Bet The Decade

$100T BY THE END OF 2036? For $SPCX, that’s an extreme bull-case thought experiment—not my base case. But it forces a much more interesting question than “how many rockets can SpaceX launch?” What businesses could it build if access to orbit became dramatically cheaper? My thesis starts with Starlink. SpaceX can launch infrastructure it owns, then sell the service repeatedly. The launch isn’t the end of the transaction. It’s the beginning of a customer relationship. Starship could expand that opportunity. If frequent, fully reusable operations deliver the intended economics, larger payloads could enable more capable satellites and services that are impractical today. That’s what makes me bullish: not launch revenue alone, but the possibility of owning more of the infrastructure—and the customer relationship—above Earth. But $100T demands an entirely different scale of business. At an illustrative 50× earnings, it implies $2T in annual profit. Cheaper launches and satellite subscriptions alone are not a sufficient argument. Entirely new, enormous profit pools would have to emerge. Execution, capital requirements, spectrum and competition could all break that path. I’m bullish on the platform. The headline is a question. The business must earn the answer. NFA. #SpaceX #Starship

Watch some amazing video. youtu.be/8ySMdUIF3cY?is=Jc3b… #Starship $SPCX

Casgevy did $99.2M last quarter, ~6x a year ago. The first CRISPR medicine is ramping. One course of CTX310: LDL-C −53% a year later. 2 FDA RMATs. AHA data Nov 9. ~47% of the market cap is cash. Full article: xitter.cf/BetTheDecade/article/2… $CRSP · Not financial advice.

IREN’s strongest argument is that the AI pivot is already showing up in revenue, not just in a construction plan. In its Nov. 5 Q1 FY27 report, the company reported $200M of AI Cloud revenue out of $228M total. That changes the question: less “can a miner sell AI compute?” and more “can it bring the next contracted capacity online on time?” My bullish case rests on that conversion. Power and GPUs become valuable together only when customers can actually use them. Commissioning turns a signed promise into a recurring service; another contract alone does not. The company’s Nov. 5 update put its operating target for more than $4B of contracted ARR in January 2027. That is a company target, not revenue already earned. What would weaken the thesis? More slippage without operating progress, or financing that leaves shareholders funding growth faster than they benefit from it. A funded project can still be late. The milestone I care about is contracted capacity becoming billable capacity. If IREN delivers that, the AI business has a much stronger foundation than a miner-pivot label suggests. $IREN — NFA.

📅 Tomorrow's market calendar: Sunday, Nov 8 (all times ET) 🇦🇺 5:30 PM: RBA Assist Gov Hunter speaks (UBS Australasia Conference) 🇨🇳 8:30 PM: China October CPI (est. 0.8% y/y, prior 0.9%) and PPI (est. 5.3% y/y, prior 5.0%) 🇺🇸 US stock markets closed #Markets #China #Inflation

Nature Methods: 130 tau proteoform groups, read one molecule at a time — Q3 revenue ~$234k, mostly a grant. youtube.com/shorts/Een84aODk…

America runs >32 GW of TOPCon module lines and ~1 GW of TOPCon cells to feed them. T1 Energy owns the TOPCon patents, a 5 GW module plant and a 2.1 GW cell fab due Q1 2027. Market cap: ~$0.7B. Q3 on Nov 12. Full article: xitter.cf/BetTheDecade/article/2… $TE · Not financial advice.

SpaceX’s biggest opportunity may not be winning a larger share of today’s launch market. It may be making things economical that nobody can afford to build today. That’s why I think looking at Starship only as a bigger rocket misses the investment thesis. If launch becomes cheaper and more frequent, companies can design different satellites. They can replace hardware sooner. They can test ideas that would never survive the economics of an expensive, infrequent ride to orbit. More customers could justify more flights. More flights could spread development and infrastructure costs across more missions. Lower costs could attract the next group of customers. But that cycle has to be earned. Recovering a vehicle is not the same as turning it around cheaply. Demand is not guaranteed just because capacity exists. Here’s what would strengthen my conviction: the same hardware flying repeatedly, less work between flights, and customers building businesses around that availability. I’m bullish on the possibility that SpaceX expands the market rather than merely dominates it. Not because a huge valuation is inevitable. Because changing the economics of access to orbit could change what gets built there. Not financial advice.

IonQ Q3: revenue $173.8M (+336% YoY), backlog $1.2B, FY guide up to $505–515M. The edge no one else in quantum has: it owns the trusted US fab its rivals use, and management says 2027 Superion 256 capacity is sold out. Full article: xitter.cf/BetTheDecade/article/2… $IONQ · Not financial advice.

GOOGLE EXEC RESIGNS FROM SPACEX BOARD Donald Harrison (Google Global Partnerships president) left SpaceX’s board effective Nov 4. Nov 6 8-K Item 5.02: not due to any disagreement on operations, policies or practices. 10+ years on the board (joined ~2015 with Google’s investment). Alphabet still largest institutional holder; Google stake ~555M shares (up from 551.2M) — not an exit. Google: still “deeply supportive.” Board seat ≠ shareholder exit. NFA. $SPCX #SpaceX #AI