Why SpaceX Will Hit $10 Trillion - And Why Most Investors Will Miss It

Ryan Miller Wall Street analysts are wrong about SpaceX , and here's exactly why that will work to your advantage. Ryan Miller Before we dive in, just a word from our sponsor. When doing deals, we all know that raising capital is the one thing that unlocks everything. That's when I've partnered with Reef Pass Investors that are actively funding deals right now.

So if you're a deal syndicator or a founder thinking about launching an M&A focused buy and build platform, reach out to Reef Pass Investors at reefpassinvestors.com . They are one of the best investors in the beginning that are helping you launch a new long-term building company . So here's what I want you to do: click the description in the notes and contact them for a discovery call and potentially get an invite to pitch your next M&A deal .

Now, let's get back to the show. Ryan Miller The current IPO consensus puts SpaceX at $1.75 to $2 trillion . And to get there, analysts are comparing it to Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, just traditional aerospace and defense at roughly 14 times EBITDA .

Okay, fine. They're doing their job, they're doing it well and doing it how they're trained. And there are others who are pulling in Rocket Lab , AST, Space Mobile , Planet Labs , the new space economy basket. SpaceX currently prices at 156 times EBITDA , blowing every single one of those comps out of the water.

So the analysts know their models are broken. They just don't know why. Well, I'm going to tell you why. See, to properly value SpaceX , you don't look at Boeing.

You go back 400 years to look at one of the most valuable companies in all human history , otherwise known as the East India Trading Company . Ryan Miller It was estimated at around $10 trillion at today's valuation . And here's what most people get wrong about the East India Trading Company . They think it became most valuable because they were trading spices , pepper, silk, cotton moving between London and Calcutta.

That's the textbook version. That is not why it was worth $10 trillion . The East India Trading Company hit a $10 trillion valuation because it stopped trading and started colonizing . It was exploring the new world.

Can you see the parallel here? So here's how it actually happened. In 1757, the Battle of Plassey changed everything. The company defeated the Nawab of Bengal and gained control of one of the richest regions in the world, not to trade, but to tax and to govern.

And so they were colonizing and building colonies in the New World to expand not only trade , but also humanity itself. It built its own standing army of 260,000 soldiers, twice the size of the British Army at the time, not to protect ships, but to control the territory . Does that sound interesting? Does that sound familiar?

Maybe an army of robots ? This is really cool. It minted its own currency and ran the court system and had power to declare war. Can you believe that?

It became a sovereign state on its own inside a corporate structure . And at its peak, it controlled half of all world trade . Not because it traded , but because it owned the infrastructure that made all of it possible. Does this sound familiar?

The spices were the excuse. Territorial Monopoly was the actual business model . Ryan Miller Now look at SpaceX . It starts a rocket company , but what it's actually building is the infrastructure layer for the next phase of human civilization , orbital launch monopoly .

They got Starlink at $9 million subscribers with no viable competitor, direct-to-cell orbital data centers , and a credible Mars colonization backed by a US government contract . It's not selling rides to space , it's building trade routes . Does this sound familiar? Ryan Miller See, the East India Trading Company was worth $10 trillion the moment the world realized it didn't just move goods, it controlled the means by which goods could move at all.

See, SpaceX goes public at 1.75 trillion and has not yet monetized a single interplanetary New World frontier. See, Wall Street is comparing it to Boeing. You should be asking what it looks like when the company that owns the infrastructure between planets starts to govern it.

It's exploring the new world and it is just getting started. So let's dive in. Ryan Miller I told you Wall Street 's comps are broken. Now, let me show you exactly how they're broken because understanding the mechanics of the error is how you can profit from it.

So here's what happens inside an equity research team when they build a SpaceX model. They look for precedent. Every analyst, every fund , every institutional desk, they all do the same thing. They find the closest comp or comparable and apply its multiple.

It's not laziness, it's process. And that's how this model works. But the problem is there really is no comparable company in our generation. There's never been a company like SpaceX in the modern era.

