Words do mean something, and you could have taken 5 minutes of research to make a reasonable counterclaim

Tesla has an insane PE ratio because it’s a casino stock (~350x). As a comparison, NVIDIA IS 40x. SpaceX Is projected to be 300-500x. These are fantasy, completely unrealizable valuations. Similar to Enron, and Enron was over 70x. Enron wasn’t some surprise either.

Typically when PE gets out of whack, market analyzers dig into what is happening because it’s usually chicanery. No longer. Everyone is along for the ride.

> How are any of these companies at all related to Enron?

There's a lot of parallels:

* Circular transactions between companies under the same control

* Using SPVs to keep debt off the books

* The supplier funding its own customer through investment to inflate revenue on both ends

* Valuations driven by a hyped up narrative and decoupled from actual fundamentals

SpaceX bought nearly 20% of Cyber Trucks sold in Q4. That makes me question the level of real profitability.

Tesla isn't that profitable, but SpaceX is likely generating boatloads of cash. From what I can tell Starlink alone has a free positive cash flow of about $2 billion. I'm not sure what the launch business is worth, but it's likely a lot given the absence of domestic competition.

I have a suspicion the reason Musk wanted to combine SpaceX and X.ai is the latter gives him losses to write off against all that cash from the former plus a chance for a big AI payoff.

[flagged]