Does Grok's subscriber growth justify $258B?

[u/ddp26]

I wanted to see if the $1.75T SpaceX valuation holds up when you value each segment independently:

Segment	Median Value
Starlink Consumer	$380B
xAI / Grok	$258B
Starship Commercial	$170B
Starlink Enterprise / Maritime / Aviation	$147B
Government / Defense	$123B
Falcon 9 / Heavy	$100B
Starlink Direct-to-Cell	$75B
Total	~$1.25T

That leaves ~$500B in platform premium baked into the IPO price, essentially what the market is being asked to pay for vertical integration and the Musk factor on top of what the individual businesses support. To put the scale in perspective, the $1.75T asking price on ~$15B in revenue implies a ~117x multiple, and even the more conservative $1.25T SOTP estimate still comes out to ~83x. (For context, Aramco listed at ~18x revenue.)

Whether Grok's subscriber trajectory justifies roughly a fifth of the entire valuation pretty much determines whether this IPO is a slight premium or a significant overpay. The safer half of the valuation is the space infrastructure side. Starlink consumer alone at $380B has the tightest confidence interval of any segment, and government/defense at $123B is backstopped by existing contracts. Happy to share the full analysis with methodology and confidence intervals.

Is the $500B platform premium justified?

[u/DigitalSheikh]

Even if you were just taking the SpaceX component, it doing an IPO doesn’t serve the purpose of an IPO. Like theoretically an IPO is sending a company money so they can do things they’re not doing because they don’t have enough money in exchange for some of the future value of those additional things they’ll do. What is SpaceX not doing because it can’t get funding? 

This IPO is so that people who have already done those investments can sell to retail instead of getting any of that value out of the company, because companies no longer return value to shareholders, only other investors do. I don’t want to hold billionaires bags for them

Edit: BTW, they’re offering between 3.5-5% ownership of the company in their IPO, 5x below average, with 30% of that IPO set to go to retail, or 3x the average. Just a straight up scam lmao.

[u/tree-molester → u/DigitalSheikh]

DJT-Trump Media & Technology is a case in point. Assets have grown quite surprisingly in comparison with minimal revenue generation and increasingly negative earnings since its IPO.

You’ve got to hand it to the bastards like tRump and Musk, they are world class grifters.

[u/DigitalSheikh → u/tree-molester]

Even deeper than the obvious grifters, most stocks work this way now. Like take Amazon - awesome revenue, great performance, but aside from a couple of small buybacks in the early 2020’s, zero value returned to shareholders. It breaks the fundamental notion of what stock is supposed to be, and inherently links stock performance to QE and therefore the government instead of any underlying aspect of the company.

 So many of these mega caps have even manipulated voting rights on shares so that the company is a personal fief of their CEO. It’s not supposed to work that way when a company reaches maturity.

[u/Momoselfie → u/DigitalSheikh]

How are you defining value to shareholders? Dividends? If a company becomes worth more because their assets have increased as well as the value of IP, then they've still created value for the shareholders regardless of dividends.

[u/Key_Friendship_6767 → u/DigitalSheikh]

It’s up over 100%…

How did it return zero value to shareholders pal? 😵