According to @garyblack00, a TSLA and SpaceX merger would require issuing roughly 35% new TSLA shares to absorb about $800B of SpaceX equity into a combined ~$2.3T company given TSLA at ~200x PE and SpaceX at ~400x, resulting in about $8B adjusted net income with TSLA at ~$6B and SpaceX at ~$2B. He adds that roughly 25% of combined profits would come from space travel and communications, which he believes many TSLA institutional holders would reject and sell into, absent large cost or revenue synergies for TSLA. He notes the industrial logic is weak because it mainly lets TSLA fund SpaceX’s negative cash flows, which he argues is not TSLA shareholders’ responsibility, and he points out TSLA has lagged the Nasdaq 100 over one year (+12% vs +20%) and five years (+48% vs +90%), reinforcing his view that added uncertainty could pressure the stock. Source: @garyblack00 on X.

According to @garyblack00, a TSLA and SpaceX merger makes little sense for Tesla shareholders without major cost or revenue synergies due to heavy dilution and valuation differences (source: @garyblack00). He calculates that with Tesla at a $1.5T market cap on a 200x P/E and SpaceX at $800B on a 400x P/E, the combined value would be $2.3T, requiring Tesla to issue roughly 35% new shares and producing about $8B in adjusted net income ($6B Tesla, $2B SpaceX) (source: @garyblack00). He adds that many institutional holders could balk if around 25% of profits come from space travel and communications and might sell, while the industrial logic is weak and Tesla could end up funding SpaceX’s negative cash flows (source: @garyblack00). He also notes Tesla has underperformed the Nasdaq over one- and five-year periods, reinforcing his caution on such a deal (source: @garyblack00).

According to @QCompounding, citing Terry Smith, buying the S&P 500 at a PE of 5.3 in 1917 and selling at a PE of 34 in 1999 would have produced an 11.6% annualized return, with only 2.3% per year attributable to multiple expansion and the remainder driven by earnings and reinvestment (source: @QCompounding on X). For trading, the same source-backed attribution favors prioritizing durable earnings growth and reinvestment compounding over chasing valuation rerates; by extension, crypto participants can apply this framework by emphasizing fundamental adoption and cash flow analogs rather than relying on rerating alone (application based on @QCompounding citing Terry Smith).

According to @garyblack00, TSLA’s recent outperformance is due to multiple expansion, with the one year forward EPS multiple rising from 60x in Jan 2024 to 196x while 2026 and 2030 earnings revisions remain negative, including analysts’ Robotaxi and Optimus estimates. He adds that despite an expected 2026 to 2030 earnings growth rate of around 40 percent CAGR, the valuation is hard to justify at a 2026 PE of 196x and a forward PEG of 4.9x, according to @garyblack00. He also argues investors will eventually demand that TSLA earnings revisions turn positive, according to @garyblack00.