So they find the closest approximation. Traditional aerospace like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, they trade at roughly 14 times EBITDA , but that multiple assumes a mature business. Predictable government contracts, cost plus pricing. That is not SpaceX .

The new space economy companies like Rocket Lab , AST Space , Mobile, Planet Labs are high growth, pre-profitability, venture-backed bets on space infrastructure . Closer, but still fundamentally wrong. Because those companies are tenants. SpaceX is the landlord.

So some analysts start using AI infrastructure in software multiples. Palantir, GE, Vernova, 150 times earnings. At least the multiple fits. But the business model doesn't.

Palantir is software, it owns intellectual property. If you pay for a license, you get access. Competitors can build different software. That's a defensible moat, but it's a software moat.

The moment a better product exists, you're competing. SpaceX is not competing, it's controlling. And here's the distinction I want you to feel in your gut, not just to understand in your head. When Palantir loses a contract, they lose revenue.

When they lose a customer, they lose fees. When a better competitor emerges, they lose market share. The company still exists. The moat is dented, but it still remains intact.

Ryan Miller Now, when SpaceX loses orbital infrastructure dominance , when someone else launches a competing satellite constellation, what do you lose? You don't lose a market share point . You lose the ability to control foundational access to space . You lose the ability to price all downstream services.

You lose the ability to decide who gets to explore next. That is not a pricing power difference. That is a sovereignty difference. And most fund managers cannot value sovereignty because they have never studied the companies that owned it.

And the analysts are not stupid. They're using the right tools, just perhaps in the wrong category of company. It is like using a ruler to measure temperature. The ruler is perfectly accurate.

It is just answering the wrong question. The right question is not what is SpaceX worth if its revenue grow at 30% and margins expand to 40%. That is the common Wall Street question. The right question is, what is the terminal value of the only company that controls the foundational access to orbital infrastructure and beyond?

Those questions have completely different answers. So your Monday action plan, pull up the SpaceX bull case you've been reading, Palantir comparison, GE Vernova comparison, AI comp multiples. Now replace those multiples and compare SpaceX to historic monopolies . The East India Trading Company , Standard Oil, ATT, when they own every telephone in America.

What changes about your conviction when you use those comparables instead? That shift is where the edge lives. And that is where we're going to play. Ryan Miller So I want to walk you through the East India Trading Company playbook in detail because it's not decorative history.

It's not a metaphor and it's not an analogy. It is a blueprint. And SpaceX is running it step by step. But let's go back to 1600.

Royal Charter granted. The East India Trading Company gets exclusive rights to trade in Asia. That's their charter. That's the permissions flip.

So for the next 50 years, from 1600 to 1650, the East India Trading Company burns capital . They're exploring , building trading posts , losing money on routes, funding naval expeditions that don't pay off. A traditional capital burn . And investors are putting up the money on the promise of infrastructure that just does not exist yet.

But here's what they're building during those 50 years: exclusive infrastructure . Routes no one else knows of, trading posts no one else can replicate, and a network of ports and access points, and a supply chain and a navy. By 1700, 90 years after the charter, the East India Trading Company is generating real business. But the money , the real money , doesn't come from being the best trader .

Plenty of other merchants are trading . The real money comes from being the only infrastructure . Ryan Miller Once the East India Trading Company infrastructure is in place, everyone else has to use it. You want to trade in Asia?

You're not starting your own trading post. You're not funding your own naval fleet. You're paying the East India Trading Company a fee to use their infrastructure . It's the profit model that becomes other people trade within your infrastructure and you take a cut.

Can you see the parallels here? So this is where I believe SpaceX is headed. Ryan Miller Now, let's get back to the history. By 1750, the East India Trading Company controls approximately 50% of all world trade .

Not 50% of their trade, 50% of everyone's trade on the planet. That is a powerful monopoly . And here's what most people don't understand about the East India Trading Company evaluation at that peak. Investors were not pricing earnings, they were pricing destiny.

They were pricing infrastructure monopoly . They were pricing the sovereignty . They were pricing the fact that no one else could replicate what they built. That is a fundamentally different valuation model than what Wall Street is using on SpaceX right now.

