this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2026
412 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

86110 readers
3497 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The bond market’s assessment also jibes with SpaceX’s stock. It’s a profitless, non-dividend-paying, one-person-controlled, empire-building project trading at more than 100 times sales, about 30 times the valuation of the S&P 500 Index. That’s the very definition of a junk stock.

Original link: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-07-02/spacex-is-junk-that-s-what-the-bond-market-says

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] weew@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Prior to the IPO, I was absolutely interested in SpaceX stock. Regardless of Musk's antics, they are far and away the most advanced and most successful space launch company in the world.

Where traditional space launch companies like Boeing and ULA are floundering and failing, SpaceX was getting it done, to the point where NASA and the US Military had to move flights originally booked with ULA and hand them to SpaceX because they were the only ones able to get things done on schedule AND is more profitable than any other rocket company thanks to landing and reuse technology.

Then, of course Musk merged Twitter into xAI, merged xAI into SpaceX, then basically called SpaceX an AI company to attract more AI investment hype, and 99% of the stock value is AI hype.

And I have zero interest in SpaceX stock any more.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I'm in the same boat. For years I'd been excited to potentially own some SpaceX shares if they went public. No interest at all now due to xAI merger. I did gamble a bit of money on day 1 just because the odds of a pop were real, but i just got in and out and I was done.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

, they are far and away the most advanced and most successful space launch company in the world.

For orbital launches, maybe, but they have all kinds of competition now. Would they even be in business if not for huge government contracts without milestones?

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They dont have any competition at the scale of what falcon 9 can do yet. Blue Origin is getting close, but they're not quite there yet.

People are transferring contracts to falcon 9 because it works and is available.

If Starship succeeds, they'll be leap frogging everything being built now thats meant to compete with Falcon 9.

[–] evadersnack@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

It does seem to be a one pump chump

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

GrokAI is a poison pill that has been fed into a healthy rocket-satellite company. Sucks for the folks who value practical infrastructure that contributes to society.

[–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Sure, but without the AI part there's no way to get investors excited.

Space is really fucking hard and doesn't scale well.

Software scales up really well and theoretically can be much more profitable without additional overhead.

It's all part of the stupid AI bubble, but there's no way SpaceX would have hit that valuation on its own without Grok.

[–] ShredderFeeder@shredderfood.net 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's all pump and dump bullshit... You can't have a 2T value when the most the company has made in a year is 19B.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And over half of that was government contracts with no milestones.

Musk is the preeminent welfare queen...

[–] NM_Gringo@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (3 children)

It really wasn't that hard to see the SpaceX ipo was mostly a scam. And yet there are post after post of people losing their entire fortune, house, future after investing in this sow. Just blinding stupidity to invest in any company run by a ketamine addict who should be in prison over that DOGE bullshit.

[–] kinther@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

I know a guy who bought in to it. I asked him recently how thats going for him. He is underwater and bag holding... the hype for many retail investors was real. Glad I didnt jump in.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Specifically Elon Musk is an irresponsible ketamine addict. Most CEOs just stick to a cocaine addiction which leaves them moderately competent.

[–] iconic_admin@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It’s at $162 right now. Above where it IPO’d at. How are people losing their fortunes? I’m not defending spaceX or Elon (fuck that guy). But how are people losing a fortune exactly?

I know it’s a scam but honestly most of the market feels that way right now anyway.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Day 1: "Let's see how this goes."

Day 2: "It's up 20%? I can't miss out on this gravy train!"

After drop: "It'll go back up for sure."

I don't know how fast it was before it peaked, but not everybody bought right away. Or people added more money after they saw it going up.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The IPO was 135, opened at 150 and closed on day 1 at 160.95 (but went up to about 175 briefly), closed day 2 at 192, then 201, and then it started coming back down.

So if you bought in on day 1 or on day 6 onwards, you're probably doing fine, but anyone on day 2-5 and they're hurting.

Everyone will probably be under by the time the insiders can start selling shares though.

Edit: Nasdaq 100 adds it tomorrow, so there might still be another pump until the insiders sell.

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I bought right after the IPO at about $150. (A whole THREE shares lol) I watched it jump to $~220 and managed to sell at $215. Now it's just a spectator sport.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The worst part is they managed to convince a few indexes to add it within weeks rather than the way things work for everyone else. That means all us IRA/401k holders will be forced to own this stock indirectly if we have funds/ETFs that track them, and suffer the losses directly.

S&P didn't take the bait and won't put it in until next year, but I think it's going on NASDAQ in a few weeks, as well as a few others.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think it's in the NASDAQ 100 now, but not every retirement fund will have that. Thank god the S&P500 held out. Also, the S&P didn't change their rules and being big isn't enough to get in, they also gotta be profitable for a period of time, so 1 year isn't a guarantee.

