Organized & Compiled:Deep Tide TechFlow

Hosts: Josh Kale; Ejaaz Ahamadeen

Podcast Source: Limitless Podcast

Original Title: Money is Running Out for the Biggest IPOs in History

Broadcast Date: June 3, 2026

Key Takeaways

This episode discusses the near-simultaneous IPO rush of SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic, focusing on how AI infrastructure development is pushing private capital and tech giant balance sheets to the limit. The hosts believe this is not just a single company's funding story, but an unprecedented concentration of capital: companies require more computing power, data centers, electricity, and chips, while public markets, index funds, and pensions are also drawn in.

The episode compares SpaceX's not fully validated space data center business model, Anthropic's demonstrated enterprise revenue growth, Google's urgency in continuing to bet on AI through external financing, and OpenAI's capital requirements for expanding data centers to train and serve models. Ultimately, both hosts remain cautious about bubble risks, but overall judgments lean optimistic: as long as computing power supply fails to keep pace with demand, AI infrastructure spending appears more like building the next generation of technological foundations rather than just a financial bubble.

Highlights Summary

Mega IPOs Coming: Is AI Development Depleting Capital?

• “OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceX's IPOs are expected to raise a total of $180 billion, a figure that exceeds the total funding during the entire internet bubble period of $164 billion. And that figure was total funding over three years, while here it’s just three companies.”
• “Why now? Why the urgency? To me, the answer is simple: AI capital expenditure is becoming more expensive than these companies initially anticipated, and they are choosing to double down. Their free cash flow is no longer sufficient to meet current demand.”
• “Whether leveraging through debt instruments or raising funds in other ways, we have already jumped into the abyss. If we don't go all out now, we will end up with nothing.”

SpaceX Redefines IPO and Index Rules, Pensions Passively Buy In

• “Through its IPO, SpaceX is actually redefining market rules to meet its massive funding needs.”
• “Over $30 trillion in passive 401(k) funds, i.e., retirement funds, will be forced to buy SpaceX stock, and at the IPO valuation level. It’s estimated that about 24% of the shares issued in SpaceX's IPO will be absorbed by these passive funds. Such scale of passive buying is unprecedented in history.”
• “Some indices only require a 5 to 15-day observation period; as long as the stock price can maintain a certain level for a few days post-IPO, the company can be included in the index. In other words, Elon Musk only needs to ensure the stock price stays at a certain level in the short term to easily qualify.”
• “It (SpaceX) has not yet truly proven its revenue model. It claims, ‘We will send AI data centers into space…’. However, this business model has yet to be validated… it feels more like a 'trust me' promise.”

The Revenue Leap and IPO Motivations of Anthropic

• “They (Anthropic) reached this figure ($20 billion) within the first one and a half months of 2026. Recently, their annual recurring revenue (ARR) has reached $45 billion, mainly benefiting from the success of Claude Code, Claude Co-Work, and a series of contracts they signed with enterprises.”
• “Anthropic expects to achieve about $550 million in profits by the end of this month. Relative to trillions of dollars in capital expenditure, this is certainly just a drop in the bucket, but it will make them the first large AI lab to achieve this.”
• “Anthropic’s coverage in the Fortune 10, meaning out of the top 10 largest companies globally, 9 are using Anthropic, especially Claude Code. Their net dollar retention rate… has grown by 500%. In other words, these companies plan to spend 5 times more.”

Google's $80 Billion Financing: Not an IPO IPO

• “Google's founders Larry and Sergey Brin clearly stated about a year and a half ago that they would rather risk losing everything than lose the AI race. So they will continue to spend until they find enough breakthroughs. They have returned to a founder mode.”
• “Google is a public company, yet raised $80 billion. …but of that $80 billion, about $30 billion might be used to cover the tax obligations incurred when employees cash out their stock in the coming months. In other words, a large portion of the financing will not actually be used for AI capital expansion. …this carries a hint of desperation.”
• “They (Google) are not focused enough. They are making agents and want better coding models; they want better general models while building TPU infrastructure; they are selling TPUs to competitors, and as a result, their computing power for training Gemini is insufficient… Even after spending so much, the recent Gemini 3.5 Flash is still lagging behind cutting-edge models.”

