But they don't have all the same owners. If I own company 2/3 of company A and it is worth $0, and I own 2/3 of company B I can't force company B to buy company A for $1. The company B shareholders will be upset and could sue.
Maybe this is a good deal for shareholders of SpaceX and xAI. But then maybe it isn't a good deal for one set of shareholders. I have no idea, but I would love to be a shareholder in SpaceX and would not want to be a shareholer in xAI. Totally depends on the price of course.
Musk is the majority owner, but he is not the only owner. So the discussion is probably amongst senior leadership from both companies and probably involves other significant owners.
The lawyers are the ones talking, and they have to come up with a fair valuation.
If SpaceX pays too much for it, other SpaceX shareholders have a case against SpaceX leadership. If xAI accepts an offer that is too low, other xAI shareholders have a case against xAI leadership. Given that the leadership is basically the same people, they are very well incentivized to come up with a valuation that is as fair as possible.
And this is not just theoretical, Musk has already been sued successfully once on a similar case, when his companies gave out too much free support to the boring company.
Otoh, he is clearly impulsive and doesn’t think the rules apply to him. I am guessing, if one approach benefits him personally the most, there will be enormous pressure to achieve that outcome.
Is this an actual question? Because it seems kinda obvious that one person can have a majority stake in two companies without those companies being the same company.
The better question is whether or not this merger makes any sense.
Probably in a desperate attempt to stall margin calls on the debt, which would cause him to have to sell his Tesla stock, which might start the freefall in stock price, creating a negative feedback loop and cratering his empire. See also the news about Tesla shifting manufacturing to robotics.
> Last year, SpaceX agreed to invest $2 billion in xAI as part of the startup’s $5 billion equity fundraising, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time.
Sometimes you just need to get the founders in a room together to hash things out and magic can happen.
You don't have to spend long looking at Tesla's investors to realize they are exactly the kind of investors you want. You don't have to do anything but make promises, and when those promises fall through, just promise you'll deliver even more in the future.
The scary people who lent the money to silence Twitter actually need paying one day. Lord knows you aren't doing that with any other product in the portfolio.
I don’t understand the point of this stuff, Musk already has infinite money why does he need to play shenanigans with shuffling things between his various holdings?
He doesn't have infinite money, he is allowed to borrow infinite money thanks to the valuation of his holdings, which lately are weakening on the fundamentals.
Some combination of never enough and the necessity of keeping the hot air balloon of his finances airborne.
I'm just waiting on the final merger with Tesla. The Tesla earnings release mentioned a big battery deal done with xAI plus the previous Cybertruck deal with SpaceX so you know it's coming.
Musk has a lot of wealth, but to turn that into money he would have to sell his stock in his companies, causing him to lose majority ownership. Merging the money-losing xAI with the profitable SpaceX would allow him to use revenue from SpaceX to fund xAI without diluting his ownership.
Maybe he wants to go down in history as the first trillionaire. His wealth exploded during the pandemic, from about $25 billion to over $700 billion today. The trillion-dollar mark is in sight. He might be willing to sacrifice some long-term wealth if it means juicing the number now, so he has what seems like a permanent place in history.
This makes sense based on his recent talk about putting solar powered AI data centers in space. I was expecting this announcement soon and it makes perfect sense if that's the goal.
Buying Twitter was a financially disastrous decision. It had reportedly lost at least 80% of its value [1]. The loans were secured against Tesla shares so there was the real risk of a margin call and a forced sell off.
And then along came xAI where a bunch of people gave Elon money and he "merged" Twitter and xAI, basically siphoning off billions of the investment funds ti bail himself out. If securities law had teeth, he probably should've gone to prison for this.
At the ssame time, why weer people giving this charlatan man-child billions to invest in AI?
The problem is they weren't buying AI. IMHO they were buying a seat at the table and an influence in the administration, a bit like the Saudi sovereign fund's "investment" in Jared Kushner.
Thing is, this isn't the first time he's done this. Elon used one of his companies (Tesla) to buy another of his companies (SolarCity) who was essentially insolvent but owed a lot of money to a third of Elon's companies (SpaceX). There was a lawsuit but it was dismissed. If you're sufficiently wealthy, the law basically doesn't apply to you [2].
I knew before even clicking on this that the justification would be orbital data centers (and it is). They make no sense becaus eof launch costs, cooling and cosmic rays and solar radiation.
Is this the continuation of the Twitter buyout shell game?
They both are privately held by the same owner! So, with whom are they talking? :-)
Two socks and two sets of googly eyes are required for this exercise. Attach googly eyes to socks. Insert hands in socks.
Now I'm imagining Musk in a k-hole just staring at his hands in sock puppets for hours.
But they don't have all the same owners. If I own company 2/3 of company A and it is worth $0, and I own 2/3 of company B I can't force company B to buy company A for $1. The company B shareholders will be upset and could sue.
Maybe this is a good deal for shareholders of SpaceX and xAI. But then maybe it isn't a good deal for one set of shareholders. I have no idea, but I would love to be a shareholder in SpaceX and would not want to be a shareholer in xAI. Totally depends on the price of course.
Musk is the majority owner, but he is not the only owner. So the discussion is probably amongst senior leadership from both companies and probably involves other significant owners.
Musk writes a letter from his ceo@spacex.com email and he reads it from his ceo@xai.com account. And viceversa.
The lawyers are the ones talking, and they have to come up with a fair valuation.
If SpaceX pays too much for it, other SpaceX shareholders have a case against SpaceX leadership. If xAI accepts an offer that is too low, other xAI shareholders have a case against xAI leadership. Given that the leadership is basically the same people, they are very well incentivized to come up with a valuation that is as fair as possible.
