this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2026
323 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

86074 readers
3094 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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 1 day ago (4 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.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I still want to know how having anyone on mars was supposed to be profitable.

Unless a government is paying you to run a private prison there.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 minutes ago

The point of manned missions and colonies now is proof of concept for the expansion of human civilization to other worlds, but yes, that's not a private for profit endeavor but a public interest one.

That said, the research and development done for the Apollo moon shots returned to the economy $14 for every one dollar spent, so it was absolutely a sound investment. Also, those patents were sold to the US government for a dollar each (at most), and so the technology gained like microcircuitry and memory foam, are public domain.

( RANT: The public domain, the creation of a robust one is -- according to the Constitution of the United States -- the very purpose of the whole temporary monopoly system that is the foundation of intellectual property law.)

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 6 points 15 hours ago

To clarify, the problem with starlink is that the investment is mostly done (they have the projected number of sats in orbit, give or take a couple thousands) so there is no rational reason for them to raise billions in cash.

In a rational world it would now have to prove itself on its own dime.

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 22 hours 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

[–] Faithless@lemmy.world 0 points 12 hours ago

To me it is unexpected in the sense that the market has been responding positive to all previous recent fantasies ..

Bit sadly it is still extremly overvalued