The way the SpaceX IPO has been going this month has been almost theatrical. The underwriters continue to be identified, the numbers continue to rise, and a new report that slightly raises the valuation is released every other day. According to people with knowledge of the situation, Goldman Sachs recently secured the lead left position on the prospectus, which is the most senior role on the deal, with Morgan Stanley following closely behind. According to reports, JPMorgan, Citigroup, and Bank of America are also involved. Smaller seats are being filled by sixteen other banks. This type of lineup is rare these days, primarily due to the fact that deals of this magnitude just don’t occur.
At a valuation close to $1.75 trillion, the goal is to raise about $75 billion. It would be the biggest public listing in history if that holds true. Not the biggest of the decade. The biggest, without a doubt. The old benchmark would not even be close.
It’s odd how informal some of the discussions surrounding it have become. Retail investors joke about “exit liquidity” and whether they’ll buy on day one or wait for the inevitable swing on Reddit and X. This week, Jim Cramer expressed concerns on his show, which may or may not be significant, but it’s important to pay attention when even the most vocal supporters of public-market drama begin to back off. The appetite seems genuine, but there’s also a sense of unease beneath it.
Recalling SpaceX’s position ten years ago is helpful. On landing pads, rockets were detonating. Half of Wall Street was writing off Tesla, the more well-known sibling. The company has integrated xAI into the corporate structure, Starlink is now making real money, and Starship V3 is scheduled to launch in the weeks leading up to the float. Prior to this most recent increase in value, the combined company was already valued at $1.25 trillion in February. The increase to $1.75 trillion in just three months provides insight into how investors are pricing their beliefs.
The deal’s structure doesn’t sit well with everyone. CalPERS and New York City and State pension officials have identified what they refer to as a management-favorable governance structure. Musk cannot be removed by shareholders due to the dual-class share arrangement, a fact that the Financial Times reported with a level of bluntness that is more detrimental than indignation. Compensation packages that cover both SpaceX and Tesla have also sparked concerns about competition between the two companies. This is an odd worry, but it makes sense considering how complex the empire has grown.
Then there’s the Cursor scenario, which seems nearly impossible to comprehend. According to Bloomberg, about thirty days after the listing, SpaceX anticipates closing a $60 billion acquisition of the AI coding startup. If it fails, there is a $10 billion cash breakup fee. Only last October did Cursor’s annualized revenue surpass $1 billion. Although practically everything in AI tooling now relies on math that would have seemed ridiculous two years ago, the price tag suggests a multiple that would have seemed ridiculous two years ago.
It’s difficult to ignore the discrepancy between what the market appears willing to underwrite and what the spreadsheets support as this develops. SpaceX has real assets, real Starlink cash flow, and a genuinely hard-to-replicate moat. Investors keep saying the same thing over and over: never bet against Elon. Perhaps they are correct. They have previously been correct. However, questions that won’t be addressed until long after June 12 are raised by a 4% float on a $1.75 trillion company that is listed on a Nasdaq that has allegedly revised some of its index rules to expedite inclusion. Naturally, the price will have started to move by then.
