Connect with us

Finance

Personal Finance: SpaceX IPO bends the rules | Chattanooga Times Free Press

Published

on

Personal Finance: SpaceX IPO bends the rules | Chattanooga Times Free Press

Elon Musk made history again this month with the largest public offering of a company in the history of the known universe. Space Exploration Technologies, better known as SpaceX, began trading June 12 on the Nasdaq exchange under the ticker symbol SPCX. In the first three days, the stock soared by 50%, blasting the rocketeer past Amazon into fifth place among America’s largest companies.

While the public liftoff was impressive for its size and the hype surrounding it, what truly set this transaction apart was how Musk used his leverage to succeed in changing the rules during the final countdown and advance his own interest at the expense of shareholders.

Space Exploration Technologies is a truly intriguing collection of assets with a history of big accomplishments and even bigger ambitions. At its core is Starlink, a profitable satellite internet and data transmission operation. In the offering document, Musk imagines a network of massive orbiting data centers, which is not entirely crazy and is likely to face less political opposition from nearby residents.

SpaceX also includes the familiar rocket launch enterprise and an artificial intelligence startup called xAI with its Grok AI assistant. While private investors and Starlink have provided operating cash flows to fund the space operations, SpaceX needs substantial additional funding to support its galactic expansion plans. That requires selling shares of this privately held company to the public in an initial public offering.

The process involves a syndicate of investment banks that facilitates the sale of shares held by the company’s founders or private investors at a specific price, the proceeds of which allow early investors to cash out and provide a large injection of capital. Once the shares are sold to public buyers, they change hands on a market exchange at a price determined by supply and demand.

Advertisement

The prospect of the largest initial offering ever ignited a frenzy of interest. It also allowed Elon Musk to leverage the buzz of a monster IPO to convince Wall Street to bend the rules.

To win the listing, the Nasdaq stock exchange agreed to substantial waivers of its own listing rules. While new companies must typically wait at least three months before they become eligible for inclusion in the popular Nasdaq 100 index, Nasdaq jettisoned this “seasoning” period and allowed SpaceX to enter the index after only 15 days. This tech-heavy index serves as the benchmark for over $1.4 trillion in fund assets that will now be required to sell other holdings to make room for SpaceX in their portfolios. Estimates range from $8 to $15 billion in forced purchases that will create artificial demand for the stock. It also means that many passive investors in retirement funds will end up owning the stock, like it or not.

Nasdaq also waived its own liquidity rules. Ordinarily, at least 10% of the company’s shares must be offered to the public, called the “float,” or percentage, of the total stock value that trades publicly. SpaceX floated only 4.3% of its stock, with private shareholders retaining 95.7%. Using some arithmetic legerdemain, Nasdaq created a “multiplier,” triple-counting the float for companies in the top 40 by total market value. Presumably for firms whose founders’ initials are E.M.

To its credit, S&P Global Inc. considered but ultimately refused to loosen its own standards for joining the S&P 500 index, concerned about the potential reputational damage. The S&P 500 is the benchmark for $20 trillion in assets and opted to retain its 12-month seasoning period as well as a four-quarter profitability hurdle. SpaceX may one day dock with the S&P 500, but the countdown has not started.

Aside from eliciting waivers and exceptions for index inclusion, SpaceX massively advantages its visionary but mercurial founder. In its surprisingly entertaining prospectus, the company boosted Musk’s control far beyond his ownership stake. The shares issued to the public are called Class A shares, and each carries one vote on matters of corporate governance. However, Musk’s stake resides in so-called Class B shares, each with 10 votes, giving Musk 84% voting control.

Advertisement

There are a few other little gems. The prospectus requires that any disputes between shareholders and the company must be settled privately through arbitration. Lawsuits, including the type of class action suits that tend to hold management’s feet to the fire, are expressly prohibited. And speaking of fire, Musk may only be fired by himself.

Some of these more restrictive provisions have been used before. For instance, in its initial offering, Google essentially pioneered the idea of multiple share classes that vested voting control with the founders. SpaceX propels contempt for shareholder rights into a higher orbit.

Separate from the structural disadvantage to public shareholders is the question of valuation. SpaceX lost nearly $5 billion in 2025 and another $4 billion just last quarter. The initial offering of loss-making companies is hardly new, especially in technologically emerging fields. SpaceX has reached the stratosphere.

