Author Topic: Finance & Investments  (Read 76532 times)

Offline PilotMan

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,593
  • Likes: 369
  •  
  • Reviews: 209
PM - I was just trying to calm things down a bit as this has been going round in circles and will continue to do so in a yes it is / no it isn't style discussion which at the end of the day nobody wins  :unknown:

In the meantime it just clogs the thread up

I agree.

Offline Moby Dick

Stoozing works, you can make some money doing it.

The top line figures that MB is quoting, aren't grounded in reality, because they don't take in to account the cost deductions such as the monthly repayments and taxation on the interest.

There's plenty of Youtube videos and articles covering it - here's an article from Which. External Link/Members Only 

The article from Which broadly concurs with my calculations. The best return they came up with for £6k used on a card (in various formats) is £359 - that doesn't take in to account taxation. And also note deposit account interest rates have come down since the article was revised on 4th October 2025.

If MB can show us some actual flowing figures with details to show how he gets to his figures, not hyperbole, that would be great. If not he needs to stop making the claims he's making.

Thank you. Stoozing works  :yahoo:

Claims I am making? I’ve told you it’s a small amount and I do it mainly to help cash flow and other benefits.

You keep asking for figures. It’s £450 per annum per £10k borrowed. It’s only 4.5%. That’s real, easily achieved. (In reality it’s more since I also transfer into my S&S ISAs plus the previously mentioned pension/salary sacrifice)

Re run your calculation:
1) without the income tax on interest.
I utilise tax free savings (ISA/NS&I) average of 4.5%.
Any excess is diverted into my pension and through salary sacrifice or my tax return my taxable income is below the 40% threshold. Even so the first £1000 of interest earned for 20% tax payers is exempt. That gives an additional £22,222 tax free pot at 4.5% gross interest.
So that’s £42k per year tax free plus £50k in premium bonds, plus previous years ISA contributions tax free! So accept I ain’t paying tax on my earnings.
2) without the monthly repayment deductions.
Your balance sheet does not model the real world of never never credit. I am not trying to pay this debt off! Yes for most of my credit cards there is a 1% repayment per month (not £60k / 36months), however I spend around £2k a month on a different 0% purchase card. Some of this is claimed back as cash for work expenses so this more than covers the 1% repayment for all cards and my monthly household bills. I payback the absolute minimum. I increase my debt every month and at the end of the term I transfer the purchase card to a new balance transfer card “kick the can down the road for ever” as mentioned by SH.
3) Dont add a transfer fee. I didn’t pay any fees for 5 cards that I have. There are still zero fee balance transfer cards available although most are now 12 to 14 months but that is fine, since you just transfer again in a years time.
4) £1 is a £1 except when it’s 100p. Even my Aunt Norma’s Goldfish Nemo (without the white stripe) knows that! Some £1 are spent / invested more wisely than others. Having more (borrowed or earned) helps.

I ain’t posting my bank / credit card / ISA statements or disclosing my net worth.
I have mentioned the above points several times. They are real for my circumstances maybe not yours.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2026, 01:20:21 pm by Moby Dick »

Offline PilotMan

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,593
  • Likes: 369
  •  
  • Reviews: 209
@mobydick

You speak with such authority on the subject and dazzle us with your financial wizardry. It's all lovely shouty stuff, but you're still unable to produce any real world cashflow calculations.

There is only one conclusion.

This is my final word on the matter.

Offline Moby Dick

@mobydick

You speak with such authority on the subject and dazzle us with your financial wizardry. It's all lovely shouty stuff, but you're still unable to produce any real world cashflow calculations.

There is only one conclusion.

This is my final word on the matter.
What not even the word “sorry” for making out I am a liar.
My numbers are real, the cash is flowing, I even got a Trading 212 ISA at 4.62% when you said I couldn’t you nay sayer!


Offline PepeMAGA

Has anyone invested in AI linked semi conductor companies?
It seems like there is consensus that it's moving away from cyclical demand to consistent growth.


Offline Massagemanmr

Ok own up who is going to buy Space X

Offline Darren101

I heard you should not buy at the launch.  Do it after it falls to $45

Offline RandomGuy99

I heard you should not buy at the launch.  Do it after it falls to $45
I don't think that's going to happen. Float price is $135

That would give SpaceX, which is loss-making, a market value of $1.77tn

This could be the floatation that makes the stock market crash.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2026, 05:06:24 pm by RandomGuy99 »

Offline Norwichwood

So you don't think it will crash to $49 or less - but you think "This could be the floatation that makes the stock market crash." doesn't make sense. Why would you think it might crash the stock market?

Sales revenue is only 1% of the stated net worth. Net loss was $5 billion.  EBITDA (also known as BS by the clever CM) for 2030 of approx $300 billion. NASDAQ 100 currently on 20x EBITDA. They are only selling 4% at this stage to raise $70~$75 billion cash to help the burn rate / growth. Demand and supply. Elon can't see for 12 months minimum. IF he can make this growth target..... the IPO is a bargain / very good deal to get a slice of. IF! The lack of supply will help keep the price up.

