One comment from institutional investors caught my attention today.
Several people compared SpaceX to Amazon during its early years. The idea isn't that today's business justifies the valuation. The idea is that investors believe the company could eventually reshape multiple industries and create markets that barely exist today.
That comparison is fascinating because Amazon also spent years looking expensive, controversial, and difficult to value using traditional metrics.
The obvious problem is that for every Amazon there are hundreds of companies that never grow into their valuation.
Do you think the Amazon comparison is fair, or are investors stretching for historical parallels to justify a price that is difficult to defend?