With no profits to measure, a useful metric is the ratio of the total value of all the company’s stock divided by last year’s revenues, called the price to sales ratio. When the unprofitable Amazon went public in 1996, its total market value was three times its 1995 sales. Google’s 2004 offering priced at 15 times sales, Facebook at a hefty 28 times, and even Musk’s own Tesla launched at a multiple of 15 times sales. SpaceX cleared the tower at an otherworldly 95 times sales, soaring to 130 by the end of day two as the frenzy intensified. During the first full trading day, it comprised 75% of all stock purchases by individual investors. In the prospectus, Musk expatiates on his plan to colonize Mars. He’s halfway there.

There is no precedent for a public offering of this size, with such a long and speculative arc toward profitability and so few shareholder protections. SpaceX is a pure play wager on a precocious space cadet with interstellar aspirations astride a solid rocket booster. Enjoy the ride.

Advertisement

Christopher A. Hopkins, CFA, is a co-founder of Apogee Wealth Partners in Chattanooga.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

SixCap Healthcare Finance Appoints Carroll as Senior Relationship Manager

Published

on

SixCap Healthcare Finance Appoints Carroll as Senior Relationship Manager

SixCap Healthcare Finance added Dan Carroll as senior relationship manager, reporting to the company’s co-founder and chief investment officer, Dan Whitwer.

Carroll brings more than 20 years of commercial finance, portfolio management and healthcare asset-based lending experience to SixCap. Throughout his career, he has managed complex healthcare lending relationships, led portfolio management teams, overseen loan closings and partnered closely with borrowers to support growth while maintaining disciplined credit management.

Most recently, Carroll held leadership positions at Siena, CNH Finance and Triumph Healthcare Finance, building extensive expertise in healthcare lending, credit analysis, loan structuring, risk management and client relationship management.

In his new role, Carroll will oversee borrower relationships across SixCap’s growing healthcare portfolio, working closely with clients to provide proactive portfolio management, responsive service and financing solutions that evolve alongside their businesses.

“We’re thrilled to welcome Dan to the SixCap team,” Whitwer said. “I’ve had the privilege of working alongside Dan and have seen firsthand the integrity, experience and thoughtful approach he brings to every client relationship. He understands healthcare, he understands asset-based lending and, most importantly, he understands the value of building lasting partnerships. As our portfolio continues to grow, Dan’s leadership and commitment to exceptional client service make him a tremendous addition to our team.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Finance

Big financing steps forward for The 78, Foundry Park projects

Published

on

Big financing steps forward for The 78, Foundry Park projects

Two of Chicago’s most pivotal but challenging undeveloped sites — Foundry Park on the North Side and the vacant South Loop parcel known as The 78 — moved forward in a big way Wednesday before the City Council adjourned for a summer recess.

Mayor Brandon Johnson introduced a $201.6 million tax increment financing subsidy for JDL Development’s scaled back vision for North Side industrial land along the Chicago River that once was supposed to be home to the Lincoln Yards megaproject.

And despite a slew of concerns from Council members, the full Council approved a $425 million TIF for The 78, a reference to Chicago’s unofficial 78th community area. The subsidy will bankroll public improvements needed for the South Loop development, anchored by a $750 million soccer stadium privately financed by Chicago Fire billionaire owner Joe Mansueto.

Downtown Ald. Bill Conway (34th), whose adjacent TIF is being raided to help The 78, again refused to go along with the $250.1 million piece of the infrastructure package that will primarily be used to build a 1,200-space parking garage. The $216 million garage will serve as the “podium” for an open-air plaza and future high-rise development on the air rights above the garage.

Referring to the Bears’ long-running stadium saga, Conway said Wednesday he appreciates the Fire “not trying to move to Hammond, Indiana, and become the Hammond Sparks.” But he said he “cannot look the taxpayers in the eye and tell them” he supported spending “$250 million to build a stadium parking garage and plaza.”

Advertisement

Finance Chair Pat Dowell, whose 3rd Ward includes The 78, has argued that the podium “brings the site to grade at Roosevelt Road” and is the key to “unlocking the site from the isolation that has stalled every previous development proposal.”

Deputy Planning Commissioner Jeff Cohen made that same point Wednesday, with a new wrinkle.

“The idea here is to incorporate that garage into the podium,” Cohen said. “It’s addressing a design and development plan that allows for all of the land within The 78 to be open for investment, rather than having to have either temporary or permanent surface parking lots to accommodate the car traffic.”

An artist’s rendering of the planned Chicago Fire soccer stadium at The 78 in the South Loop.

Advertisement

Related Midwest & Gensler

The $201.6 million subsidy proposed for Foundry Park pales by comparison to the $1.3 billion that former Mayor Rahm Emanuel once proposed for Lincoln Yards. That massive subsidy became a political lightning rod, with the avalanche of criticism led by the Chicago Teachers Union and then-union organizer Brandon Johnson.

