78,000 Sign Up for Cybercab Fleets; SpaceX $13.2B/year Order
Overall Thesis
SpaceX's newly announced $13.2B annual contract and path to profitability suggest significant upside potential, with analyst price targets of $230+ per share substantially above current trading levels, indicating the market has undervalued the company's growth trajectory.
Narratives
The hosts discuss the massive response to Tesla's Cybercab fleet signup page, with reports of tens of thousands of interested fleet operators. They believe Tesla will likely prioritize established fleet operators and private equity groups over individual signups, and see fleet ownership as a way to accelerate real-world feedback and expansion of use cases for the robotaxi service.
Key Arguments
- 78,000 people reportedly signed up for the Cybercab fleet opportunity, showing strong demand.
- Fleet operators and PE groups will likely be favored by Tesla over individual small-scale applicants because they can prove financial capacity.
- Involving many independent fleet owners will help Tesla discover new use-case niches and provide valuable real-world feedback compared to casual retail owners.
- Tesla appears to be learning from Hertz's mistakes, where poor customer onboarding and bad timing on fleet purchases hurt that rental relationship.
The hosts note that Fluence is facing a wave of negative analyst sentiment amid concerns about delivery ability and margin maintenance. They express skepticism about the broader energy-storage sector's 'unlimited TAM' thesis, citing funding difficulties and pricing uncertainty as headwinds for smaller players like Fluence.
Key Arguments
- Analysts are turning negative on Fluence today amid concerns the company can't deliver or maintain margins.
- Finding and funding new energy-storage projects has become harder as the easy opportunities were captured a year or so ago.
- Smaller storage firms have had real problems achieving scale on costs, which the hosts believe applies to Fluence as well as EOS Energy.
The hosts describe EOS Energy as having struggled with shareholder dilution from perpetual capital raises and argue its 'long duration' battery technology is a weaker value proposition compared to faster discharge/charge alternatives. Overall they view EOS as one of the smaller storage players facing real cost and scale disadvantages.
Key Arguments
- EOS Energy has been perpetually raising money and diluting shareholders, which hasn't been a good experience for existing shareholders.
- EOS's zinc battery 'long duration' design discharges more slowly, which the hosts view as a disadvantage versus faster-discharging competitors that can capture better pricing.
- Smaller storage firms like EOS have had real problems achieving cost scale relative to bigger players.
Hedges & Caveats
- SpaceX is not yet publicly traded; valuation based on private market assessments
- Analyst price targets may not materialize as projected
- Market reaction to profitability announcements is uncertain
- Current stock price range (135-165) reflects actual market conditions versus analyst projections
- Hosts acknowledge SpaceX remains poorly understood despite available information