Ryan Miller Now, let's run the SpaceX timeline through the exact same framework. 2002, SpaceX founded with a charter mission . Make humanity interplanetary . That is not a revenue target .

That is a sovereign mission . That's your permission slip to build what needs to be built, even if it doesn't pay off in year one. Now, fast forward 2008 to 2020. SpaceX burning through capital .

They're launching rockets that fail time and time again. They're building infrastructure that costs billions . They're landing boosters that no one else has ever done. Pure exploration, capital burn .

During this period, what are they building? Exclusive infrastructure . Launch capability no one has. Reusability no one has achieved.

And a network effect in orbital access . Yep, they're exploring the new world and they're building the infrastructure to do it. So 2015 and forward, Starlink goes live. That's your trading post .

That is your route, and that is your access point. In 2024 to present, Starlink reaches 9 million subscribers. That's not an internet company. That is a foundational infrastructure of global communications across the entire planet .

And that could be any planet. And guess who controls it? SpaceX , full stop. Ryan Miller So here's the exact parallel.

The East India Trading Company profit model was everyone routes through our infrastructure . We take our cut. SpaceX's profit model is becoming everyone's internet , everyone's satellite services , everyone's orbital manufacturing , everyone's point-to-point travel routes through our network, and we take our cut. Can you see the parallels?

So the East India Trading Company earned revenue from traditional trade . True. But the real wealth came from currency , banking , territorial control , military contracts, territory rents , licensing , access fees , and more. SpaceX has not monetized those streams yet.

And just pay attention and watch for those signals to see if they're doing it. Even Elon 's obsession in the early days, which he caught a lot of trouble for with Bitcoin and Doge and all of this currency stuff, the new world currency , you see how this is starting to shape up? All signs, in my opinion, are pointing to a $10 trillion valuation . So the $1.

75 to $2 trillion is going to be peanuts compared to what it'll achieve when it's actually a mature company controlling trade routes , its currency , its robot army, whatever you want to call it. There is a lot that it's still going to do and it's going to control everything. See, Wall Street is valuing SpaceX on today's businesses , launches and Starlink . That's like valuing the East India Trading Company in 1710 after the trading posts were built, before the monopoly revenue kicked in.

Think about that. You're watching the exact same movie 400 years later. Same playbook, just better rockets. So, your Monday action, map out SpaceX's infrastructure monopoly separate from its revenue monopoly .

Which one is priced into the $2 trillion valuation ? Which one is it? Where is that gap? That gap is where the $10 trillion lives.

Ryan Miller Hey, if you're finding value out of this discussion, could you do me a huge favor? Could you just take a second and hit that like or subscribe button? It costs you nothing, but it tells the algorithm that this is valuable information and it helps us to get it to more people. Thank you.

You're incredible. Now let's get back to the show. Ryan Miller So now I'm going to show you exactly h ow Wall Street is analyzing SpaceX and then show you precisely what that model breaks down for monopolies in formation . Wall Street's model looks like this.

Take the current revenue , Starlink revenue plus launch services revenue plus government contracts , apply a growth rate for SpaceX , they're bullish. Maybe 25, 30, 35% revenue growth annually. Discount that cash flow stream back at a weighted average cost of capital , typically 10 to 12% for a company at SpaceX's risk profile . Run the math out to a terminal value, apply an exit multiple , and the output $1.

75 to $2 trillion . That's it. That model is mathematically sound. That model is correctly built if SpaceX is just a launch company plus an internet company .

That model is completely wrong, however, if SpaceX is a sovereign infrastructure monopoly in formation. And here's why. Ryan Miller The discount cash flow model prices today's businesses and assumes growth follows a predictable curve. That's fine.

But margin expansion follows historical precedent. That works for mature companies and all companies. That works for category leaders, but that does not work for monopolies before they're monopolies . Because a monopoly information does not have predictable margins .

It has binary outcomes. Either the infrastructure becomes foundational or it doesn't. Either the competitive moat locks in or it doesn't. Either control becomes irreversible or it doesn't.