Edit: My bad, Nasdaq is July 6th, so tomorrow. So it'll probably pump a little temporarily until insiders can sell.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 13 points 2 days ago (4 children)

And yet they were given the IPO, so now it's the public's problem...

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 54 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Once again, the IPO ($135/share or $2.1 Trillion) was based on the success of some long term goals like space-based data centers and a Mars colony of one million permanent residents.

This is from the same guy who promised a fleet of Tesla robotaxis by 2025.

Space experts have since pointed out that the vacuum of space does not sink heat.

Some of the assets thrown into the SpaceX valuation include xAI (which is falling behind OpenAI and Anthropic) and Starlink (which is suffering from congestion problems already and cannot be scaled up).

So this is not unexpected.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Starlink (which is suffering from congestion problems already and cannot be scaled up).

Where does this come from? Yes there are congestion issues at the moment and even congestion charges, isn’t this just a matter of more satellites? They only have like 10,000 but planned for a gazillion and are continuously increasing …. The very definition scalable

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 14 hours ago

I was reading off the articles that talked about the SpaceX IPO and why it's a bad investment. But a websearch seems to reveal a number of problems, from the collision risks caused by exponentially larger numbers of satellites to the environmental impact of the launches to get them into orbit. And then there's the problem that Starlink satellites are falling from space by the hundreds (and not always fully burning up in the atmosphere).

As it is, congestion, especially in cities, is critical, and Starlink is now charging extreme congestion fees. For now Starlink is being promoted as a rural option, since the US is disinterested in running fiber, or even copper. (We had programs that were so budgeted but now they've been shut down, and Musk has a lot of access to the White House.) But satellite internet doesn't work well for activities that require high bandwidth, such as gaming or high-resolution streaming.

Also revealed by my websearch, Starlink customers are desperate for better customer service, and instead are having to rely on online user groups.

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 2 days ago

Space experts have since pointed out that the vacuum of space does not sink heat.

I'm merely a casual Elite: Dangerous player and I could have told him that.

He's a genius btw

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago

The stock market. Running the world's economy on hunches and gut feelings and insider manipulations. It's time for that shit to go. Does anyone even need ticker-tape anymore?

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago

Nonsense, it's the stepping stone to our Space Elevator, Mars colonizing, asteroid mining, multi-planet galactic human empire! 4 reelz yo, we have AI supercomputers on a chip now, so obviously now that processing information is cracked, physics melts away!!!!

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 44 points 3 days ago (11 children)

I feel like I'm way ahead of the market.

(If only I knew how to turn that wisdom into money)

[–] BreakerSwitch@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Alas, the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

[–] cideyav138@lemmy.ml 29 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I'm convinced that to win in today's market, you really can't think deeply about anything.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I read somewhere that, if reusable rockets were all ok today, spacex needs some 450 launched just to get back to zero compared to Ariane 6 because of the massive costs.

So yeah "reusable" (I would like to know how reusable they actually are/how much they cost to reuse) is great and all but not yet economically viable it seems.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There has been questions about if those rockets were reused at all.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 13 hours ago

I read it was finicky and costly somewhat to re enable them for reuse, would love some hard information about all that.

[–] waitmarks@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It’s honestly not the rocket business that is the problem. Yeah, it’s risky, but it’s actually ambitious and starlink makes money. So, they have a money making product that could actually fund development of a real reusable rocket.

The actual problem is the AI money pit they slapped on to the side. The amount of money XAI spends is so insane it’s like 80% of the whole capex. Which most people dont realize because it’s still called spacex, but in reality the whole space business has become the side project for an AI company burning money at an unprecedented rate.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah and that is so unfortunate. They had so much potential to change the industry again, as a space company.

Using that space company to fund ai was a bad idea

[–] IamNefarious@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Falcon 9/Heavy has already shown that reusability is feasable. Their rocket business is not making money because of the development costs if Starship. But Starship is also incredibly ambitious compared to other rocketry programs

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Not the Apollo program 60 years ago.

[–] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I work in the aerospace industry, mainly to satellites these days but I've worked in launch in the past and have plenty of friends who have as well.

That 450 figure is probably all of Falcon 9s development which has gone through several design iteration cycles. Industry rumors point to a new Falcon 9 booster being around $50 to build and a million or two to refurbish on average. The re-use is saving them a significant amount, but the upfront design cost was just so stupid high.

It's also worth noting that Starlink supposedly launches at near cost meaning little profit for each of those, but then SpaceX turns around and prices Falcon 9 close to Atlas V for government contracts (90-150m total price so probably 60m profit) and gouges people on Transporter (they're almost certainly pulling in 150-200m on each of those)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›