OpenAI and AI Infrastructure: Money Hasn't Been Spent Yet, Bottlenecks Exist in the Physical World

• “I (Ejaaz) may have a slightly controversial view: the money that is about to be raised and spent will ultimately be a good thing. I believe it will not essentially be a bubble but rather construct necessary infrastructure.”
• “We are currently constrained by the physical world. …No matter how much leverage you want to use or how much money you want to raise, you may not be able to actually spend it, since you will be limited by the speed of regulations, the speed of data center construction, and the capacity of silicon chip production. There is only one ASML, one Nvidia, one TSMC. The physical infrastructure for AI is hard to expand. Until I see this bottleneck lifted, I don’t believe we are in a bubble.”
• “The rental price for GPUs from four or five years ago is even higher than it was then. They have become more valuable. …What we are seeing now is the opposite: buyer demand is so strong that we don’t have enough silicon and computing power to meet it.”
• “We are in a historically unique moment. There has never been such a scale of funds and values concentrated on the same idea, either in American history or in the history of capitalism. …The U.S. is industrializing in an important way.”

Mega IPOs Coming: Is AI Development Depleting Capital?

Josh:

The three largest IPOs in history may submit their filings within weeks: SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic. On the same day, Google also raised $80 billion from external financing to support its AI development.

Interestingly, the financial relationships among these companies have become quite complex, to some extent, they are "transfusing" each other's balance sheets with their respective funds. Over the past few weeks, the market has even begun to modify rules protecting passive investors to allow them to participate in IPOs sooner.

Currently, the largest wave of construction in the history of capitalism is occurring, so we must ask a question: is there really enough money? These companies choosing to go public almost simultaneously is clearly not a coincidence. The chart we are displaying on the screen is astonishing: The total funding expected from the IPOs of OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceX is estimated to reach $180 billion, which even exceeds the total funding of $164 billion during the entire internet bubble period. And that figure was total funding over three years, while here it’s just three companies.

So, this scale is quite astonishing. We need to answer a few key questions: is this a moment of circular economy? Are these companies running out of money? Have they grown too large for private capital to sustain them? There is much worth discussing here. Ejaaz, let’s start with SpaceX.

Ejaaz:

SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic are all preparing for mega IPOs, but the real story is not merely about a single company's financing but rather about their potential simultaneous public listings within weeks. Their latest target is to complete their IPOs by the fourth quarter, and the total financing scale is massive. This situation is unprecedented in history.

Looking individually, SpaceX should have submitted its S-1 filing on April 1, indicating its intent to go public. Market rumors suggest it may go public this month or by early July at the latest. About ten days ago, it was reported that OpenAI also secretly submitted its S-1 filing in preparation for its IPO. Just yesterday, Anthropic submitted a confidential S-1 filing. This means these three companies are racing for mega IPOs almost within the same timeframe.

This raises the question: Why now? Why the urgency? To me, the answer is simple: AI capital expenditure is becoming more expensive than these companies originally anticipated, and they are choosing to double down. Their free cash flow is no longer sufficient to meet current demand.

So far, these companies have primarily been spending private funds, either raised from investors or through their own revenues. Now, they are turning to the public markets, appealing to investors, “We need more money to build more data centers, purchase more GPUs, and train more models to meet the continuously growing demand.”

If you ask these companies, none will admit to having a lack of demand. In fact, Google, along with Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta that I recall, have reported profitable quarters amid massive AI capital expenditures. The total funding these four companies plan to invest this year may approach $1 trillion, yet even that is not enough. Therefore, they need more funding to support this construction.

What I am truly concerned about is whether we have reached a point of no return. We discussed this issue before recording: once we reach this point, there’s no turning back. Whether through leveraging debt instruments or other means of financing, we have jumped into the abyss. If we don’t go all out now, we will end up with nothing.

SpaceX Redefines IPO and Index Rules, Pensions Passively Buy In

Josh:

What surprises me most is that not only are these companies going all out, but institutional investors, the general public, and even major fund companies on Wall Street are also participating in betting on these IPOs and modifying rules to accommodate them.

A recent typical example is the SpaceX IPO. To have its stock included in indices faster, index providers relaxed their original profit requirements and shortened the observation period from 90 days to 5 days. By traditional rules, a company must first prove that it can operate normally and has sustained profitability before index funds are required to invest in its stocks. But now, these index funds can buy in earlier. Even for those who do not wish to actively invest in SpaceX, their retirement accounts, 401(k) accounts, and investment portfolios holding these index funds will be passively buying SpaceX stocks faster than ever before.

Ejaaz:

This has never happened in history. Through its IPO, SpaceX is effectively redefining market rules to meet its massive financing needs.