See, when you hit that inflection point, the valuation does not go up linearly, it goes up exponentially. Full parabolic movement. The East India Trading Company valuation model was different. They weren't running a discount cash flow in 1650.

Investors understood that they were pricing a charter mission. They understood that they were pricing infrastructure that did not exist yet. They were asking one question. If this infrastructure becomes foundational, if the entire world has to route through it, what is the value of that control?

Not what today's revenue is. What is the terminal value if infrastructure monopoly locks in? See, the East India Trading Company investors got the answer right. $7.

9 to $10 trillion in today's money . Wall Street is answering a different question. How much is current SpaceX revenue worth if it grows at 30% and margins expand to 40%? The answer?

Around $2 trillion . Ryan Miller Those are not the same questions. And they will not produce the same returns. So here's what matters.

The East India Trading Company investors had no Bloomberg terminals, no sophisticated valuation models , no equity research . They had history and judgment. They looked at the charter, they looked at the infrastructure being built . They looked at the mission, and they priced it like the most powerful entity on the planet would be worth exactly what it was.

And they were right. Wall Street has all the tools, all the models, all the data, and they are pricing SpaceX like a launch company with margin expansion . Fundamentally, I think this is wrong. You now have asymmetry.

You have historical model that suggests $10 trillion valuation . You have Wall Street consensus suggesting a $2 trillion valuation . And the pricing difference, that gap, that is your edge. So your Monday action.

Stop using discount cash flow alone . Build a monopoly formation valuation alongside of it. Ask this question: What is the terminal value if Starlink reaches 100 million users or multiple planets where it's used to communicate ? If orbital manufacturing becomes viable, if point-to-point travel scales, if Mars manufacturing goes online, work backwards from those outcomes to today's entry price.

And that gap is your edge. Wall Street is valuing SpaceX at $2 trillion based on today's business . Starlink internet , launch services , government contracts, that's fine. That is the business they can model .

That is the business that they can also predict . But the East India Trading Company playbook says the real money , that comes later. When the infrastructure is so foundational that everyone has to route through it and they collect the toll. For the East India Trading Company , that meant currency , banking , territorial licensing , military contracts , territory rents , and even access fees .

The goods they sold were a fraction of the total value extraction. Ryan Miller For SpaceX , those parallel streams have not started yet, but it looks like they're doing the exact same thing. Think about orbital manufacturing . Every satellite manufacturer , every zero gravity research, every pharmaceutical company that wants to manufacture protein crystals in microgravity, they all need SpaceX infrastructure .

They all need launch . They all need processing capability. They all need orbital access . And they'll pay a premium for exclusive access to SpaceX's network .

That is not aerospace revenue. That is infrastructure monopoly revenue . Think about point-to-point travel. New York to Tokyo in 45 minutes, Los Angeles to Singapore in 30.

That is the starship. That is not happening in 2026. But SpaceX has the only infrastructure that even makes that possible. When point-to-point travel scales, and it will, SpaceX doesn't need to own all the airlines.

SpaceX just needs to own the infrastructure that all of them will use. Look at the East India Trading Company playbook. They didn't own every merchant operation. They owned the routes, the ports, the access points .

And they took their cut from everybody that used them. Ryan Miller Now let's talk about space-based solar power . SpaceX owns the launch capability . SpaceX owns the orbital network .

Space-based solar power doesn't get to orbit without SpaceX infrastructure . SpaceX doesn't need to build and operate all the solar platforms . SpaceX needs to own the orbital real estate and the transmission rights. Off-world resource extraction, asteroid mining, lunar mining, that is real commerce moving off planet .

Every mining company, every research agency, every government, they all need SpaceX to get there and back again. That is licensing revenue . That is territorial control. The East India Trading Company earned a fraction from goods.

The overwhelming majority came from infrastructure rent , licensing , and territorial control . SpaceX currently owns almost everything from goods and services, almost nothing from infrastructure rent and licensing yet. That gap between what SpaceX earns today and what territorial infrastructure monopoly earns at maturity, that is where the distance between $2 trillion and $10 trillion really lives. So your Monday action.

