3 ms·

Like every other group, there is some amount of groupthink happening with Wall Street analysts. They all came to similar incorrect conclusions because they are

by hx8 3mo ago

Like every other group, there is some amount of groupthink happening with Wall Street analysts. They all came to similar incorrect conclusions because they are working with similar information using similar techniques towards similar goals. This creates a level of bias, even if banks didn't have incentives to write bullish projections. Getting a diversity of opinions doesn't mean talking to 10 experts in the same field, but talking to experts in 10 related fields.

khurs 3mo ago
It's not Group Think I would say, more capitalism. SpaceX has all the big name banks and VCs and investors involved. So the banks know that if they don't fall in line, the VC's may not select them for future IPOs/make them lead bank and also not use them for other work. And the banks know that the big name investors who invested in the VCs are also their high net worth day to day clients buying their services. The banks loyalties and financial interests are not in protecting normal everyday people, it's protecting their business and individual bonuses. (SpaceX paid around $600 Million in fees for the IPO! And that's after negotiating a low percentage). The news sites know that if they speak out of line too boldly, they won't be 1st in line to get exclusive stories and invites to events. Or Advertising Spend. It's for governments and regulators to put rules in, otherwise capitalists will carry on in their own interests.
pinkmuffinere 3mo ago
> This creates a level of bias, even if banks didn't have incentives to write bullish projections. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I think this is misleading. The bad estimate of fair price is _overwhelmingly_ due to incentives for bullish projections. I have no source to back this up, aside from common sense. SPCX is supposedly an AI-company now, even though we all know this is a lie. It's AI-only revenue within 5 years[1] is projected to be larger than most SP500 companies' full revenue today[2]. On the face of it, this is silly, and I don't accept that all the analysts group-thought their way to believing it. [1] https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/goldman-sachs-expects-spacexs-ai-152151131.html https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/goldma... [2] https://stockanalysis.com/list/sp-500-stocks/ https://stockanalysis.com/list/sp-500-stocks/
piloto_ciego 3mo ago
SpaceX is literally the only company that has a reliable partially re-usable launch vehicle, and they're probably going to be the only company with a fully re-usable launch vehicle. Nobody else except maybe for some chinese companies and kind of RocketLab is even close. They basically have a monopoly... They're launching like 150 rockets a year or something like that? It's bananas. They have star link too. Honestly, I think people are asleep at the wheel with the valuation and shorting it seems stupid. They have the star shield thing, and hypothetically point-to-point QRF systems for governments with star ship. Then there's space data centers. I know people gnash their teeth at that, but I'm pretty convinced the ass-pain associated with getting a data center constructed on the planet with all the NIMBY stuff will be will incentivize space data centers too.
- zulux 3mo ago
  Any idea how they're handling the space data center heat problems? Energy harvesting in space is easy, while getting rid of heat is quite hard.
  - piloto_ciego 3mo ago
    Scott Manley had a really good video on it that more or less confirmed my "bar napkin approximations" when people first started talking about this stuff. I think it's this one? https://youtu.be/DCto6UkBJoI?si=opcoaBEqKmw4LCrF https://youtu.be/DCto6UkBJoI?si=opcoaBEqKmw4LCrF Anyway, I think sun synchronous orbit (basically slightly off from polar) and pointing the solar panels toward the sun and the radiator away... It's not as far fetched as people would have you believe.
    - JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
      Yup. It’s weirdly closer than I would have thought before sitting down with pen and paper.
    - jordanb 3mo ago
      Did we watch the same video? My takeaway from Manley is that it is something that can pencil out as a physics problem with a very carefully selected orbit But as an engineering problem it's quite another thing. For example he talks about how far you have to pump the ammonia, and then you either need a very large amount of ammonia, or you have to pump a smaller amount of ammonia very fast through kilometers of plumbing. Of course there are highly theoretical ideas like making an atmosphere of coolant around the satellite or something but he left that stuff on the sci fi category.

by hx8 3mo ago

khurs 3mo ago

It's not Group Think I would say, more capitalism. SpaceX has all the big name banks and VCs and investors involved. So the banks know that if they don't fall in line, the VC's may not select them for future IPOs/make them lead bank and also not use them for other work. And the banks know that the big name investors who invested in the VCs are also their high net worth day to day clients buying their services. The banks loyalties and financial interests are not in protecting normal everyday people, it's protecting their business and individual bonuses. (SpaceX paid around $600 Million in fees for the IPO! And that's after negotiating a low percentage). The news sites know that if they speak out of line too boldly, they won't be 1st in line to get exclusive stories and invites to events. Or Advertising Spend. It's for governments and regulators to put rules in, otherwise capitalists will carry on in their own interests.

pinkmuffinere 3mo ago

> This creates a level of bias, even if banks didn't have incentives to write bullish projections. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I think this is misleading. The bad estimate of fair price is _overwhelmingly_ due to incentives for bullish projections. I have no source to back this up, aside from common sense. SPCX is supposedly an AI-company now, even though we all know this is a lie. It's AI-only revenue within 5 years[1] is projected to be larger than most SP500 companies' full revenue today[2]. On the face of it, this is silly, and I don't accept that all the analysts group-thought their way to believing it. [1] https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/goldman-sachs-expects-spacexs-ai-152151131.html https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/goldma... [2] https://stockanalysis.com/list/sp-500-stocks/ https://stockanalysis.com/list/sp-500-stocks/

piloto_ciego 3mo ago

SpaceX is literally the only company that has a reliable partially re-usable launch vehicle, and they're probably going to be the only company with a fully re-usable launch vehicle. Nobody else except maybe for some chinese companies and kind of RocketLab is even close. They basically have a monopoly... They're launching like 150 rockets a year or something like that? It's bananas. They have star link too. Honestly, I think people are asleep at the wheel with the valuation and shorting it seems stupid. They have the star shield thing, and hypothetically point-to-point QRF systems for governments with star ship. Then there's space data centers. I know people gnash their teeth at that, but I'm pretty convinced the ass-pain associated with getting a data center constructed on the planet with all the NIMBY stuff will be will incentivize space data centers too.

zulux 3mo ago
Any idea how they're handling the space data center heat problems? Energy harvesting in space is easy, while getting rid of heat is quite hard.
- piloto_ciego 3mo ago
  Scott Manley had a really good video on it that more or less confirmed my "bar napkin approximations" when people first started talking about this stuff. I think it's this one? https://youtu.be/DCto6UkBJoI?si=opcoaBEqKmw4LCrF https://youtu.be/DCto6UkBJoI?si=opcoaBEqKmw4LCrF Anyway, I think sun synchronous orbit (basically slightly off from polar) and pointing the solar panels toward the sun and the radiator away... It's not as far fetched as people would have you believe.
  - JumpCrisscross 3mo ago
    Yup. It’s weirdly closer than I would have thought before sitting down with pen and paper.
  - jordanb 3mo ago
    Did we watch the same video? My takeaway from Manley is that it is something that can pencil out as a physics problem with a very carefully selected orbit But as an engineering problem it's quite another thing. For example he talks about how far you have to pump the ammonia, and then you either need a very large amount of ammonia, or you have to pump a smaller amount of ammonia very fast through kilometers of plumbing. Of course there are highly theoretical ideas like making an atmosphere of coolant around the satellite or something but he left that stuff on the sci fi category.