And this is not just theoretical, Musk has already been sued successfully once on a similar case, when his companies gave out too much free support to the boring company.
Tesla engineers being lent out right after the Twitter buyout to eval the codebase was one of many reasons I won’t work there. So unserious.
Otoh, he is clearly impulsive and doesn’t think the rules apply to him. I am guessing, if one approach benefits him personally the most, there will be enormous pressure to achieve that outcome.
Otoh, he is clearly impulsive and doesn’t think the rules apply to him.
They don't, so why shouldn't he think that way?
I was imagining a boardroom reenactment of Geri's Game
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geri%27s_Game
"Have your Grok call my Grok!"
Is this an actual question? Because it seems kinda obvious that one person can have a majority stake in two companies without those companies being the same company.
The better question is whether or not this merger makes any sense.
I'd be quick to assume the ":-)" in this context indicates it is not an actual question.
He's really shuffling the X purchase debt around.
Probably in a desperate attempt to stall margin calls on the debt, which would cause him to have to sell his Tesla stock, which might start the freefall in stock price, creating a negative feedback loop and cratering his empire. See also the news about Tesla shifting manufacturing to robotics.
> Last year, SpaceX agreed to invest $2 billion in xAI as part of the startup’s $5 billion equity fundraising, the Wall Street Journal reported at the time.
Sometimes you just need to get the founders in a room together to hash things out and magic can happen.
Why would you pollute SpaceX’s valuation by coupling it with a toxic asset like xAi?
You don't have to spend long looking at Tesla's investors to realize they are exactly the kind of investors you want. You don't have to do anything but make promises, and when those promises fall through, just promise you'll deliver even more in the future.
> Why would you pollute SpaceX’s valuation by coupling it with a toxic asset like xAi?
SpaceX IPO will save the current xAI/Twitter bag holders
The scary people who lent the money to silence Twitter actually need paying one day. Lord knows you aren't doing that with any other product in the portfolio.
save it from the ai bubble collapse?
I don’t understand the point of this stuff, Musk already has infinite money why does he need to play shenanigans with shuffling things between his various holdings?
He doesn't have infinite money, he is allowed to borrow infinite money thanks to the valuation of his holdings, which lately are weakening on the fundamentals.
Hence the shenanigans.
Some combination of never enough and the necessity of keeping the hot air balloon of his finances airborne.
I'm just waiting on the final merger with Tesla. The Tesla earnings release mentioned a big battery deal done with xAI plus the previous Cybertruck deal with SpaceX so you know it's coming.
Musk has a lot of wealth, but to turn that into money he would have to sell his stock in his companies, causing him to lose majority ownership. Merging the money-losing xAI with the profitable SpaceX would allow him to use revenue from SpaceX to fund xAI without diluting his ownership.
to please one or another set of shareholders, to keep up his compensation, and to prop up bad decisions
Maybe he wants to go down in history as the first trillionaire. His wealth exploded during the pandemic, from about $25 billion to over $700 billion today. The trillion-dollar mark is in sight. He might be willing to sacrifice some long-term wealth if it means juicing the number now, so he has what seems like a permanent place in history.
Elon doing some financial engineering to engineer a 1T valuation for himself? :-D
This makes sense based on his recent talk about putting solar powered AI data centers in space. I was expecting this announcement soon and it makes perfect sense if that's the goal.
https://www.wsj.com/tech/bezos-and-musk-race-to-bring-data-c...
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/01/technology/space-data-cen...
> Reuters could not determine the value of the deal, its primary rationale, or its potential timing.
This makes total sense his DC in Memphis will be his Houston. That DC will control all space flights and space robots.
This could happen without a merger
One c suite is much cheaper and easier to control then two. Reminds me of many reversed mergers in oil and gas.
So, somehow, Twitter will end up being (partially) public again!
What are we doing here
Buying Twitter was a financially disastrous decision. It had reportedly lost at least 80% of its value [1]. The loans were secured against Tesla shares so there was the real risk of a margin call and a forced sell off.
And then along came xAI where a bunch of people gave Elon money and he "merged" Twitter and xAI, basically siphoning off billions of the investment funds ti bail himself out. If securities law had teeth, he probably should've gone to prison for this.
At the ssame time, why weer people giving this charlatan man-child billions to invest in AI?
The problem is they weren't buying AI. IMHO they were buying a seat at the table and an influence in the administration, a bit like the Saudi sovereign fund's "investment" in Jared Kushner.
Thing is, this isn't the first time he's done this. Elon used one of his companies (Tesla) to buy another of his companies (SolarCity) who was essentially insolvent but owed a lot of money to a third of Elon's companies (SpaceX). There was a lawsuit but it was dismissed. If you're sufficiently wealthy, the law basically doesn't apply to you [2].
I knew before even clicking on this that the justification would be orbital data centers (and it is). They make no sense becaus eof launch costs, cooling and cosmic rays and solar radiation.
Is this the continuation of the Twitter buyout shell game?
[1]: https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/02/business/elon-musk-twitter-x-...
[2]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50695593
Sounds like schizophrenia.
Are the talks just Elon with a sock puppet on each hand while Grok runs in the background doing the voices?
Tesla invests $2B in xAI, SpaceX merges with xAI. It's just blatant self-dealing all the way down to artificially prop up valuations.
grifters gonna grift
Elon Musk in negotiation with himself.
What does the process look like, exactly?
I'm not totally clear, but it probably involves the ol' stranger.
A lot of ketamine is involved.
You do whatever you feel like.
You get sued.
You drown the court in expensive lawyers.
Rinse. Wash. Repeat.
Oh good, orbital rockets and simulated child porn under the same roof. I hate this timeline.
MechaHitler now has space launch capabilities