Several data points deserve special attention. First, over $30 trillion of passive 401(k) funds, that is, retirement funds, will be forced to buy SpaceX stock, and at the IPO valuation level. It is roughly estimated that about 24% of the shares issued in SpaceX’s IPO will be absorbed by these passive funds. This scale of passive buying is unprecedented in history.

Second, under traditional rules, to be included in key indices like NASDAQ 100 or Fortune 500, a company typically needs to demonstrate significant revenue and maintain stable performance over one to two quarters, usually requiring 3 to 6 months. However, the current rules have been significantly relaxed. Some indices now only require a 5 to 15-day observation period; as long as the stock price can maintain a certain level for a few days post-IPO, the company can be included in the index. In other words, Elon Musk only needs to ensure the stock price stays at a certain level in the short term to easily qualify.

Josh:

This change is indeed concerning. For decades, key indices have followed two core rules intended to protect ordinary investors, particularly those participating in the market through retirement accounts or regular investment accounts. The first rule is that a company must be profitable for four consecutive quarters, and the second is that the minimum free float ratio is between 5% to 10%.

These rules were established after the burst of the internet bubble in 1999-2000. At that time, many indices included a batch of fast-growing but persistently losing companies at the peak of the bubble, leading 401(k) holders and retirement investors to passively hold stocks of these companies and ultimately suffer significant economic losses once the bubble burst. Hence, these rules were introduced to protect ordinary investors.

And now, it seems the situation is repeating itself. The rules are being reversed. Companies no longer need to show consecutive four quarters of GAAP profits; they only need good performance within 15 days. Compared to the past, this threshold has significantly lowered. This makes me cautious. Although such easing of rules might provide strong support for SpaceX’s stock price, as a large amount of passive buying would drive its stock price up; if things do not unfold as expected, this might cause considerable harm to ordinary investors passively holding SpaceX shares.

Ejaaz:

Josh, I believe many of the criticisms of SpaceX's IPO from the outside are valid: It has not yet truly proven its revenue model. It claims ‘We will send AI data centers into space, achieving this goal through rockets’. However, this business model has yet to be validated, and it hasn't even reached the proof of concept stage. Although it has indeed been launching rockets, we have yet to see GPUs in space actively participating in training cutting-edge AI models. So, in a sense, this feels more like a 'trust me' promise.

However, one company is different. It has proven its revenue capability and is showing impressive growth: Anthropic. Just yesterday, Anthropic submitted a draft registration statement of S-1 to the SEC, indicating its plan for an IPO in the coming months.

The Revenue Leap and IPO Motivations of Anthropic

Ejaaz:

The story of Anthropic has several differences from SpaceX. Anthropic’s CFO Krishna Rao previously mentioned that the company did not have immediate plans for an IPO and would take its time. At that time, they had already reached an annual recurring revenue of $9 billion and expected to reach about $20 billion by the end of 2026, but they achieved that number within the first one and a half months of 2026. Recently, their annual recurring revenue has reached $45 billion. This is mainly due to the success of Claude Code, Claude Co-Work, and a series of enterprise contracts they signed. They are also involved in many joint projects, funding from Blackstone, and advancing many different initiatives.

Therefore, compared to SpaceX, Anthropic is indeed making a lot of money. Consequently, it makes sense for them to want to go further at this point. They are acquiring as much computing power as possible and primarily competing with OpenAI: training cutting-edge models, servicing cutting-edge models, and providing these models to as many people as possible. That is why I believe they are advancing with the IPO.

However, it should be noted that no details have been published this time, right? It feels more like a statement that needed to be issued. OpenAI seems not to need this, but Anthropic decided to disclose for the sake of transparency. Josh, what do you think?

Josh:

It's interesting; it feels like a “confidential disclosure about a confidential submission,” which is quite ironic. But I think this indeed surprised many people. Almost everyone did not expect the pace to be this fast. When I looked at Polymarket, everyone initially expected OpenAI to IPO before Anthropic. Yet once this news broke, the odds flipped dramatically.

The data I saw from The Information might even be outdated, as I’ve recently heard rumors that Anthropic's growth rate is even faster than previously anticipated. It is demonstrating an incredible growth trajectory, primarily driven by real value creation on the enterprise side and a very strong model capability.

Think about Mythos. They announced this model two months ago, which means its training completion time must have been even earlier. These models are incredibly strong. I feel Anthropics is very confident about going public.

This topic also raises another question: How much money does the market have to absorb this financing?

