Why SpaceX 2040 Revenue FCST $4.3T in highly unlikely

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Valuation and 2040 Forecast

  • Core debate is whether a $4.3T revenue forecast by 2040 is remotely plausible.
  • Skeptics note this implies ~40% annual growth from an already large base, far above historic tech leaders, and could approach ~10% of projected US GDP.
  • Some argue past “impossible” calls on Tesla/SpaceX were wrong and that dismissing this outright may repeat that mistake.
  • Others counter that recent Tesla misses (20M cars, FSD timelines) show a pattern of overpromising, with stock price outpacing fundamentals.

Business Model Assumptions

  • Thread consensus: rockets alone cannot justify the number; launch TAM is too small even with Starship.
  • Many point out that most forecasted revenue is from AI and space-based data centers, plus Starlink and possible Tesla tie-ins.
  • Multiple commenters see space data centers as uneconomic vs ground (cooling, maintenance, launch cost, latency) and potentially just “cover” for weapons systems.
  • Starlink/space cell service is seen as limited by RF spectrum and capacity; capturing even the entire US mobile market gets SpaceX only a few percent toward $4.3T.
  • Speculative ideas like asteroid mining or space-based power beaming are mentioned but treated as highly uncertain.

Competition and Moats

  • China’s reusable rockets and industrial capacity are raised as a long‑term threat, but others note US aerospace know‑how, regulation, and software as remaining moats.
  • Several comparisons to Tesla: strong manufacturing execution but also intense competition, especially from China, and regulatory-credit–boosted income.

Macro, Inflation, and Currency

  • Some say extreme inflation or dollar debasement could make multi‑trillion revenues numerically easy but economically meaningless.
  • Others argue high inflation would lift all assets; nothing here makes SpaceX uniquely advantaged.

Market Structure and Investors

  • Concern about “forced bid” via index inclusion: index and pension investors may be dragged into a bet they wouldn’t choose.
  • Suggestions of regulatory capture, weak oversight, and “meme mode” markets where narratives, not cash flows, drive pricing.

Presentation and UX

  • Many dislike the “scrolling visual essay” format of the linked analysis: hard to read, inaccessible, fragile with zoom/printing.
  • A minority praise it as intentional, “small web” experimentation; others ask for a plain article alternative.