The $201.6 million subsidy that Johnson introduced at Wednesday’s Council meeting is more likely to be criticized for being too little.

It will support just over 25% of the $800 million worth of roads, bridges, utilities and mass transit improvements that 2nd Ward Ald. Brian Hopkins has said were mandated as part of the Lincoln Yards plan.

Advertisement

Foundry Park developer Jim Letchinger acknowledged that there is “other infrastructure that the neighborhood would like to see done that is not possible right now.”

But Letchinger added it’s a start that includes the long-promised extension of the popular 606 Trail. “If you don’t start with something that’s achievable, you can’t achieve anything.”

“We have a plan to actually start building and creating revenue right away in conjunction with building our infrastructure … A lot of parks. Massive riverwalk. Ten acres of public open space. Very usable, very engaging,” Letchinger said Wednesday.

“As we continue to build, since we’re not using anywhere near all the increment that we’re creating, the other increment can go toward other projects that the neighborhood would like to see — whether it’s to build a bridge or fixing Elston Avenue, or anything else that they’re anxious about,” he said.

Public improvements promised to residents, but not covered by the $201.6 million subsidy, include another bridge crossing the Chicago River and a realignment of Elston Avenue, which Letchinger called a positive move in the long run, but a “massive undertaking” complicated by cost and property control.

Advertisement

“No private developer can realign Elston. It’s impossible. The city is the only one that can do that, and they’re working on it. There’s plans for it. But it will take a very long time,” Lechtinger said.

Ald. Scott Waguespack (32nd) said there is “one bridge that a lot of people still want,” but it goes through private properties owned by Ozinga Ready Mix Concrete and several other owners.

“The city would have to do it as a taking [of property], and that would be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. So they took that off the table because … that bridge wasn’t necessary at this time,” Waguespack told the Chicago Sun-Times.

Letchinger’s plan for roughly 34 vacant acres of the site calls for up to 3,737 residences, 20% of them designated as affordable to comply with the city’s set-aside rules. The new design includes low- to mid-rise buildings, some for offices, grouped near open space and riverfront access. Buildings would get ground-floor retail, and one is slated as a boutique hotel.

The project’s reduced density has drawn praise from residents. And Waguespack said he’s satisfied with the reduced public subsidy.

Advertisement

“In the future if there’s more needed, we could go back and do it. But this is much more grounded in a realistic infrastructure project that will still satisfy all the needs of connecting the neighborhoods,” Waguespack said.

Hopkins said he views the scaled-down subsidy and the infrastructure projects as “wholly inadequate” and a broken promise to Lincoln Park and Bucktown residents.

“Lincoln Yards provided for two bridges with the possibility of a third. Foundry Park has zero,” Hopkins said. “I don’t want to move on a vague verbal promise that we might consider adding a bridge later. The time to add it is now while the redevelopment agreement is still pending. And the fact that it was omitted is tragic. Also, the [Elston-Armitage] intersection redesign and the new Metra station seems to have fallen by the wayside.”

Also at Wednesday’s meeting, Johnson proposed a tax break for Chicago’s booming film and television industries — by reducing the 15% personal property lease transaction tax to 11%.

The tax has been raised twice in recent years and was the biggest piece of the revenue package that helped balance the $16.7 billion budget for 2026. It has exceeded revenue projections by $40.3 million through June 30, allowing Johnson to offer the break in hopes of attracting more film and TV productions to Chicago.

Advertisement

The City Council also followed a trail blazed by Gov. JB Pritzker and his counterparts in six other states by prohibiting present and former city employees — and elected officials — from using insider information to bet on prediction markets. Apps including Kalshi and Polymarket are used to place bets on everything from election winners and the number of candidates entering a specific race for office, to budgetary and foreign policy decisions by elected officials.

Championed by Ald. Timmy Knudsen (43rd), the ordinance prohibits current or former city officials, appointees and employees from using “confidential information or any non-public information, including the identity of the subject of an investigation” to either participate in prediction markets or “assist any other person” placing those bets.

The Council also confirmed Johnson’s appointment of Dr. Garth Walker as the city’s public health commissioner.

Continue Reading

Finance

The average cost of fertility treatments and how to plan for them

Published

on

The average cost of fertility treatments and how to plan for them

Covering the cost of fertility treatment can feel like yet another hurdle in a process that is already physically and emotionally draining. Not only do you have to go through the testing and medical procedures involved, you can also end up paying tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.

For families who want to have kids or women who want to afford themselves a little more time, though, this can feel like a price well worth paying. But the process may necessitate some financial planning. Research can also go a long way, as insurance companies increasingly offer coverage.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending