5 ms·

* https://web.archive.org/web/20260414235001/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/spacex-ipo-elon-musk/686793/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260414235001/h

* https://web.archive.org/web/20260414235001/https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/spacex-ipo-elon-musk/686793/ https://web.archive.org/web/20260414235001/https://www.theat... * https://archive.md/w1p99 https://archive.md/w1p99 Seems like a weird article though, with some inaccuracy in key data: > The company is in fact relatively small and losing money. Whereas it's widely reported to be profitable: https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/spacex-generated-about-8-billion-profit-last-year-ahead-ipo-sources-say-2026-01-30/ https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/spacex-generated-ab... (many reports of that same info around) The article also contradicts itself later on: > SpaceX’s rocket-launch and satellite-internet businesses are enormously profitable near-monopolies. Was this article just AI generated spam? :(

barbacoa 6mo ago
They are likely including xAI and the massive training costs that entails in order to make it sound like all their ventures are losing money.
- whaleofatw2022 6mo ago
  In fact lumping xAI in that to cause a loss likely provides some tax benefits vs putting it with Twitter/X itself
- rsynnott 6mo ago
  I mean, either a company is profitable or it is not. You don't get to say "if you ignore the massive pile of burning money in our parking lot, we are profitable". Or, well, I suppose you can _say_ that (see WeWork), but you can't expect analysts to be too impressed with it. The S-1 will be interesting; I wonder if they'll try going with a bulllshit metric like WeWork did ("Community Adjusted EBITDA", which was, seemingly, pretty much "profit, if you exclude basically all costs").
- Zigurd 6mo ago
  Cockroaches everywhere: starlink revenue won't be enough to fund constellation sustainment. Refurbishment costs for Falcon 9 make the reusability economics dubious. And xAI is just a disaster. So is Twitter.
adjejmxbdjdn 6mo ago
The article states right up front that they’re not profitable because of xAI’s costs. So there’s nothing contradictory about it. In the second paragraph: > SpaceX’s annual revenue last year was less than $20 billion, and it lost nearly $5 billion, according to a new report from The Information, mostly because of xAI’s huge capital costs.
- peebee67 6mo ago
  That's right. SpaceX is likely a great business on its fundamentals, and starlink is probably even better. The meme-stock part of this is that they've swept all these different business up together. I would've loved the opportunity to invest in SpaceX and starlink, but I'm not convinced the AI and other parts of the business are anything other than a landfill fire. The orbital datacentre concept is just plain nutty and in a different way than most of Elon's major undertakings. Sweeping them all in together like this just creates a serious risk that the best space company in the world will go under when the AI bubble bursts.
  - __patchbit__ 6mo ago
    > The orbital datacentre concept is just plain nutty It's edge computing. Obsoletes the round trip for ground based AI crunch and power draw, cooling.
    - f_devd 6mo ago
      Except there is little cooling or power in space, depending on your position in orbit you could only have one of those at a time.
      - metalman 6mo ago
        military/industrial customers want this for tactical operations fully discreet low latency compute that integrates with there existing space hardware so the ability to run drones, and meatbots from space, with low hardware requirements on the ground, but with lets say 1000~2000 users max, power users, but not that many. so batteries, heat sinks,he refrigeration radiators, on a sattelite fleet. they have been trialing this for years and are pitching putting ALL of the military compute in space, no more dirty civilian hands on there toys
lp0_on_fire 6mo ago
The Atlantic aligns politically with people who do not align politically with Musk. It’s just red meat for their readers.
tcp_handshaker 6mo ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47606845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47606845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47613231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47613231
desecratedbody 6mo ago
SpaceX is profit in the sense that they report an adjusted non-GAAP version of EBITDA where they change the definition and inclusion of CapEx.

barbacoa 6mo ago

They are likely including xAI and the massive training costs that entails in order to make it sound like all their ventures are losing money.

whaleofatw2022 6mo ago
In fact lumping xAI in that to cause a loss likely provides some tax benefits vs putting it with Twitter/X itself
rsynnott 6mo ago
I mean, either a company is profitable or it is not. You don't get to say "if you ignore the massive pile of burning money in our parking lot, we are profitable". Or, well, I suppose you can _say_ that (see WeWork), but you can't expect analysts to be too impressed with it. The S-1 will be interesting; I wonder if they'll try going with a bulllshit metric like WeWork did ("Community Adjusted EBITDA", which was, seemingly, pretty much "profit, if you exclude basically all costs").
Zigurd 6mo ago
Cockroaches everywhere: starlink revenue won't be enough to fund constellation sustainment. Refurbishment costs for Falcon 9 make the reusability economics dubious. And xAI is just a disaster. So is Twitter.

adjejmxbdjdn 6mo ago

The article states right up front that they’re not profitable because of xAI’s costs. So there’s nothing contradictory about it. In the second paragraph: > SpaceX’s annual revenue last year was less than $20 billion, and it lost nearly $5 billion, according to a new report from The Information, mostly because of xAI’s huge capital costs.

peebee67 6mo ago
That's right. SpaceX is likely a great business on its fundamentals, and starlink is probably even better. The meme-stock part of this is that they've swept all these different business up together. I would've loved the opportunity to invest in SpaceX and starlink, but I'm not convinced the AI and other parts of the business are anything other than a landfill fire. The orbital datacentre concept is just plain nutty and in a different way than most of Elon's major undertakings. Sweeping them all in together like this just creates a serious risk that the best space company in the world will go under when the AI bubble bursts.
- __patchbit__ 6mo ago
  > The orbital datacentre concept is just plain nutty It's edge computing. Obsoletes the round trip for ground based AI crunch and power draw, cooling.
  - f_devd 6mo ago
    Except there is little cooling or power in space, depending on your position in orbit you could only have one of those at a time.
    - metalman 6mo ago
      military/industrial customers want this for tactical operations fully discreet low latency compute that integrates with there existing space hardware so the ability to run drones, and meatbots from space, with low hardware requirements on the ground, but with lets say 1000~2000 users max, power users, but not that many. so batteries, heat sinks,he refrigeration radiators, on a sattelite fleet. they have been trialing this for years and are pitching putting ALL of the military compute in space, no more dirty civilian hands on there toys

lp0_on_fire 6mo ago

The Atlantic aligns politically with people who do not align politically with Musk. It’s just red meat for their readers.

tcp_handshaker 6mo ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47606845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47606845 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47613231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47613231

desecratedbody 6mo ago

SpaceX is profit in the sense that they report an adjusted non-GAAP version of EBITDA where they change the definition and inclusion of CapEx.