upvote
This would be a horrible deal for Tesla investors.

Long-term investors would lose about 40% of their investment to subsidize the inflated valuation of X (bought by xAI), the inflated valuation of xAI (bought by SpaceX), and SpaceX (whose valuation is based on the assumption that demand for inference is effectively unlimited, and that everyone will prefer hardware in space over Earth).

The valuation of both companies was inflated prior to acquisition, and Tesla shareholders will be asked to dilute their investment by absorbing that cumulative inflation.

Not even to mention that Musk would have exclusive control over the entire conglomerate, with not even the pretense of a Board to check his power.

When even Steven Mark Ryan is like "let's pump the breaks a little bit," you know it's bad.

reply
It’s about Elon’s control over these companies. Creating a valuable company with durable revenue that produces products that the market actually wants, with stable governance by a board representing the shareholders of the company? Bah! What am I, a sucker?

He wants control, so that he can use investor’s cash to do epic stuff like humanoid robots, cyber trucks, an AI that tells you that apartheid was actually cool, rocket cars, real life brain controlled robot bacon chungus, etc.

reply
> SpaceX (whose valuation is based on the assumption that demand for inference is effectively unlimited, and that everyone will prefer hardware in space over Earth).

Well, that and being the only reusable rocket company ever with an even bigger version on the horizon and a global Internet service that's about to get a whole lot better thanks to aforementioned rocket. Both of which are hugely profitable.

reply
Rockets and Internet service are a tiny part of the valuation. It's mostly imaginary AI related sales.
reply
You don't know why people value the company and excluding the two very profitable parts of the business in your list is obviously misleading to the point that anyone reading that should be offended that you think they are that stupid.
reply
> You don't know why people value the company…

We do, at least at the time of the merger, as it existed as separate parts prior. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceXAI#Finance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_public_offering_of_Spa...

reply
Their own numbers in the S1 they released before the IPO listed their potential market growth, and it was almost entirely in the AI division. These aren't my numbers, these are Musk's numbers.
reply
Yeup. In 2025–

“Other shareholder meetings are snoozefests but ours are bangers. Look at this. This is sick.”

Elon’s pay package: he gets 400 million Tesla shares if he raises the market cap of tesla(xspacextwitterxAIx) to $8.5 trillion (nominal). He spent a cool 250 mil on making friends with the republicans, so as to ensure that his incoming epic awesome merger is not blocked.

A merger, plus the amount of inflation this government has already produced over the next decade, will probably see X co hitting Elon’s salary goals.

reply
Yes, let's combine Twitter, an AI company, and a space company with a solar company, car company, battery company, and robotics company, so that we can have one huge valuation that can't be possibly delivered upon and losses will be absorbed for a short period. What could go wrong?
reply
Have you heard of the concept of Conglomerates?

In the US, GE makes your microwave, aircraft engines, and also the gas turbine your power plant uses.

Siemens makes appliances, MRI machines, and even nuclear reactors I believe.

Or in Korea: Samsung, Hyundai, LG. Samsung makes chips, TVs, washing machines.

Japan: Mistubishi makes washing machines and excavators and mining equipment.

India: Reliance has cell phone service, grocery stores, and oil rigs. Tata makes cars, has tier 1 datacenters, and runs hotels too.

This is hardly a novel idea.

reply
Interestingly conglomerate market caps are punished by the market.

The only recent exception is Samsung because of memory suddenly costing 10x.

reply
Samsung makes a lot more than that. Well, lots of them make a lot more than what is listed, but Samsung pretty much has division for everything.
reply
Japanese companies manage fine doing this kind of thing.
reply
Japanese keiretsu also usually have a bank at their center or have both horizontal and vertical integrations. Where they don't have integration, they at least have financial integration. Whatever Musk is doing is far less cohesive in every way.
reply
Musk's hype the stuff up, raise money, can be applied to any venture.
reply
The only charitable part of this idea is that it will insulate the stock price from the actual balance sheet. It asks investors not if they want to invest in an EV automaker but in "Elon Musk Inc" essentially. He's been doing some variation of this his whole career, this would just give him the ability to dilute the numbers of each component industry further. The problem is the brand name of Elon Musk is worth a lot less than it was in the 10s.
reply
Did you forget X money and Musk's literally first job being in a bank?
reply
A payments platform is not a bank. Beyond the services being different and the customers being different (consumers vs businesses), both had to partner with... well a bank, to provide the actual financial services.
reply
Do they have a gigantic tumor like twitter and Space AI slapped on the side? If all of the products were profitable it would work.
reply
I don’t have time to look up whatever Masayoshi Son has wasted a few billion dollars on today, but yes kinda.
reply
Reliance in India basically ran a severe loss for Jio (their new mobile network where they essentially gave the country free mobile internet), but paid for by the profits of their fossil fuel business.

For a while, didn't Amazon do the same? They basically ran a loss with Amazon retail but profits on AWS, until they spun off?

So yes, this is fairly common with conglomerates, (Amazon sold diapers at a loss to put diapers.com out of business). And in fact, this tactic is a target for anti-trust laws where they exist.

reply
I think Twitter is the one that actually makes money.

Until they sold all their compute to anthropic, Ai was the boat anchor.

reply
Starlink makes the money.

No way in hell is Twitter making a lick of profit.

reply
deleted
reply
I'm glad someone else gets it.
reply
What about Tesla's management style would you call Japanese?
reply
I’m highlighting that companies can and do have all kinds of departments doing seemingly unrelated things if they want to.
reply
I'm pointing out that Japanese companies can do that because they're organized and managed like Japanese companies. Tesla is not, and in fact lacks pretty much all the organizing characteristics and long term planning that enables keiretsu to function.
reply
Don’t think it requires layers and layers of management attending meetings for 12 hours a day to function as a prerequisite.
reply
Kamikaze
reply
It would almost be as big a monstrosity as Amazon
reply
but... All elon companies. More valuable bundled, because all the elon lovers don't have to pick where they throw their tithes. I'd love it even more if they throw in a tunnel construction and a human brain implant company in the mix while they are at it.
reply
Add weapon and tank and they will reach the scale of Samsung.
reply
Tesla-Yutani
reply