> Starship makes money by delivery shitloads of sats to LEO without refueling or human certification. I mean. That's not what's happened, and that's not what NASA paid for. Not a single payload has reached LEO. This is a shipping company that hasn't delivered a single package in this rocket.

---

Nearly ALL of $SATS is SpaceX stock. No need to settle for 9%.

---

Good points, but zooming into irrelevant technical difficulties. Starship makes money by delivery shitloads of sats to LEO without refueling or human certification. Moon and Mars are aspirational, non-financial goals. I can guarantee you $800B valuation does not hinge on petty gov moon contracts nor spacex’ own mars mission, but on starlink’s promise of eating into the ISPs and cellular provider cakes, and most recently, AI centers in space

---

No, the real play is SATS. Thank me later

---

Yes spacex has been contracted to deorbit the iss, spacex has also been contracted to launch the axiom and vast stations. And yes amazon has hired, ula(vulcan and atlas), blue origin(new glenn), arianespace( ariane 6) and spacex(falcon 9) to launch their sats. We have no idea what spacex is making on launches they dont make it public. Their are rumours that the internal cost for falcon 9 is around 20 Million but for customers minimum 65/69 million. Still being cheaper that their current competition ULA

---

I have Jan '27 RKLB and SATS calls, let both of 'em cook. These names have so much meme potential

---

Fully funded for 100 sats now, per the last earnings call.

---

They're sitting on 3bn cash now. They're fully funded for launching 45-60 sats which is what they need for full coverage of key markets (US, Europe, Japan etc.) and by the time they have \~45 sats up they'll start making a ton of revenue. There should be no need to another dilution in theory but if they do it'll be for a good reason like accelerating the constellation build-out or enabling new capabilities like more government stuff.

---

Soon to be referred to as "sats".

---