AJs Law: The number of bought-and-paid-for journalists bashing a company, is directly proportional to that company’s potential revenue growth in absolute terms. @CGrantWSJ @Tweetermeyer @lopezlinette @danahull @lorakolodny @russ1mitchell $TSLA $TSLAQ

SpaceX raised only $12B of capital before going public. With that $12B, they revolutionized the rocket industry, built a global satellite network, and created arguably the most innovative company of all time. The federal government spends $12B every 15 hours and still can’t get its shit together. Prior to SpaceX, NASA was sending astronauts into space on Soviet-era Russian Soyuz capsules. So no, I don’t find Elon’s wealth to be a problem, and I wouldn’t trust Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders to allocate a single dollar of it.

Ten years ago, Elon Musk and Jack Ma both looked like avatars of the future. Musk was building electric cars, rockets, satellites, and AI. Jack Ma was building Alibaba, the crown jewel of China’s internet economy. Fast forward a decade: Musk is worth $1.1 trillion. Jack Ma was forced into silence, Ant Group’s IPO was crushed, Alibaba lost its aura(its stock plunged by more than 60% since 2020), and China’s tech sector went from world-beating to politically domesticated. One entrepreneur was allowed to compound. The other was reminded who really owns the scoreboard. This is not just a story about two billionaires. It is a story about two systems. One system lets madmen build rockets to Mars. The other cuts down its most successful entrepreneur for flying too close to the sun. That is why Musk became the world’s first trillionaire. And Jack Ma became a warning label.

.@BernieSanders , it is a time to celebrate. @elonmusk has created enormous value for society by building @SpaceX, driving down the cost of rocket launches and creating a global satellite communication network that has brought high speed, low-cost internet and communication access to hundreds of millions and eventually billions of people along with critical advantages for our military and our nation’s defense. SpaceX and its technologies will cause an acceleration in the growth of wages and wealth creation globally, including in some of the poorest communities in the U.S. and around the world. Access to low-cost, high speed communications everywhere will allow children around the world to be educated, families to build businesses, and life-saving medical knowledge and care to be available everywhere. SpaceX will materially bring down the cost of compute, advancing AI and humanity. Meanwhile, 4,000 SpaceX employees yesterday became millionaires, including hourly wage employees who you claim you are trying to help. The Elon Musks of the world drive growth, global GDP, and provide access to goods and services at lower cost that would otherwise not exist. Elon’s nominal trillionaire status is due to his ownership of SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, the Boring Company and his other initiatives that have brought new technologies that improve our everyday lives. Elon is not sitting on a trillion dollar pile of cash, jewelry and gold. He is using his controlling stakes in his companies to advance mankind. Elon’s companies don’t pay dividends. They reinvest all of their capital to accelerate innovation and value creation. Elon is working 24/7 for all of us. He deserves respect and appreciation, not smears. Bernie, your socialism would never allow a SpaceX to be built. Socialism has only proven to impoverish mankind and lead to death and destruction. We need to create the conditions for more SpaceXs to be built, not attack the great entrepreneurs who are helping to advance our country.

Thanks, Elon. And thanks to you too, Gavin.

This chart is nutty

Organizations like SpaceX and Tesla? That kind of organization? Or do you mean the kind that are democrat PACs in disguise?

I did!

