regular people, he would be in jail for fraud.
  - briandear 2y ago
    If shareholders are happy, what business is it of yours? If they aren’t happy, they can sell the shares.
    - dullcrisp 2y ago
      SEC destroyed
    - elAhmo 2y ago
      Following the law should be above the shareholder gain. Mentality like yours is what got us in this situation where people are blatantly abusing the government for personal gain.
Onavo 2y ago
Berkshire is very different, they are a hedge fund/holding company and their main business is trading companies.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
samwillis 2y ago
It's similar (ish), but I think unfortunately the comparison distracts from your core point and observation. Musk Inc. is, in essence, a privet equity company. He raises a fund, and invests it along with his own cash into a business he knows well, and with which he believes he can disrupt the status quo. He's very hands on, understanding all the important core details, setting culture, and pushing hard. But he also delegates to experts he brings in to run his businesses. It's obviously not the same as PE, but there are distinct similarities. With each of his companies he clearly can't take an active role all the time, but what his team are experts at is identifying the areas he needs to be on top of, and they will quite literally fly him in for it. It seems to me it's always the start of something, be it a new company or project. He will be there 24/7 getting it off the ground, but then hand over to lieutenants to run. It's a formula that seems to work again and again. We're (well those of you in the US) are in for an interesting time over the coming year as he has a new project to kick start.
- cj 2y ago
  I’m curious why this is being downvoted (seems to hit the nail on the head)
  - archagon 2y ago
    Well, it's certainly how Musk likes to market himself.
    - altcognito 2y ago
      12 children, 3 billion dollars companies, "advising" the government on cutting millions of jobs", yet he is "very hands on"
      - walls 2y ago
        And hundreds of tweets per day.
      - pmarreck 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
numpad0 2y ago
You're describing a corporate conglomerate, in style of pre-modern to early industrialization era.
moralestapia 2y ago
Starlink has always been a SpaceX project. I don't see what's confusing about it.
morpheuskafka 2y ago
＞ His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the most part. It's not unusual for large companies to have a large web of corporate entities, but what's problematic is that they have different ownership rather than the same owners/owned by each other. (I started to say that one is public and others private, but it would be the same issue if two were public, as they would obviously not have the exact same set of owners.) When xAI makes a deal with Tesla, if xAI is getting the better end of the stick, that is a self-dealing problem that the SEC can investigate on behalf of Tesla shareholders. The assets of Tesla belong proportionally to its owners, so Musk or another large owner can't make deals that give their private company an advantage at the expense of Tesla owners. If Tesla gets too generous of a deal, that's something the non-Musk owners of xAI if any could raise an issue with, but when the public company is allegedly getting shortchanged, the SEC gets involved too. Moreover, even if you are trying to do it right, there is always the opportunity for someone to challenge you.
- Spooky23 2y ago
  Recall that Elon re-domiciled from “activist” Delaware to… whatever you call Texas and it’s reputation for corporate governance. And now, he’s becoming some sort of circus act to disrupt the bureaucracy of the Federal government. So I wouldn’t count on the SEC doing anything.
  - throwaway69123 2y ago
    If it ends up creating more Elon musk style success stories it can only be good for America.
demarq 2y ago
samsung family I think is the closest
SMAAART 2y ago
Starlink is a wholly owned subsidiary of subsidiary of SpaceX.
mavhc 2y ago
Isn't the Tesla supercomputer completely separate from the xAI supercomputer?
tucnak 2y ago
In the context of OP, the corporate structure of SpaceX et al. is about as far from interesting as it could possibly get. The obsession some posters have with rich people (and Musk in particular) is really unhealthy!

by cj 2y ago

lupusreal 2y ago

Starlink and SpaceX have an even closer relationship than most other Musk companies; Starlink is a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX.

tgma 2y ago
> Starlink is a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX. Starlink is not a separate entity — it's a division of Space Exploration Technologies Corp. From Terms of Service[1]: > Your order for two-way satellite-based internet service (“Services”) and a Starlink antenna, Wi-Fi router and mount (“Starlink Kit” or “Kit”) is subject to the terms (“Terms”) of this Starlink agreement for the United States and its territories. These Terms, those terms incorporated by reference, and the details you agree to in your online order (“Order”) form the entire agreement (“Agreement”) between you (“customer” or “user”) and Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (known as “Starlink” in these Terms). [1]: https://www.starlink.com/legal/documents/DOC-1020-91087-64?regionCode=US https://www.starlink.com/legal/documents/DOC-1020-91087-64?r...
- jazzyjackson 2y ago
  I didn't realize SpaceX was just a nickname for Space Exploration Technologies Corp, TIL So the Terms of service is with SpaceX but apparently there is such a thing as Starlink Services LLC, but I'm just going off Wikipedia, all this corporate structuring is opaque to me.
  - tgma 2y ago
    > SpaceX was just a nickname for Space Exploration Technologies Corp It's slightly more than that: it's a legally recognized nickname for the actual entity, technically called a "Fictitious Business Name" (aka DBA, "doing business as") registered with the state. > there is such a thing as Starlink Services LLC One might register a bunch of shell companies in various jurisdictions, holding various assets and contracts during the course of business, for tax reasons, to limit the blast radius of liabilities and facilitate business (for example, retail gift cards, e.g. Amazon, are often issued by a separate legal entity.) I think there's a qualitative distinction there with what Berkshire Hathaway or perhaps Alphabet Inc. do with their separate businesses that are hands-off subsidiaries. It appears at the moment Starlink is very much intertwined with SpaceX and user contracts and the trademark are actually directly owned by SpaceX, so not sure what they are using that particular LLC for.
    - inemesitaffia 2y ago
      It's for users outside the USA
- inemesitaffia 2y ago
  Outside the US, for Internet, your agreements are with Starlink Services LLC. Not with SpaceX
kortilla 2y ago
Starlink isn’t a company. It’s a product offered by spacex. Just like Falcon, Starship, and Dragon.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Starlink Services LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX.

