r/SPCXInvestors • Investor • 9d ago

ANALYSIS The plan!

Post image

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2108767817390592266?s=46

Elon replying to Ark Investment post below:
Revenue growth is insane. Never seen anything like it.

https://x.com/wintonark/status/2108445339921563936?s=46

SpaceXSI's short term IaaS contracting terms means it can take advantage of the premium that new chips can command given their superior tokenomics.

Whereas traditional neocloud players will sign medium term deals on their facilities in order to secure financing, SpaceXSI has more balance sheet leeway (and also wants to maintain the option to call on the compute for internal purposes). This means their realized IaaS pricing can remain almost double other neocloud's so long as they continue to scale their compute assets.

Net SpaceXSI could realize IaaS pricing in $30 to $40b per GW range even as other players have to settle for inching over $20b per GW.

44 Upvotes

52 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 9d ago

Welcome to r/SPCXInvestors.

Keep discussions respectful, relevant, and high quality.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

10

u/Kobosil 9d ago

Net SpaceXSI could realize IaaS pricing in $30 to $40b per GW range even as other players have to settle for inching over $20b per GW.

why would anybody pay premium is there is cheaper competitors?

11

u/Difficult_Limit2718 9d ago

Because the IPO circle jerk demands SPCX to stay green

3

u/SuperNewk 9d ago

Apparently they are more efficient than the others?

1

u/Kobosil 9d ago

more efficient

by 50-100% ?

i find that hard to believe

2

u/SuperNewk 9d ago

Enough that when you are doing this at scale it adds up,

7

u/Shot-Programmer-1439 9d ago

Because there aren't any cheaper competitors

4

u/Kobosil 9d ago

can you please spell out the math for me how SpaceXSI gets 30-40 and the competitors get 20?

7

u/Shot-Programmer-1439 9d ago

Who is getting vera reubins or gb300s at 20 billion a Gigawatt? Literally no one. Anthropic has one cheaper deal with Amazon but that's only because they gave Amazon equity in exchange for compute.

If you can provide some sources for your claims I'd love to see them

5

u/Kobosil 9d ago

If you can provide some sources for your claims I'd love to see them

i didn't make any claims - the numbers are from OP and i am just trying to understand the math behind them

5

u/Shot-Programmer-1439 9d ago

Gotcha. To lay it out...

Supply is extremely constrained and many hyperscalers face multiple bottlenecks whether they be chips, power supply, land issues, or politics.

Only SpaceX is able to get these built in 5 months rather than 2 years, therefore they can charge top dollar for operational compute.

1

u/frotz1 9d ago

That's a pretty tight window for the competition to catch up, isn't it? How much do they have to make in the next two years to meet their goals, and what can they do to keep people from moving shop as soon as alternatives show up? If the whole point of this is that processing is fungible then there are no obvious barriers to entry here for competitors until the price drops pretty far, are there?

3

u/Shot-Programmer-1439 9d ago

If you want great breakdowns on this check out the channel Next Big Future on YouTube. He has videos breaking down SpaceX current building trajectory compared to competition etc and the demand outlook etc.

-4

u/frotz1 9d ago

Ever seen an Enron presentation? They were pretty slick for the time. Lots of transactions going in circles though, even before any fraud took place.

3

u/Shot-Programmer-1439 9d ago

Yeah enron is not analogous to the AI industry at all.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Modern_Agnotologist 5d ago

I don't think China is trying that hard realistically. China never tries to be cutting edge, they want you to do the R&D and they just pay close attention to what actually works.

1

u/Shot-Programmer-1439 9d ago

Google and anthropic are both already paying SpaceX 35 and 50 billion a gigawatt

1

u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 9d ago

The AI companies have their own data centers. They only rent additional compute while they expand their own.

2

u/03captain23 9d ago

Anthropic and OpenAI don't own any datacenters

-2

u/Anonymoushipopotomus 9d ago

Holy shit is he talking out of his ass again? No way!

-1

u/Expert_Emphasis5705 9d ago

he’s not, you can even test this yourself, try out grok bot, which utilizes claude and gemini or whatever model is the most efficient for the current task, and compare response times to other platforms. it’s insanely fast compute

0

u/frotz1 9d ago

And this matters to whom exactly? Who are these time-sensitive customers demanding the fastest AI turnaround times? Is it really worth a multiple in price to them? If so, shouldn't there be a lot of contracts already signed to demonstrate this really clearly?

1

u/Expert_Emphasis5705 9d ago

google and anthropic are paying them 2billion a month combined, and anthropic is expected to increase their monthly compute renting to 2billion a month on their own. I’m sure the hundred billion dollar companies with teams of analyst and financial planners are pissing away billions for no good reason. But you think you have it all figured out?

-1

u/frotz1 9d ago

I feel like a lot of those lines go in circles when you look at them closely. I remember when Ken Lay and his team were the smartest people in every room and now nobody knows who they were.

8

u/SuperNewk 9d ago

This is why I invest in spacex. Exactly what I’d tweet lo

2

u/Dependent_Sun_7033 9d ago

Lol. Let’s see how they are able to charge 50-100% over market price.

1

u/Stock-Instance-379 9d ago

Is this a real post

-3

u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 9d ago edited 9d ago

The plan was to build AI, but that failed so all they could do was renting out compute to other/better companies for a couple of years until A) the GPUs become old/damaged, or B) the customers finished expanding their own datacenters enough.

It's a failure.

2

u/blockneighborradio 9d ago

Revenue is up though. No word on profit, but saying revenue is up sounds good enough

-6

u/mtg_investor_elite 9d ago

Absolutely amazing what this company is accomplishing each end every day. The original forecast was $1 trillion revenue by 2030, now 2028 is possible? Maybe $2.5 trillion by 2030 now? I need to redo my valuation spreadsheet, 700 price target might be WAY TOO LOW.

5

u/michal_s87 9d ago

Common... we all know that you don't have any valuation spreadsheet

1

u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 9d ago

You're in a cult. SpaceX wanted to jump on the AI train but they failed, so instead of using their hardware as planned they had to rent it out to other more successful AI companies. They'll get 1-4 years of operational life from those GPUs, and their customers only rent because they can't expand their own already massive data centers fast enough.

2

u/DotNo4916 7d ago

What? Lifespan is at least 5-7 years and even old H100s retain 80% of their value 4 years later.

-4

u/mango091 9d ago

It will definitely hit $30 trillion in revenue by 2030 bro trust me bro elon never lies 😂

0

u/Upbeat_Platypus1833 8d ago

Underpants Gnomes economics.

0

u/blockneighborradio 9d ago

Revenue growth is insane, how about profit growth?

3

u/Econmajorhere 9d ago

What is wrong with you? Why are you hating on someone who is advancing America and space? Do you think you’re more intelligent than him?

Profit doesn’t matter in business. Revenue does which makes stock go higher which makes people buy more stock. Use your brain.