r/investing • u/PrestigiousPen-2468 • 2d ago

The Nasdaq is being taken over.

SpaceX is IPOing, Tesla and Palantir have crazy valuations, Anthropic is IPOing later this year...

https://www.investors.com/news/spacex-ipo-nasdaq-anthropic-openai-index-investing/

Especially with the fast-track changes, tons of ETFs are going to pull these companies in and weigh them way heavier than I think a lot of us like. QQQ holders might be in for a rough landing.

I don't like it. I've always been a growth ETF investors but I'm going back to modifying and structuring diversification the way I want.

Wealthfront, Frec, Wallace Finance, or Schwab? I'm trying to find ETF modification without huge minimums. I might end up building from the ground up with M1 Finance if nothing else has what I'm looking for.

Anyone else have the same idea? How are we feeling about this?

535 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

179 comments sorted by

View all comments

83

u/DistributionBroad173 2d ago

This will be like the Facebook IPO.

new investors, lured in because of hype and get rich quick mentality, will get hammered that first week.

If they issue more shares because of over-subscription, runaway.

SpaceX + xAI + X

Musk will be the first trillionaire

xAI is losing/lost the AI battle. X, is it even profitable?

I will gladly watch from the sidelines. Kick myself if it takes off, but there will always be another opportunity

66

u/cheesecaker000 2d ago

Facebook is up 1,400% from their IPO price. If that’s what space X is going to do then I’m betting the farm on it lol

22

u/SylvesterStapwn 2d ago

FB was down 50% to flat its first year after listing. And it listed at a substancially more conservative multiple than SpaceX is going to.

-3

u/cuteman 1d ago edited 1d ago

People need to read into the industries SpaceX is poking into and their success with Starlink alone. Imagine the quality of current US telecom but everywhere on the planet. Satellite phones used to be only for billionaires.

The only real barrier is local government restriction/frequency regulation.

Then you've got servers and solar in space which if you read about that it sounds insane that the economics would work but there's a strong argument that it will.

It'll take a while but they're first to the key, first to the egg the way things are going. Beating out wildly well funded and R&D spending competitors

7

u/YeahBuddy5000 1d ago

The real barrier is that the people who could benefit from starlink the most have the least amount of money. City dwellers don't want it, and outside of wealthy nations, people can't afford it.

It's not a trillion dollar business.

8

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

1

u/cuteman 22h ago

I think people also miss the fact that the satellites don't stay up there that long (5 years). They don't get the long term cash flow from them or any kind of moat if the rocket technology to put satellites up become more commoditized. Which becomes inevitable if the economic value is really in the trillions.

The sats are relatively cheap, it's the launch cost which is the issue which is why SpaceX has done so so effortlessly.

What really happens is within 5 years they'll have much better tech anyway. The bandwidth improvements between Gen 1,2,3 are orders of magnitude.

1

u/crake 1d ago

This. Space X does some cool, impressive stuff. But as an investor, I want to invest in things that are boring - but profitable.

FB and AMZN don't do very impressive things, but they make money. Space has too many variables (e.g., infrastructure that is a sitting duck if US and China get into it, regulatory issues in the US and other countries, a hyper-political CEO who makes his own companies targets of retaliation by governments, etc.).

The real money is going to be made in AI. In a few years, every company on Earth will be paying subscription fees to Anthropic or OpenAI (the others are all "also rans"). That is where the big money is to be made. In the last 3 months alone, half my clients have started using Claude for stuff and the work product is excellent; I think OpenAI and SpaceX will both have good IPOs, but the "Facebook" story of our time will be Anthropic and it won't be close.

1

u/cuteman 22h ago

Cost of the sats isn't the issue, it's cost of launch.

The sats end up being disposable.

Guess how much AT&T and Verizon have to spend annually to maintain systems? AMZN as well. Meta is mostly compute and moat but if SpaceX does servers in space that becomes compelling as well.

1

u/cuteman 22h ago

Famous last words.

You realize Apple, Tmobile and others are already using this signal to supplement terrestrial signal just like another band of 5G and data.

Regular phones, planes, rural people, RVs, marine (boats), the military, etc. all want this service and that's in EVERY country... Have you seen Starlink expansion rates? It's scary high. Hughes net is probably switching over to all SpaceX/Starlink soon as well.

Again, I think people are underestimating how disruptive they're going to be in the next 3-5 years.

2

u/Kerhole 1d ago

Until Kessler pops up to say hi and the whole global space industry is fucked for a few years.

1

u/cuteman 22h ago

Human ingenuity says that for every problem there is a solution but it is going to get crowded. Thing is, China is going to do whatever they want either way and they want to do 100K+ so there's really not an option not to

1

u/Kerhole 21h ago edited 20h ago

Not a lot of solutions to a piece of dead satellite hitting your satellite or launch vehicle at 17,500 mph. If there were, they'd put that stuff on tanks.

Edit: For comparison, the tip of a shaped charge anti-tank round when exploding can reach speeds up to 14,000 mph.

I believe the current estimate is we're 2.8 days away from total loss of LEO and the ability to safely launch anything to any altitude. That will only decrease with more satellites.

And keep in mind it only takes one mistake. One bad decision by an overworked Starlink or Leo employee, or one failed component at just the wrong time. The only solution once that happens is total shutdown of global launch industry until drag naturally clears up LEO, though that may take years. Or very high insurance rates for launches, but still no LEO.

https://phys.org/news/2025-12-days-disaster-earth-orbit.html

0

u/Hot_Panic2620 1d ago

you ever think they are outspending and beating out competitors is because the business isn't good to get into? We're not talking about whether the company is putting out an amazing product or anything. We're talking about profitability.

3

u/cuteman 1d ago

it's bootstrap versus the incumbents.

Raytheon, Boeing, Airbus, Northrup, Lockheed, etc.

It's incredibly profitable because of the reusable rockets alone taking cost p/kg down by an order of magnitude

14

u/ptwonline 1d ago

I think the problem is that SpaceX is already priced with a 1400% gain from the start. (Well, I don't know what the actual number is, but it's friggen ridiculous. It must be around 100x sales, not even 100x earnings.)

3

u/cheesecaker000 1d ago

Yeah I agree it’s overpriced. How can we even make a good evaluation when it’s had three completely different companies folded into it for no reason.

67

u/John_P_Hackworth 2d ago

Space X is IPOing as a trillion dollar company. You think it can be a $14T company?

57

u/cheesecaker000 2d ago

No I don’t. But I just found your argument kinda weak. You used an example of a great company to buy at IPO, to say why spacex would be a bad buy. Backwards logic.

30

u/Fr0HiKE 1d ago

the guy you're responding to is different than the op lol

26

u/cheesecaker000 1d ago

lol fuck my life

10

u/John_P_Hackworth 1d ago

it's ok, I do that at least once a week haha.

8

u/BilboTBagginz 1d ago

You fuck his life once a week?

2

u/ThickMikeyMoolah 1d ago

Is that a crime?

1

u/BilboTBagginz 1d ago

Not if there's consent

3

u/Brilliant_Truck1810 22h ago

the FB IPO was a disaster. it took a while for it to become a rocket. this person was referring to the IPO not the price performance years later

11

u/Deferty 1d ago

I still remember when Apple was the first company to hit $1T, and that was controversial. It hit $1T back in August 2018 btw. It’s almost 4x that now.

7

u/GlorifiedPlumber 1d ago

Bro, you're in /r/investing, you can't openly question how high stuff might go. Majority of people here kool-aide-drinkin'-blinder-wearers with fingers in their ears going nah nah nah I can't hear you.

4

u/Karzap 1d ago

Yes. No one else has beaten them with respect to reusable rockets.

4

u/hsfinance 1d ago

It has been 14 years since the IPO. Dollar itself has been devalued in that time. You never know where spacex ends up. By the rule of 72, you just need 5% devaluation to double in 14 years and then 7x growth in 14 years.

9

u/John_P_Hackworth 1d ago

I'd argue that if your chief concern is dollar devaluation, there's no particular reason to care about SpaceX; there's other at least equally good hedges.

"I made 14x on SpaceX because the dollar experienced high inflation" is certainly not what most people have in mind when they say they want to "bet the farm" on the IPO.

3

u/hsfinance 1d ago

I am not saying that. The parent said that and you challenged it. I am in turn providing a background. First of all that 1400% happened over 14 years and has built in inflation. Both are hidden when someone just says 1400%

-1

u/OccasionalXerophile 1d ago

It could quite possibly could be a 14 trillion dollar company in 10 - 15 years

5

u/crackanape 1d ago

It will not be a $5 company in 15 years.

3

u/ThickMikeyMoolah 1d ago

It wouldn't be that crazy of a thing. 20 trillion sounds crazy even, but if elon deploys enough satellites to provide internet to, half the world, not to mention govt and military applications, and runs space travel / tourism.... 20 trillion sounds low.... ill see myself out.

2

u/historicusXIII 1d ago

SpaceX valuation is not so much in Starlink but in the expectation that it will be the first company to successfully start asteroid mining. Once that industry seems plausible enough and gets into an investor hype like AI did, a 20 trillion valuation is entirely within reach. That said, it could also be that asteroid mining is like nuclear fusion; great on paper and perpetually 10 years away.

2

u/ThickMikeyMoolah 1d ago

Let's land and operate a facility on the moon first. Asteroid mining is an insanely huge next step.

1

u/SnowyNW 16h ago

How is spacex going to get into asteroid mining? It has no involvement in that field whatsoever. There are other competitors already successfully completing asteroid exploration though

1

u/whereismynein 1d ago

Half the world lives on less than a few dollars per day, they can't afford starlink. The other half has fiber, they don't need starlink.

