The SpaceX Short Thesis…

以下是内容的中文翻译： 这份视频文字稿详细分析了“SpaceX 做空论点”，其中包含了两位不同人士的批评意见，随后是主持人的反驳。 **背景和 SpaceX 成就（主持人观点）：** * **SpaceX 可重复使用性：** 强调了2017年SpaceX实现可重复使用技术路线的总结，现在这被认为是“常规操作”，发射和着陆“几乎每天都在进行”。 * **飞行记录：** 单个助推器的飞行记录达到了36次，第二名和第三名分别为35次和34次。 * **星舰进展：** 被描述为取得了“令人难以置信的进展”，正在接近快速、常规和可靠的重复使用，有望实现“向轨道运载量的巨大提升”和“成本的显著下降”。 * **缺乏竞争：** 主持人讽刺地提到，有一份“竞争对手”定期实现可重复使用技术的合集，但随后揭示根本没有这样的视频，暗示十年后，没有其他公司能够常规、快速、可靠地重复使用火箭。 **第一项做空论点 – 摘自“CEO日记”播客的 Jeremy（章节：“SpaceX 最终会失败吗？”）：** * **特斯拉股价操纵：** Jeremy在一个“点击量超过900万”的播客中声称，埃隆·马斯克“将股价抬高到其真实价值的四到五倍”，“出售了大量股票”，并“用这些钱建造了超级工厂”。 * 主持人澄清说，这可能是一种误解，暗示Jeremy的意思是马斯克的言语影响力使得在为工厂筹集资金时获得了更有利的融资条件和更少的股权稀释。 * Jeremy进一步声称，特斯拉的价值“增加了10倍”是由于马斯克的说服力，而非其真实价值。 * 主持人指出，特斯拉目前“距离历史最高点约35%”，是一家“万亿级公司”，并且自IPO以来上涨了“约25,000%”。 * **SpaceX 是“第二轮”：** Jeremy预测马斯克将对SpaceX采用同样的“胡说八道的故事”策略，将“小行星采矿”和“人工智能的巨大成功”等概念视为“市场见顶”和“巨大泡沫”的迹象。 * **星舰估值：** Jeremy声称，星舰的“辉煌时刻”（用机械臂捕捉火箭）“相当于SpaceX一半的估值”。 * **火星殖民：** Jeremy颇具争议地表示，“去火星，说实话，不符合物理定律。” * 他随后又自相矛盾地解释了在火星上生活的挑战：心脏/骨骼适应1/5重力，需要转入地下以避免宇宙射线，需要重力旋转装置，以及可持续穹顶系统历史上的失败（主持人提到1970年代的一次尝试导致人们营养不良）。 * Jeremy认为人类“首先应该专注于我们的星球”。 * 主持人对此强烈反驳，解释了火星作为人类抵御小行星撞击或超级火山等生存威胁的“异地备份”概念，强调了可以同时处理地球问题和太空殖民。 * **SpaceX 估值：** Jeremy暗示，他只会在SpaceX估值“一美元值10美分，是的。我可能会。5美分。”的情况下才会投资。 * 主持人根据播客发布（约6月25日）时假定的每股200美元估值，推断Jeremy会在每股10-20美元的价格买入。 **第二项做空论点 – 财经媒体的 Peter（积极做空 SpaceX）：** * **锁定期解禁“血洗”：** Peter讨论的是SpaceX锁定期解禁的第一天，许多人预期这会导致股价暴跌。 * 主持人报告称，SpaceX股价在第一天上涨了“约6%”，第二天又“进一步上涨了15.83%”，与预测相反。 * 未来的锁定期解禁批次均为7%。 * **特斯拉/SpaceX 合并：** 当被问及合并是否会改变他的空头立场时，Peter表示这将创造一个“更加混乱的局面”，使其“几何级地更加复杂”。 * 主持人承认其复杂性，但批评Peter将特斯拉视为单一行业的隐含观点，详细列举了特斯拉的多元化业务：汽车、FSD（全自动驾驶）、能源（家庭、电网、Megapod）、机器人出租车和人形机器人。 * **星链是“唯一盈利实体”：** Peter认为，“未来星链可能会被剥离，成为SpaceX内部三个业务中唯一盈利的实体。” * 主持人通过当前的财务数据对此提出质疑： * **星链：** “极其盈利”，调整后息税折旧摊销前利润（EBITDA）“超过25亿美元”。 * **发射业务：** “基本收支平衡”，调整后EBITDA为“负2.05亿美元”（被称为“误差”），原因是星舰投资，而猎鹰9号则在“印钞票”。 * **人工智能业务：** “已经盈利”，调整后EBITDA“超过11亿美元”。 * **SpaceX 估值：** Peter引用SpaceX“非常非常高”的“50倍市销率”，即便它已经“有所下降”。他表示，如果它“再降一半”，可能会获得“更理性的关注”。 * 主持人指出，这次采访是在SpaceX财报电话会议*之后*录制的，公司在会议上预计到12月年化收入将达到1000亿美元或更高（是第二季度月收入的两倍）。主持人认为Peter将第二季度收入作为年化率，从而错误地呈现了未来的估值。 * **人工智能竞争：** Peter认为SpaceX的人工智能部门“正在与许多其他知名聊天机器人竞争”，称其为一场“赛马”，SpaceX的胜算不确定。 * 主持人部分同意人工智能是一个竞争激烈的领域，但强调了SpaceX人工智能的优势：计算资源获取、独家X数据流、潜在的特斯拉合作、对Cursor的收购，以及Grok 4.5“巨大的飞跃”和开发者采用。 **主持人的结论：** 主持人对做空者，特别是Peter，表示担忧，因为他们缺乏对SpaceX业务和财务现实的深刻理解就积极做空，暗示他们正面临巨大的财务损失风险。主持人推销他自己长达20年的特斯拉和SpaceX估值模型，认为这是比依赖这些“专家”更好的选择。

This video transcript details an analysis of "SpaceX short theses," featuring critiques from two different individuals, followed by the host's rebuttal. **Initial Context and SpaceX Achievements (Host's View):** * **SpaceX Reusability:** Highlighted a 2017 compilation of SpaceX's path to reusability, now considered "routine," with launches and landings happening "every other day." * **Flight Records:** The record for a single booster stands at 36 flights, with second and third place at 35 and 34 flights respectively. * **Starship Progress:** Described as making "incredible progress," nearing rapid, regular, and reliable reuse, promising a "massive increase in payload to orbit" and "huge cost decline." * **Lack of Competition:** The host sarcastically notes a compilation of "competition" regularly achieving reusability, only to reveal there is no such footage, implying no other company is regularly, rapidly, and reliably reusing rockets a decade later. **First Short Thesis - Jeremy from "Diary of a CEO" Podcast (Chapter: "Will SpaceX Eventually Fail?"):** * **Tesla Stock Manipulation:** Jeremy, in a podcast with "over 9 million views," alleges Elon Musk "talked the stock up to four or five times what it was worth," "sold lots of stock," and "used the money to build a gigafactory." * The host clarifies this is likely a misinterpretation, suggesting Jeremy meant Musk's verbal influence allowed for more favorable financing terms and less dilution during capital raises for factories. * Jeremy further claimed a "10 times increase" in Tesla's value due to Musk's persuasion, not its actual worth. * The host points out Tesla is "within about 35% of all-time highs," a "trillion-plus dollar company," and up "about 25,000%" since IPO. * **SpaceX as "Round Two":** Jeremy predicts Musk will employ the same "BS story" strategy for SpaceX, labeling concepts like "mining asteroids" and "incredible success of AI" as signs of a "market peak" and "terrific bubble." * **Starship Valuation:** Jeremy claims Starship's "magnificent moment" (catching rockets with chopsticks) is "worth half the price of SpaceX." * **Mars Colonization:** Jeremy controversially states, "Going to Mars is not within the laws of physics, really." * He then contradicts himself by explaining the challenges of living on Mars: heart/bones adjusting to 1/5 gravity, need to go underground to avoid cosmic rays, need gravitational spinning machines, and the historical failure of sustainable dome systems (host mentions a 1970s attempt where people were malnourished). * Jeremy argues humanity should "focus on our planet first and foremost." * The host strongly refutes this, explaining the concept of Mars as an "off-site backup" for humanity against existential threats like asteroid impacts or supervolcanoes, emphasizing the ability to work on both Earth problems and space colonization simultaneously. * **SpaceX Valuation:** Jeremy implies he would only invest in SpaceX if it were valued at "10 cents on the dollar, yeah. I might. 5 cents." * The host interprets this, based on a presumed $200/share valuation around the podcast's June 25th publication, to mean Jeremy would buy at $10-$20 per share. **Second Short Thesis - Peter from Finance Media (Actively Shorting SpaceX):** * **Lockup Expiration "Bloodbath":** Peter was discussing the day one of SpaceX's lockup expiration, which many expected to cause a stock crash. * The host reports that SpaceX stock was up "about six or so percent on day one" and a "further 15.83%" on day two, contrary to predictions. * Future lockup tranches are noted to be 7% each. * **Tesla/SpaceX Merger:** When asked if a merger would change his short stance, Peter said it would create an "even more confusing situation," making it "geometrically more complicated." * The host acknowledges the complexity but critiques Peter's implied view of Tesla as a single industry, detailing Tesla's diverse segments: vehicles, FSD, energy (home, grid, Megapod), robotaxis, and humanoid robots. * **Starlink as "Only Profitable Entity":** Peter suggests "in the future that Starlink might be spun off as maybe the only profitable entity of the three" within SpaceX. * The host challenges this with current financial data: * **Starlink:** "Extremely profitable," with "over $2.5 billion" in adjusted EBITDA. * **Launch Business:** "Essentially break-even" with a "$205 million negative adjusted EBITDA" (described as a "rounding error") due to Starship investment, while Falcon 9 is "printing money." * **AI Business:** "Already profitable" with "over $1.1 billion" in adjusted EBITDA. * **SpaceX Valuation:** Peter cites a "very, very high" "price to sales of 50" for SpaceX, even after it has "come down." He states if it "came down, even, you know, half that," it might gain "more rational attention." * The host points out this interview was recorded *after* SpaceX's earnings call, where the company projected $100 billion or more in annualized revenue by December (doubling Q2 monthly revenue). The host suggests Peter is using Q2 revenue as the annual rate, thus misrepresenting the future valuation. * **AI Competition:** Peter views SpaceX's AI segment as "competing against many other well-known chatbots," calling it a "horse race" with uncertain odds for SpaceX. * The host partially agrees that AI is a competitive field but highlights SpaceX AI advantages: access to compute, exclusive X data stream, potential Tesla collaboration, Cursor acquisition, and Grok 4.5's "huge leap forward" and developer adoption. **Host's Conclusion:** The host expresses concern for the short sellers, particularly Peter, for actively betting against SpaceX without a strong understanding of its business and financial realities, implying they are risking significant financial loss. The host promotes his own 20-year Tesla and SpaceX valuation model as a better alternative to relying on such "experts."