We know SpaceX will be the first to go public. Rumors suggest it may list around June 12, in the coming two weeks. This could absorb $100 billion in capital. Although it aims to raise $75 billion, I believe it will ultimately exceed that figure. So how much more can Anthropic raise from the market? If OpenAI lists right after it, how much funding will be left for OpenAI? We are posing a very large capital demand to the public markets. The private market may have already been drained, or maybe it hasn't. But we will soon see how quickly the reserves of public market funds are consumed, as the amount each company wants to raise is remarkably large.

Ejaaz:

This is how I see it: there will be a class of investors buying stocks of these companies because their core logic is straightforward: they are bullish on AI. Then there will be a large group of retail investors who will say, “I use Claude every day, and it helps me a lot, so of course, I want to buy stocks in this company.” Or they use ChatGPT every day and would have similar thoughts.

Both groups will ultimately lead to the same outcome: buying shares of these companies. From the companies’ perspective, their purpose in going public to raise funds is clear. Anthropic’s CFO Krishna Rao has said it, OpenAI’s CFO Sarah Friar has said it, and Elon Musk has said it too: We need more computing power. More computing power will bring better AI, better AI will bring better products, better products will serve more customers, and ultimately lead to more revenue.

Specifically regarding Anthropic, the rumors about its AGI model Mythos are very real. Today, there’s breaking news that they are advancing Project Glasswing, which is a staged, sandboxed release approach for Claude Mythos, covering 150 new organizations globally. They also mentioned recently in a statement that they will release to the public in the coming weeks. So, all this occurring now feels coincidental but can also be seen as a coincidental arrangement.

Another difference for Anthropic is that it expects to achieve about $550 million in profit by the end of this month. Relative to trillions of dollars in capital expenditure, this is certainly just a drop in the bucket, but it will make them the first large AI lab to achieve this. Its growth rate is indeed astonishing. Among all these IPOs, I might be most optimistic about Anthropic, but each company has its own developmental path.

Google's $80 Billion Financing: Not an IPO's IPO

Josh:

We previously made a judgment about whether large tech companies like Google would begin to spend beyond the limits of their own revenue capacities. This means they would start supporting these constructions through debt.

Now we are seeing some signs that the market is gradually moving into this territory. Google's income on its balance sheet is no longer sufficient to cover its needs, so it begins seeking external capital. This is not an IPO, because Google is already a public company, but it still needs more money. So what did it do? It raised $80 billion to support AI development, which is a huge amount of funding.

I don't remember what its total capital expenditure commitment specifically is, but I estimate that this money is close to 30% to 40% of its planned annual capital expenditures. Notably, Berkshire Hathaway, which is Warren Buffett's old company, issued a $10 billion check to participate. This is a big deal: $30 billion comes from underwriting public offerings, $40 billion from market expansion plans starting in the third quarter of this year, and $10 billion from Berkshire's private placement.

We have previously digged into Google's balance sheet, looking at how much they earn and spend. At that time, they were positive. Now it seems like they're either heading towards a loss or are just buffering in advance to keep a sufficient safety cushion.

Ejaaz:

I think they are going all in and ultimately the balance may turn red. Google's founders Larry and Sergey Brin stated very clearly about a year and a half ago that they would rather risk losing everything than lose the AI race. So they will keep spending until they find enough breakthroughs. This is the founder model; they are back to the founder mode, Sergey Brin returned to Google to return the company to this state.

This is my favorite IPO story this week, but it’s not even an IPO. Google is a public company yet raised $80 billion. The question is, what exactly is this $80 billion for? The headline obviously is: we are going to use this $80 billion to build more AI capital expenditure, create more TPUs, and provide more computing power, etc.

However, many people overlook a story: of that $80 billion, about $30 billion might be used to cover the tax obligations incurred when employees cash out their stocks in the coming months. In other words, a significant portion of the financing will not truly be used for the expansion of AI capital expenditure.

Setting that aside, I don’t think Google is a bad actor. They have been as transparent as possible about how much they are spending on AI and what they plan to do. They are indeed trying hard. But this reminds me of our discussion at the end of last year regarding OpenAI's status: then we said OpenAI was a bit distracted, doing many random AI products, missing the focus on coding AI, and later they called out Code Red and focused back in.

I feel Google is now drifting into a similar state of overexpansion. They are not focused enough. They are creating agents while wanting to develop better coding models; they want to create better general models while building TPU infrastructure; yet they are selling TPUs to competitors, and as a result, their own training power for Gemini is insufficient, causing Gemini to lag. Even after spending so much, the recent Gemini 3.5 Flash is still falling behind cutting-edge models. Now they need to raise so much more money to train better models. It seems they need to genuinely lock onto a target and focus.