Model SpaceX revenue streams separately. Look at what the valuation is today. And by 2030, what would be possible? And then finally by 2035, what does monopoly control look like ?

Build three cases. The conservative case, infrastructure licensing does not scale. The moderate case, it becomes 30% of revenue. And the bull case, infrastructure rents becomes 60% of total revenue.

Which model is Wall Street using? Which one actually prices this opportunity correctly? Ryan Miller So here's the thing about historical parallels that most fund managers miss. The East India Trading Company opportunity was not obvious until it was too late to get the asymmetric return.

In 1650, the East India Trading Company looked like a risky trading venture . There was no comparables, no historical precedent for a corporate-backed colonial power model. Investors were betting on unproven infrastructure and a charter that nobody really understood. That was the risk.

But by 1700, when the infrastructure was locked in and the monopoly was clear, everyone could see it. But the valuation had already been inflected. The early investors , the one who understood the charter and had the vision to see the infrastructure monopoly that was beginning to form, they were the ones who got the asymmetric returns. The late investors , the ones who waited until 1750, when the East India Trading Company already controlled 50% of world trade , they got a mature company returns.

Safe, predictable, but still smaller. SpaceX , right now, is the exact same position as the East India Trading Company in the 1700s. The infrastructure was clear. Starlink is at 9 million subscribers.

The government charter is in place. The monopoly position is forming. But Wall Street has not connected the dots to historic precedent. But that window is right now.

And I'll tell you the signal. The moment Wall Street wakes up, because I'm not going to guess at timelines, I can't verify, but you can watch for this. When SpaceX announces orbital manufacturing revenue , when they start pricing point-to-point travel commercially, that is Wall Street 's wake-up call. That is the moment institutional desks realize, oh my goodness, this isn't a launch company .

This is a sovereign infrastructure monopoly . And after that announcement, the repricing will happen faster than you can blink your eyes. Ryan Miller Now, this isn't trading advice. This is structural.

The East India Trading Company investors who understood the playbook in 1700 got asymmetric returns. The investor who jumped in at 1750, they got a mature company return. Same company, same fundamentals, but different timing. You're looking at the same setup today.

Wall Street is in 1700 mode. They see the infrastructure , but they're pricing it like a utility. You can see 1850 mode, full monopoly , infrastructure rents , sovereign territory , and $10 trillion in terminal value. That is the asymmetry.

And asymmetry is where generational returns really start to land. So your action is set an alert for SpaceX orbital manufacturing revenue announcement. That is your signal. That is Wall Street' s wake-up call.

So make sure that if you can, your position before the bell rings. Because once it does, the repricing will be fast and the easy money is long gone. Ryan Miller So I want to end here with something that goes deeper than valuation models and revenue streams. Hope gives you sight.

That is what I mean when I say hope is not motivation. Hope is the ability to look at a forest and see a ship inside of it. To look at a deserted island and understand that the trees around you are not a prison, they are a vessel waiting to be built. When you look at SpaceX , most analysts see a launch company .

That is the spreadsheet story. Revenue , growth margins , return on capital . It's rational and it is still small. But when you look at SpaceX with the eye of hope, You begin to see something bigger.

You see humanity's infrastructure bet on its own future. You see an exploration charter. You see Mars colonization of the new world . You see the same dream that drove the East India Trading Company , the idea that the world can be explored, conquered, and made to prosper.

That commerce can flourish at the edge of what humans ever thought possible. The East India Trading Company was built on that dream. It lasted for 250 years. It made its investors obscene amounts of money and it shaped the entire global world order.

Ryan Miller SpaceX is executing that same blueprint, just with better physics. And here's what separates the fund managers who will get asymmetric returns from the ones who won't. The ability to hold both truths at the same time. One, SpaceX is a company with cash flow and growth rates and a $2 trillion IPO valuation .

That's the truth. But two, SpaceX is a sovereign infrastructure monopoly formation with a $10 trillion terminal value. Executing on a 400-year-old playbook, that is also the truth. Wall Street is comfortable with one.

