HyperGuap 💵
Gali's startup investment fund
Podcast 🎙️
Listen on Spotify
Tap any section to expand • Tap timestamp to jump to that part
ARK Invest has built a detailed valuation model for SpaceX. This video breaks down their analysis and assumptions about where SpaceX's value really comes from.
ARK's models are known for being bold but data-driven. Understanding their methodology helps you form your own view on SpaceX's potential.
Elon's stated goal is to build 10,000 Starships per year. For context, the entire commercial airline industry produces around 1,000-1,500 planes annually. This would be unprecedented scale in aerospace.
Why so many? Mars colonization needs massive cargo capacity. But even before Mars, this volume crushes the cost per launch to previously impossible levels.
More rockets = cheaper rockets. At 10,000/year, each Starship becomes almost disposable, fundamentally changing what's economically possible in space.
Starship has flown test missions, but hasn't carried paying cargo yet. The gap between "test flights" and "reliable commercial service" is where all the risk lives.
Key milestones to watch: successful orbital insertion, payload deployment, and crucially - the Super Heavy booster catch and Starship landing/reuse.
SpaceX has a track record of hitting milestones (eventually). But timelines slip. The question isn't "if" but "when" - and that timing affects valuation significantly.
Starlink is already generating real revenue - it's not just a cool project, it's a business. The V3 satellites are much larger and more capable, with roughly 10x the bandwidth of earlier versions.
This isn't just about home internet. Enterprise, maritime, aviation, and government contracts are where the big money is. Starlink can serve customers no one else can reach.
Starlink funds Starship development. Starship makes launching Starlink satellites cheaper. Cheaper launches = more satellites = better service = more revenue. Repeat.
Direct-to-cell means your regular phone connects to Starlink satellites - no special hardware needed. SpaceX partnered with T-Mobile in the US for this.
Spectrum (the radio frequencies satellites use) is incredibly valuable and limited. SpaceX acquiring spectrum rights is a strategic moat that's hard for competitors to replicate.
Dead zones disappear. Emergency services anywhere. Every phone becomes satellite-capable. This expands Starlink's addressable market to basically everyone with a phone.
Data centers in space sound wild, but the logic is solid: unlimited solar energy, natural cooling, and no land/water constraints. AI training and inference need massive compute - Earth has limits.
Near-term use case is AI inference (running models, not training them). Inference needs low latency, and satellites in orbit can actually be closer to users than distant data centers.
Energy is becoming the limiting factor for AI. Space has essentially unlimited solar power. If launch costs drop enough, space data centers become economically viable.
StarCloud is building space-based data center technology. Major cloud providers (AWS, Google, Microsoft) might acquire them to compete with SpaceX's vertical integration.
There's also speculation about OpenAI potentially acquiring Stoke Space (a rocket company). AI companies need compute, and controlling your own launch capability could be strategic.
When an industry becomes strategic, big players either build or buy their way in. Space infrastructure is becoming that important to tech's future.
This isn't just another tech IPO. SpaceX is potentially the first company where a significant portion of future value comes from activities beyond Earth.
How do you value Mars colonization rights? Asteroid mining potential? Interplanetary communication networks? Traditional models don't have frameworks for this.
Whether you think SpaceX is overvalued or undervalued probably depends on your timeline. 10-year view? Risky bet. 50-year view? Might be the bargain of the century.