From a funding structure perspective, $80 billion is a lot, almost equivalent to an IPO to support their own construction. I am not too sure if using $30 billion of it to cover tax obligations is the best way to go. This carries a hint of desperation. Still, I remain optimistic because companies that past have done similar public financings when Berkshire Hathaway issued a $10 billion check generally performed well afterward. So I hope Google will be like them. But this story is indeed very interesting.

Josh:

Trust Berkshire to live forever, right? They have been accurate in判断 and very disciplined in the past. We hope this continues. Another point worth noting is that Google holds significant stakes in many upcoming public companies. It is one of the large private shareholders of SpaceX and Anthropic, so when the stock prices of these companies rise, Google will also benefit significantly.

However, these numbers are getting larger and a bit intimidating. We seem to have become numb to the magnitude of hundreds of billions of dollars. Google’s expected capital expenditure of $180 billion to $190 billion this year was unimaginable a few years ago. So when they say they are all in, it is on a scale we have never seen before.

I think this is also one of the themes of this episode: we are in a historically unique moment. There has never been such a scale of funds and values concentrated on the same idea, in both American history and capitalism's history. The outcome will be very significant. Regardless of whether it is a bubble, we are building real value. Real intelligence is being built. As the results of these expenditures enter the market, transformations at a real civilizational level will begin to be felt.

These huge numbers can easily make one feel lost, but they will ultimately bring truly valuable tools. We often tease Google, saying they haven't launched new cutting-edge models in a while. But I am also using their tools and services, and I can clearly feel these products are getting smarter. Next week’s WWDC, we will also cover, and at that time we can see how Apple is preparing to launch these tools and make them smarter. We will see where these capital expenditures go.

But there’s one IPO we haven't expanded on, which is OpenAI.

OpenAI and AI Infrastructure: Money Hasn't Been Spent Yet, Bottlenecks Exist in the Physical World

Ejaaz:

As mentioned earlier, 10 days before Anthropic submitted its potential IPO filing, OpenAI did the same; it also submitted confidentially. However, the so-called confidentiality ultimately leaked; since it will all leak anyway, it might as well be released by themselves.

Josh:

Interestingly, before the reports from Bloomberg and Financial Times came out, the market for OpenAI's IPO on Polymarket had already risen, so there must have been some internal news circulating.

Ejaaz:

Essentially, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have reportedly been helping OpenAI prepare for the IPO behind the scenes. If you ask them why they are doing this, the reason is still the same: they want to raise more money to build more data centers. They seem to have just broken ground for a new data center a few days ago. So now it's all in.

I may have a slightly controversial view: the money that is about to be raised and spent will ultimately be a good thing. I believe it will not essentially be a bubble, but rather construct necessary infrastructure. This infrastructure will land in the West, especially within the U.S., becoming the fundamental foundation for the next generation of technological innovations.

You need computing power, you need power transmission lines, and you need all the foundational materials necessary to make GPUs and silicon chips truly operate and serve customer needs. We are currently constrained by the physical world. It may sound abstract, but I'm speaking literally. I align with Gavin Baker’s perspective: No matter how much leverage you want to use or how much money you want to raise, you may not be able to truly spend it, as you will be limited by regulatory speeds, construction speeds of data centers, and silicon chip production capacities. There is only one ASML, only one Nvidia, only one TSMC. The physical infrastructure for AI is hard to expand.

Thus, even if you want to leverage or design various complex debt structures, it doesn’t work because there’s no place to spend. You are constrained by the physical world. Until I see this bottleneck lifted, I don’t believe we are in a bubble.

Josh:

Speaking of Gavin Baker's viewpoint, he often draws comparisons with the dark fiber during the internet bubble era. At that time, a large amount of fiber was laid down, but there weren't enough application scenarios to use it. Many constructions went unused and didn’t generate income, ultimately causing everything to collapse.

However, this time, we have been saying, the rental price for GPUs from four or five years ago is even higher than it was then; they have become more valuable. Interestingly, Michael Burry, the person from "The Big Short," has always said, “No, that's wrong, everything will collapse.” But so far, he has been completely wrong.

So far, all the indications and signals we see are green, all positive. Everything looks good. Capital expenditures seem to be bringing real value. You mentioned rumors about Anthropic potentially turning a profit soon, which is very important. Because if it can absorb all the raised funds and spend them with sufficient capital efficiency, ultimately converting into revenue, that’s astonishing. I remember OpenAI does not plan to do this at least before the end of this year.