You need to be comfortable with both because the moment SpaceX proves the second truth is real, and it will, the market reprice s in a heartbeat. And we don't get paid to start things. We get paid to finish them. The East India Trading Company finished the first wave of global exploration.

SpaceX is finishing its second, worth $10 trillion because exploration , genuine exploration , planetary scale exploration has always been the most valuable thing humanity can do. And that is what we're doing here. We're teaching you to see the ship in SpaceX 's force. We're teaching you that Wall Street 's $2 trillion valuation is the evidence saying there is none, but you're going to see it anyways.

And when you do, that shift in perception is where eight more trillion dollars lives. Ryan Miller So your final action, stop thinking of SpaceX as a stock . Stop thinking of it as a chart. Start thinking of it as humanity's infrastructure bet on its own future.

Start thinking of it as the East India Trading Company 400 years later with rocket ships instead of sailing ships. That mindset shift changes everything about how you hold this position. It changes how patient you can be. It changes how you size the bet.

It changes whether you can sell on dips or whether you understand that the dips are accumulation periods of monopoly infrastructure information. See, most fund managers will miss this because they don't have the historical insights to see it. But you and I, we're not most fund managers . Ryan Miller Now, I know you're sitting with questions.

You're thinking, what is the scorecard? How do I identify other $10 trillion opportunities? How do I spot monopolies before Wall Street does? Well, we're building something specifically for this.

It's called the sovereign corporate state scorecard . It's a framework I use to identify companies that are building empires, not just revenue growth . And more importantly, to understand why Wall Street can't value them yet. The scorecard walks you through the markers, the government charter, the infrastructure burn phase , exclusive access points, monopoly information.

It shows you which companies are following the playbook and it gives you the valuation model , the historical model, not the software model that gets you to the real number. You can get it for free. Just download it in the description below and run it on the other companies you're holding. See where the gaps are.

Ryan Miller We also have a community of fund managers who think the way you're learning to think, who see a ship when others see a forest, who position monopoly opportunities before the market wakes up. You're welcome there. Go to fundraisecapital.co and join the Fund Raise Capital community.

This is what we do at Fund Raise Capital . We help you to see. We help you to model. We help you to finish.

That's because capital is the one thing that unlocks everything. And the sizzle, the vision, the mission, the hope. That is what keeps you working at 4 a.m.

when no one's cheering you on. That is what separates the investors who get 40% returns from the ones who get 4,000%. The East India Trading Company investors got it. SpaceX investors are about to.

Fund managers who see what we see and think like we think have the best chance to do the same. Ryan Miller So let's bring it home. Here's what you're walking away with today. Three things.

One, Wall Street is wrong about SpaceX valuation . They're comparing it to aerospace, defense, and space economy companies, all of which are fine, but they're tenants. SpaceX is the landlord. That category error could be costing you billions .

Two, SpaceX is executing the exact same playbook as the East India Trading Company 400 years later. Same charter, same structure, same infrastructure burn , same monopoly formation, same terminal value trajectory. The East India Trading Company was worth $10 trillion . SpaceX is executing the blueprint at stage two.

Infrastructure locked in. Monopoly revenues not yet flowing. And then three, the timing is now. Wall Street has not connected the dots yet.

You have a window before the orbital manufacturing revenue announcement forces them to wake up. Use that window. Position before the bell rings. Because once it does, the repricing is fast and easy money is gone.

See, success is an inside job, and that means you have to be able to see what others can't yet. You have to be able to study history deeper than fang stocks that all the analysts have done. You have to have the courage to price the destination before Wall Street does. And most importantly, you have to be right.

This is why you want to check with attorneys, accountants, and the rest of your financial team before you make any move. Hold this position. Study the East India Trading Company , map SpaceX infrastructure against a 400-year-old playbook. Get this Sovereign Corporate State Scorecard in the description below and join the Fund Raise Capital community position before everyone else figures it out.

You do these things, and you too will be well on your way in your pursuit of Making Billions .