Bogdan Sumaruk @Sir_H_Pennywise: "𝐖𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭..."

Italy

𝐖𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐒𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐗 𝐈𝐏𝐎: 𝐀𝐦𝐚𝐳𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐲, 𝐃𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐭 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞? TLDR: Great company does not automatically mean great entry price. And "included in the index soon" is not a reason to buy blindly. Stay with me on this... I think SpaceX may be one of the most important companies of our lifetime. Rockets, Starlink, defense, satellite internet, maybe even AI infrastructure in orbit. This is not a normal IPO. But investors need to separate two questions: Is SpaceX a great business? Is the IPO/index setup healthy for public markets? Those are not the same question. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐱 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 (1/3) Two index dynamics matter. Nasdaq 100 fast-entry: Nasdaq revised its rules so very large new listings can join the Nasdaq 100 after just 15 trading days if they rank among the biggest market caps. In practice, SpaceX could be absorbed almost immediately after listing if its valuation lands where expected. S&P 500 consultation: S&P Indices is reviewing whether to shorten the public trading seasoning requirement from 12 months toward 6, and whether to cancel profitability tests for megacap IPOs. That is not finalized, but the conversation matters. Why? Because index inclusion is not symbolic. It is mechanical. If SpaceX IPOs at a $1-2T valuation and then gets fast tracked into major indices, passive funds, ETFs, pension plans, and benchmarked managers become forced buyers regardless of fundamentals. That creates a feedback loop: IPO at huge valuation, fast-track index inclusion, passive funds forced to buy, price pushed higher by flows, retail momentum follows, valuation becomes justified by flows rather than cash flows. This is not investing. It is structural demand. It can lift prices quickly, but it also builds crowding and concentration risk inside passive portfolios. 𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 & 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐬 𝐒𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐥𝐝 (2/3) SpaceX is incorporated in Texas, not Delaware. That does not mean there is no SEC scrutiny, but Texas corporate law is newer, more management-friendly, and less battle tested than Delaware’s shareholder litigation system. According to the S-1, SpaceX will have dual-class shares: Class A gets 1 vote, Class B gets 10. Elon Musk will essentially retain control. SpaceX also expects to qualify as a “controlled company,” which gives it exemptions from some normal governance requirements. The filing also includes mandatory arbitration, jury-trial waiver language, and tighter shareholder proposal rules. In plain English: public shareholders may get economic exposure, but very limited control. You can sit in the rocket, but Elon keeps the launch button. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐤 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 & 𝐑𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝-𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲 𝐈𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞𝐬 (3/3) Then there is the related party issue. The S-1 says SpaceX purchased $506M of Tesla Megapack products in 2025, $191M in 2024, and $131M of Cybertrucks from Tesla in 2025, at MSRP. Maybe those are legitimate operational needs. Maybe they genuinely need Cybertrucks in space. You know, for strategic YOLO purposes. But when one Elon-controlled company buys from another Elon-controlled company, investors should ask: is this clean capital allocation, or empire management? The xAI/X structure complicates things further. SpaceX’s financials have been recast to include xAI and X Holdings because of common-control transactions. Some numbers: 2025 revenue: about $18.7B 2025 net loss: about $4.9B Q1 2026 revenue: about $4.7B Q1 2026 net loss: about $4.3B Starlink looks powerful, and SpaceX’s core space/connectivity assets are impressive. But the combined entity is starting to look like a Musk conglomerate: rockets, satellites, AI, X, compute infrastructure, Tesla purchases, and government contracts. That may be visionary. It may also be governance risk dressed as innovation. Sometimes the future arrives wearing a spacesuit and carrying a conflict of interest disclosure. 𝐌𝐲 𝐕𝐢𝐞𝐰 My concern is bigger than SpaceX itself. SpaceX may be transformational long term, and I admire the ambition. I’m fascinated too. But the IPO structure feels like a market stress test: extreme valuation, compressed float, potential fast-track into Nasdaq 100 and maybe later S&P 500, weak public governance, and related party complexity. That cocktail can turn a visionary company into a crowded systemic trade. For those of you that want exposure, separate the analyses. First, evaluate the long term operational case. Then ask whether you want to participate at the IPO price, with fast-track index demand sitting in the background. Great company ≠ great entry price. Inclusion in an index soon is a reason to slow down, not to sprint in. Sometimes the fact that "everyone will be forced to buy" is the clearest reason not to be first through the door. Yours, Bogdan $SPX500 $DJ30 $NSDQ100 $NVDA (NVIDIA Corporation)

Not investment advice. The author may have financial interests in the mentioned instruments.