All these signals are leaning positive. One thing I personally will keep an eye on is whether companies start cutting AI expenditures. I saw some news of a surprising $500 billion bill from Amazon, but I don’t know how real those details are.

Ejaaz:

As long as companies can extract value from AI systems, they will continue to spend, as this enhances their own business revenues and profit margins. So far, everything seems good. Let's hope this trend continues.

Did you see that crazy data Christian mentioned on the Invest Like the Best podcast? Anthropic’s coverage in the Fortune 10, meaning among the top 10 largest companies globally, 9 are using Anthropic, especially Claude Code. Their net dollar retention rate, that is, the budget customers started with on January 1 compared to what they expect to spend by the end of the year, has grown by 500%. In other words, these companies plan to spend 5 times more.

But they are not doing this out of obligation, but rather by choice. The reason is that they have achieved very high returns on their investments on the back end. Therefore, the question is, if this trend continues in the correct direction, the common definition of a bubble is excessive leverage, coupled with insufficient buyer demand. What we are currently seeing is the opposite: buyer demand is so strong that we do not have enough silicon and computing power to meet it. This is the reason Google is raising $80 billion and these companies are IPOing at huge valuations. They need to satisfy that demand. Maybe I am drinking my own sweet water, but that is my judgment.

Which Company is Worth Participating In? Long-term Bets behind Three IPOs

Josh:

We should also consider its downstream impacts, which will be immense. Now we are building all this infrastructure in the U.S. and have the capacity to build it. Moving forward, the focus will gradually expand beyond software. Software is certainly still important, but I just saw a news that OpenAI is hiring for a robotics department to begin building robots. The Elon system is also pushing for the Optimus robot. I guess around the time of the IPO, they might do a demonstration to attract more attention.

I believe we are witnessing a massive transformation: the U.S. is industrializing in a significant way. We will send satellites into space, and launch data centers into orbit. This requires huge capital. But think of the value it can create: it's akin to replicating an Internet and placing it in low Earth orbit. Thus, it wouldn't be easily affected by geopolitical impacts, wouldn't go offline, and wouldn't experience disruptions. This is astonishing technology, driven by this capital expenditure and extensive spending. Now the public also has the opportunity to participate in this.

Ejaaz, I have a question for you: of these three companies, if any, which one are you most excited about and most likely to invest in at the IPO?

Ejaaz:

To be honest, I am excited about all of them. If I had to rank them, I would choose Anthropic, SpaceX, OpenAI, but the gap between them is minimal. It’s very hard to choose. They are all building remarkable things, and I genuinely believe that the products and services created by these three companies will become the foundation for all future businesses and constructions.

The question is, how do you value such a company? We haven't seen anything like this before. We have never witnessed a technology disruption that can permeate into every industry you can think of, even including the hardware side. Think of what will happen when robotics scale. You need robotic models and data to achieve this, which is exactly what these AI labs will do. You will also need potentially infinite computing power possibly deployed in space. You need very intelligent models that could come from Anthropic or OpenAI, trained through reinforcement learning, to accomplish these tasks.

These three companies are the clearest bet. So if I take a long-view approach, which is typically how I invest, I would buy at the IPO and see what happens. How long have you been following SpaceX?

Josh:

For over ten years, starting from the Falcon 9 project. I remember watching every live broadcast. In fact, my YouTube channel should have been around for 14 or 15 years. My first video was shooting the Falcon 9 launch on a handheld camera, pointing at the screen.

It’s truly astonishing. Watching them progress from Falcon 1, which had a single rocket engine, to now Starship with about 39 to 40 engines combined, this progress is incredible. It shows an awe-inspiring opportunity. Being able to invest in this company and be part of it is very exciting for me.

I know some people are unhappy about its relatively high valuation. But if you consider its future landscape after success and the team requirements needed to accomplish this, it’s hard to find a better opportunity. You can't form a better team than this, nor a better company to take a shot. So at least it deserves excitement and support for this attempt: civilization is going to do something we have never accomplished, and it's in a cool and exciting way, and it ultimately has the chance to benefit everyone.

This is why I am excited about SpaceX. I will try to participate. I hope it’s not valued at $4 trillion at the time of its listing and that it can get as close as possible to the issue price. I think another point to watch out for is how high the premium will be after it starts trading because we know the market will be very hot.

Ejaaz:

Finally, I want to remind the audience listening that Josh and I are indeed bringing an almost exaggerated optimism to these matters. We occasionally try to keep ourselves grounded, but generally speaking, we are optimistic about AI and frontier technologies. So, these are not investment advice.