There’s been a lot of handwringing over SpaceX’s valuation lately, with some actually pretty well researched pieces (Morningstar) coming in 50% below the IPO price. The reason this was low is that they valued the company strictly through fundamental and financial metrics (which is fine) but didn’t apply any premium multiplier on top. Valuing $TSLA through that same strict lens over the years would never have come close to matching its actual market value. Call it the innovator’s premium or Elon premium — we could never quite quantify it in isolation before. Now we can use $TSLA as a baseline to value SpaceX. Profitability, growth, and TAM are the core variables for valuation. Because so much of the expected profit sits far in the future, we can proxy with revenue and margins instead. $TSLA’s ~15x sales multiple is a product of: • 20% gross margins (profitability) • High expected future growth, though stagnant in recent years (growth) • Wide optionality in autonomy and robotics (TAM) How much of that 15x is the Elon premium is difficult to quantify, but it’s embedded in the number. We can use it as a direct basis for SpaceX — there’s no reason the same premium wouldn’t apply. SpaceX 2025 gross margins: • Overall: 49% • Launch segment: 67% • Connectivity segment: 48% • AI segment: 33% Both launch and connectivity margins will rise substantially with Starship, but we’re not factoring that in (just as $TSLA’s margin profile will evolve with robotaxi). AI segment is dragged down by X advertising margins. As AI and infrastructure grow to become a bigger portion of the segment, margins improve. Q1 2026 margins already rose to 44%. The data center opportunity: $26B per year in contracted data center revenue from Anthropic and Google already represents over 50% of total revenue going forward. Using $CRWV and $NBIS as baselines for industry-standard margins points to ~70% gross margin. The $26B is currently surge pricing well above standard rates. I’m assuming it normalizes to 70% GM in the future. Some will push back that these are short-term contracts. They are — but these are real assets in short supply right now. If supply normalizes, surge rates will come down, yet the capacity remains highly valuable. And the main reason the contracts are short-term is that if Grok or Cursor really scales, SpaceX will need the compute for itself and can generate even higher margins than selling it as a neocloud. Blending the new data center margins with 2025 margins gets us to total gross margins for SpaceX of around 60% — that’s 3x $TSLA’s 20%. Based on the profitability variable alone (holding the Elon premium constant), SpaceX should be valued at 3x $TSLA’s sales multiple, or 45x sales. Conservative revenue run-rate: • $18B 2025 revenue • $5B Starlink growth in 2026 • $4B Cursor run-rate • $26B data center run-rate = $53B run-rate revenue (assuming zero growth in Grok) $53B × 45x sales multiple = ~$2.39 trillion. The Elon premium may be an ethereal concept we can’t fully quantify, but using $TSLA’s well-established valuation over the years as a framework lets us guesstimate how the market should treat SpaceX based on its margin profile alone. The other variables (growth and TAM) are up to your own projections. I’d argue SpaceX wins on both, but to keep it simple let’s call it a tie. That said, there’s something bigger here: being the modern-day equivalent of the South Sea Company or East India Trading Company, what extra premium should a near-monopoly over the emerging space economy command?

Unsupervised Robotaxi now in the entire Austin Metro area

Wow. Legend.

Leftism was always a pseudo radical movement. They don’t want to smash the system and eat the rich. They want to control the system and become the rich.

Incredibly sci-fi. Go SpaceX Go Starship

TIL Mark Cuban is retarded.

From factory floor to installed on stand in less than 18 hours - not bad for SN1!

This is the automotive world’s BlackBerry to iPhone moment.

This means Teslas drove more than 4 billion miles using FSD without a single fatality last year. A bigger increase in safety than the seatbelt.

Wut

RT @CuriousPejjy: 36! WHY IS THIS SO MUCH FUN TO TRACK?! $TSLA

The California Coastal Commission has issued a formal apology to @elonmusk and SpaceX, adding that it will not consider political views or speech in future regulatory decisions. • The Commission admits some officials made politically biased and improper statements about SpaceX and Elon Musk • It formally apologizes for those remarks • Agrees it will not consider political views or speech in future regulatory decisions • The Commission will NOT require coastal permits for most launch operations at Vandenberg Full statement: "The Commission agrees that it may not consider irrelevant factors in performing its function and specifically agrees that it will not take into account the perceived political beliefs, political speech, or labor practices of SpaceX or its officers in considering any regulatory action concerning SpaceX. The Commission acknowledges that Commissioners made statements, including during their October 10, 2024, hearing on the Base’s Falcon 9 launch program, that showed political bias against SpaceX and its CEO and were improper. The Commission apologizes for those statements, as set forth in the signed letter attached as Exhibit C." This filing means that SpaceX and the California Coastal Commission have reached a settlement in their federal lawsuit, and it provides long-term regulatory clarity for SpaceX for future Falcon 9 launches.