forums

Off-Topic Stock Market & Crypto Discussion

30

US
CPI (MoM) (May)
0.5% 0.5%
0.6%
08:30

US
Core CPI (MoM) (May)
0.2% 0.3%
0.4%
08:30

US
CPI (YoY) (May)
4.2% 4.2%
3.8%
08:30

US
Core CPI (YoY) (May)
2.9% 2.9%
2.8%
08:30

US
CPI Index, n.s.a. (May)
335.12 335.11
333.02
08:30

US
Core CPI Index (May)
336.12
335.42
08:30

US
CPI, n.s.a (MoM) (May)
0.63%
0.85%
08:30

US
CPI Index, s.a (May)
332.41
08:32
08:30

US
Real Earnings (MoM) (May)
-0.2%
-0.2%


CPI up….inflation up


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
 
I do wonder if the ultimate plan is to merge Tesla and SpaceX within a yr or so.... I really wouldn't like the incentive there is for Musk regarding Tesla stock price. Already people are probably selling out a bit of Tesla to get into SpaceX. But he has far more voting control of SpaceX than Tesla. The lower the valuation of Tesla in the event of a merger, the far better it is for Musk. The money will be the money regardless for him. And if done in short term the robotaxi results and thus valuation could he mostly missed out on by Tesla shareholders...... So personally if there was an e attempted merger, I probably wouldn't want it to happen unless Tesla was at least at/nearear ath, or it happened >1yr when market corrections for SpaceX value can be priced in more.
 
Also do any of y'all own MNOs/cell service providers that own a lot of terrestrial spectrum in the US(or rest of world) for 5g, and are valued very low or are prime acquisition targets? For SpaceX DTC aspirations which probably have a TAM of close to $1T by itself, I do view this is a critical possible acquision.

I'd assume US Mobile is probably the prime target, but SpaceX is acquiring Cursor for $60B... T-Mobile, At&t, and Verizon are worth like what $160-$200B each?

Id guess globally Vodafone and Millicom?
 

Update: US Equity Futures Rise Pre-Bell After US Says Strikes Completed Against Iran​

 
90scane said:
This is only the communication side of SpaceX. Add the AI data centers in space and the majority of AI will move to space. Revenue from both could be massive.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. This doesn't include cost of sats or initial capital costs like the manufacturing facilities though. V3 starlinks are almost 5x more expensive. So it's not as clean as this analysis quite makes it out to be. Rather than 20x it's closer to 5x, and worst case 3x better. But that's just pure $/Mbps. The actual tangible improvement in service being provided is going from 96 Gbps to 1,000 Gbps per Sat of which Starship launches about 2x as many as Falcon 9 does V2.5... and if the internal launch cost of Starship are eventually equal to or below Falcon 9 (may take 2-3 years).... So yeah a 20x better service per launch. And launch will at least 10x/yr in quantity over next couple years? 160 F9 flights. 1,000 Starship flights isn't crazy.
 
Last edited:
Canedog said:
What is the advantage to having Ai in space instead of on Earth?
Click to expand...
Mass up, Data down via lasers. Solar is at least 5x more efficient in SSO. You mostly/entirely eliminate need for batteries. You entirely eliminate the timing lockup of terrestrial power generation and NIMBYism.

So They need to reduce mass as much as possible, which mostly means make the chips operate as high of temp as possible. Because cooling in space is only done via Radiation, which scales to T^4. So just for space compute, basically for every 1 degree Celsius increase in operating temp, the radiator size decreases 1%. (Technically this may be more like 1.5% cause chips don't operate close to 200C, 1% is an avg between 0-200C)

From there the actual compute rack is mostly the same. Solar is already one possibly cheapest to deploy power generation terrestrially, and its even cheaper for space because there is less structural requirements in 0G. So if you successfully reduce mass enough from the radiator, and you're as low mass as possible, well then it ALL essentially becomes a function of $/kg to orbit. Currently Falcon 9 is internally at around $700/kg. Starship would only need to cost $70M to match that. But the plan is <$20M (and eventually way less). So that would be $200/kg if they just meet that.

I think once we start getting in the $50-$100/kg launch cost area is when space Data center become purely better just financially with no other outside considerations.

But AI data centers are more like 3yrs out. Specifically because of $/kg to orbit. SpaceX will start with Starlink, which even at high launched costs short term because Starship is still new and reuse not proven (with the upper stage), it still makes sense. And SatCom alone has what a $2T TAM?

Oh and 1 AI1 Sat is equivalent to 1 rack of Nvidia GB300 and weighs about 2 tons with Solar+Radiator include (same as Starlink V3). SpaceXs newest MacroHarder Data Center (not yet complete) is 2 GW, so probably is like 16,000 Gb300 racks? Okay that means you need 16,000 AI1 sats launched (32,000 tons). That would take about 320 launches. Which if at $200/kg would be $6.4B... and at $50/kg would be just $1.6B... and then you get the unlock of 5x better solar generation, and no time delays. How many Macroharders would SpaceX be able to launch per year? Well 1,000 launched per year is certainly one of their shorter term goals. Oh and they want >10,000 Starship launches yearly Lol. **** even the Artemis plans for our moon landing require 11-15 Starship tanker flights within like a couple weeks. And that's conservative NASA...
 
Last edited:
Tony4Canes said:
Click to expand...

If you’re willing to get suspended from participating in IPOs for a yr or whatever it’ll probably pop like 15-20% within first couple days. Idk if when the 15day passes it’ll still be up. But then at that point is when the Nasdaq100 entry occurs so maybe?
 
Back
Top