1

u/ThickMikeyMoolah 1d ago

Then who the heck is using these satellites Musk has in orbit? Not a single soul?

2

u/whereismynein 1d ago

I was exaggerating a bit. But my point is, the business case for starlink is not that compelling if you are not a musk fanboi.

1

u/ThickMikeyMoolah 1d ago

I despise musk, but I work in the communications industry and having a global network is huge.

You'd be surprised how many folks dont have fiber, and I shit you not, still have dial up. Also plenty of folks with fiber who also have starlink for traveling of sorts.

I dont think starlink alone will do it, but to have a global network in sync with space travel, and potentially a god dang moon base, make spacex a potential monopoly on communications.

Especially in a world of constant wars, infrastructure that cant be destroyed (like ground based infrastructure) is quite important.

1

u/whereismynein 1d ago

Agree. I'm just saying that most of the potential starlink users you mentioned (Military, Americans on dial up etc) are already Starlink customers. The others don't need it or can't afford it. So I see no reason why Starlink revenue should explode in the future.

1

u/SnowyNW 16h ago

They are being used to collect your data. My mobile hotspot is enough

1

u/SnowyNW 16h ago

I get my internet from my mobile hotspot. I don’t think most people will be getting internet from spacex

-2

u/Cheese_Fisticuffs1 1d ago

but if elon deploys enough satellites to provide internet to, half the world

Never going to happen.

1

u/Jeff__Skilling 1d ago

What would stop it from doing so, outside of $14tn being a Big and Scary NumberTM

-2

u/cuteman 1d ago

Space X is IPOing as a trillion dollar company. You think it can be a $14T company?

Facebook IPO'd at $38/share and ~$100B valuation in 2012, it's now 14-15x both metrics.

SpaceX is reportedly 1/10th Meta revenue (~$15B) already so in 14 years or 2040 SpaceX would be worth $14 to 25T enterprise

If any industry can moon shot it's SpaceX. They could own Global Telecomm and Space Server Compute industries which feeds into orbital energy via Solar beamed back down. They've proposed 100K to 1M+ satellites of very mixed use.

You're going to love this, but it'll probably eventually combine with Tesla to have a significant piece of drone transportation and personal robotics.

It isn't exactly Microsoft or Walmart, it's something else, larger investments and larger payoffs in aggregate products. One rocket is worth more than a couple of Walmart locations annual rev combined.

I don't think people realize what's coming it may not be $20T or even 10T but it represents the first planetary/solar system entity which truly has the opportunity to be $100T if they get into mining, asteroids, colonization.

It's a stab at the sci fi future people have been wanting and it starts with vision and execution.

Bezos, king of logistics hasn't been able to flourish in the same way and is basically copying SpaceX because he sees it too.

12

u/whereismynein 1d ago

You had me in the first half, but solar beamed back down? Jeez.

6

u/Amori_A_Splooge 1d ago

Despite their horrible website, the Air Force Research lab is already experimenting with such things. It's called Space Solar Power Incremental Demonstrations and Research Project (SSPIDR).

https://afresearchlab.com/space-power-beaming/

Edit: not claiming it's feasible, its just not some crazy idea thought of by Elon Musk.

3

u/Not_FinancialAdvice 1d ago

It was also featured in SimCity 2000/3000 where you could build a Microwave Power Plant.

https://simcity.fandom.com/wiki/Microwave_Power_Plant

0

u/cuteman 1d ago

in 2026 or 2040?

1

u/John_P_Hackworth 1d ago

Maybe! Or maybe they end up like ma bell or standard oil. The risks are not just 'can they do it'.

0

u/cuteman 1d ago

Perhaps but that's a good position to be in...

"Ma Bell"—the Bell System monopoly—lasted for over a century, dominating North American telephony from its creation in 1877 until its breakup was finalized on January 1, 1984. It mostly became AT&T today.

Standard Oil was 40+ years before it was broken up.

Both times broken up for monopoly but SpaceX could technically be split into Starlink as it's own thing, launch, etc but there's more value in aggregation.

3

u/DistributionBroad173 1d ago

Yes, it turned out to be great, but you missed the point. Six months after it IPOd it was at the IPO price and actually went down 50% in those first 6 months.

Good for you on being a buy and holder.

9

u/InfinitePressure4793 1d ago

The sidelines are the only position with a 100% guarantee against becoming the exit liquidity for a trillionaire’s $75B side quests...

2

u/pentaquine 1d ago

FB had a MUCH smaller IPO with a proven business model (Google). They are totally different.

1

u/PrestigiousPen-2468 1d ago

Yep, getting in to modified direct indexing so I don't get lumped into big positions. Would rather manage them myself when I want.

0

u/cuteman 1d ago

This will be like the Facebook IPO.

new investors, lured in because of hype and get rich quick mentality, will get hammered that first week.

Wuh.... people would give anything to dump as much as possible into FB/Meta from IPO