paxys 2y ago

While your overall question is valid, Starlink is simply a division of SpaceX. There's no "relationship" to consider. They are one and the same.

xiphias2 2y ago
While it's true, SpaceX will raise money by making Starlink (the less important / easier business) public and keep SpaceX (the real business that makes it possible that Starlink depends on) private.

skissane 2y ago

> His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the most part. My understanding is that, given Tesla is a public company, any collaboration between Tesla and other Musk companies needs to be approved by the board (or maybe by other C-suite executives) without Musk in the room. Musk can come up with the idea for a collaboration, but then the decision that it is in the best interests of Tesla and all its shareholders to proceed with the collaboration needs to be made independently of him. By contrast, I don't think the rules apply as strictly to his other companies since they are privately held. The law cares a lot more about protecting shareholder rights in public companies than in private ones.

Hamuko 2y ago
Wasn't Musk pulling Tesla engineers to go work on Twitter?
elAhmo 2y ago
The board at Tesla is basically Elon’s buddies. There is no oversight or independence there, they do what he wants. If law was applied equality to billionaires as it does to regular people, he would be in jail for fraud.
- briandear 2y ago
  If shareholders are happy, what business is it of yours? If they aren’t happy, they can sell the shares.
  - dullcrisp 2y ago
    SEC destroyed
  - elAhmo 2y ago
    Following the law should be above the shareholder gain. Mentality like yours is what got us in this situation where people are blatantly abusing the government for personal gain.

Onavo 2y ago

Berkshire is very different, they are a hedge fund/holding company and their main business is trading companies.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

samwillis 2y ago

It's similar (ish), but I think unfortunately the comparison distracts from your core point and observation. Musk Inc. is, in essence, a privet equity company. He raises a fund, and invests it along with his own cash into a business he knows well, and with which he believes he can disrupt the status quo. He's very hands on, understanding all the important core details, setting culture, and pushing hard. But he also delegates to experts he brings in to run his businesses. It's obviously not the same as PE, but there are distinct similarities. With each of his companies he clearly can't take an active role all the time, but what his team are experts at is identifying the areas he needs to be on top of, and they will quite literally fly him in for it. It seems to me it's always the start of something, be it a new company or project. He will be there 24/7 getting it off the ground, but then hand over to lieutenants to run. It's a formula that seems to work again and again. We're (well those of you in the US) are in for an interesting time over the coming year as he has a new project to kick start.

cj 2y ago
I’m curious why this is being downvoted (seems to hit the nail on the head)
- archagon 2y ago
  Well, it's certainly how Musk likes to market himself.
  - altcognito 2y ago
    12 children, 3 billion dollars companies, "advising" the government on cutting millions of jobs", yet he is "very hands on"
    - walls 2y ago
      And hundreds of tweets per day.
    - pmarreck 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

numpad0 2y ago

You're describing a corporate conglomerate, in style of pre-modern to early industrialization era.

moralestapia 2y ago

Starlink has always been a SpaceX project. I don't see what's confusing about it.

morpheuskafka 2y ago

＞ His empire is divided into so many corporate entities, but they all cross-pollinate and are clearly under his direct control for the most part. It's not unusual for large companies to have a large web of corporate entities, but what's problematic is that they have different ownership rather than the same owners/owned by each other. (I started to say that one is public and others private, but it would be the same issue if two were public, as they would obviously not have the exact same set of owners.) When xAI makes a deal with Tesla, if xAI is getting the better end of the stick, that is a self-dealing problem that the SEC can investigate on behalf of Tesla shareholders. The assets of Tesla belong proportionally to its owners, so Musk or another large owner can't make deals that give their private company an advantage at the expense of Tesla owners. If Tesla gets too generous of a deal, that's something the non-Musk owners of xAI if any could raise an issue with, but when the public company is allegedly getting shortchanged, the SEC gets involved too. Moreover, even if you are trying to do it right, there is always the opportunity for someone to challenge you.

Spooky23 2y ago
Recall that Elon re-domiciled from “activist” Delaware to… whatever you call Texas and it’s reputation for corporate governance. And now, he’s becoming some sort of circus act to disrupt the bureaucracy of the Federal government. So I wouldn’t count on the SEC doing anything.
- throwaway69123 2y ago
  If it ends up creating more Elon musk style success stories it can only be good for America.

demarq 2y ago

samsung family I think is the closest

SMAAART 2y ago

Starlink is a wholly owned subsidiary of subsidiary of SpaceX.

mavhc 2y ago

Isn't the Tesla supercomputer completely separate from the xAI supercomputer?

tucnak 2y ago

In the context of OP, the corporate structure of SpaceX et al. is about as far from interesting as it could possibly get. The obsession some posters have with rich people (and Musk in particular) is really unhealthy!