Offline RandomGuy99

So you don't think it will crash to $49 or less - but you think "This could be the floatation that makes the stock market crash." doesn't make sense. Why would you think it might crash the stock market?

Sales revenue is only 1% of the stated net worth. Net loss was $5 billion.  EBITDA (also known as BS by the clever CM) for 2030 of approx $300 billion. NASDAQ 100 currently on 20x EBITDA. They are only selling 4% at this stage to raise $70~$75 billion cash to help the burn rate / growth. Demand and supply. Elon can't see for 12 months minimum. IF he can make this growth target..... the IPO is a bargain / very good deal to get a slice of. IF! The lack of supply will help keep the price up.
Elon is going to own 80% of the stock, so he will still control the company and the shareholders will have no real say.

Offline Norwichwood

Yes he will own 42% of the shares - but control 82% to 85% of the votes - not fair but legal and clearly laid out. But IF he hits the 2030 target it will be a good bargain to buy now.
...... I work for a guy who always tells me there is cake tomorrow (and cock ups today).

Offline Darren101

I don't think that's going to happen. Float price is $135

That would give SpaceX, which is loss-making, a market value of $1.77tn

This could be the floatation that makes the stock market crash.

Sorry, meant to say 145 or there about a as thought it was that.  Either way, don’t touch too soon.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2026, 10:35:26 pm by Darren101 »

Offline RandomGuy99

Sorry, meant to say 145 or there about a as thought it was that.  Either way, don’t touch too soon.
External Link/Members Only

Offline Vice Admiral

According to today’s Times, if the £2.7 billion bid for Tate & Lyle from Ingredion (an American "food and beverage ingredient provider” based in Westchester, Illinois) is successful it will mean the loss of the last remaining original constituent of the FT30 share index after 91 years.

Other old names from the past that have been lost to takeovers over the years include: the brewers, Bass, Watney and Distillers; the retailers, Harrods, Woolworths and the International Tea Company; Bolsover Colliery and United Steel; Rolls-Royce and Austin Motor; London Brick, Dunlop Rubber and Hawker Siddeley; and Electrical & Musical Industries (later known as EMI) and ICI.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Incidentally, Henry Tate & Sons apparently introduced the sugar cube to the UK in 1875.  Was the 150th anniversary commemorated last year?  If not, why not?

And when did anyone last buy a box of sugar cubes?  Or, indeed, put two in their tea?

Hidden Image/Members Only

Offline bigden40

I don't think that's going to happen. Float price is $135

That would give SpaceX, which is loss-making, a market value of $1.77tn

This could be the floatation that makes the stock market crash.

Tbh I’ve heard this sort of pish against many an IPO.

SpaceX is a highly profitable, vertically integrated technology and telecom monopoly rather than just a traditional aerospace company.  It includes Starlink which is a cash cow, add that to the launch monopoly - currently responsible for 80% of mass launched into orbit - then the valuation makes more sense. 

I laughed this morning to read that Elizabeth Warren is calling for an SEC review of the IPO, it left me wondering what she thinks they’re currently doing given that they regulate the entire process. 


Offline RandomGuy99

Tbh I’ve heard this sort of pish against many an IPO.

SpaceX is a highly profitable, vertically integrated technology and telecom monopoly rather than just a traditional aerospace company.  It includes Starlink which is a cash cow, add that to the launch monopoly - currently responsible for 80% of mass launched into orbit - then the valuation makes more sense. 

I laughed this morning to read that Elizabeth Warren is calling for an SEC review of the IPO, it left me wondering what she thinks they’re currently doing given that they regulate the entire process.
SpaceX made a $4.9 billion loss in 2025

Offline PilotMan

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,593
  • Likes: 369
  •  
  • Reviews: 209
SpaceX made a $4.9 billion loss in 2025

Amazon lost $2.8bn before it turned a profit, and that was 25 - 30 years ago.

Offline PilotMan

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,593
  • Likes: 369
  •  
  • Reviews: 209
SpaceX made a $4.9 billion loss in 2025

Amazon lost $2.8bn before it turned a profit, and that was 25 - 30 years ago.

Offline RandomGuy99

Amazon lost $2.8bn before it turned a profit, and that was 25 - 30 years ago.
Yes, that is correct but SpaceX is a high cost business as making rockets isn't cheap especially when they blow up.

Offline PilotMan

  • Age Check : 18+
  • Forum Helper
  • ****
  • Posts: 6,593
  • Likes: 369
  •  
  • Reviews: 209
Yes, that is correct but SpaceX is a high cost business as making rockets isn't cheap especially when they blow up.

I think you can make all kinds of statements about cost, the industry classification, the market and anything and everything.

The bottom line is, will it make money for investors? Either share price growth or dividends, or both.

Offline RandomGuy99

I think you can make all kinds of statements about cost, the industry classification, the market and anything and everything.

The bottom line is, will it make money for investors? Either share price growth or dividends, or both.
Ultimately, Starlink and the other parts of SpaceX will. Rockets will always be relatively low volume though. You're probably not going to ve making 100s or 1000s of them a year. Could they become the Boeing or Airbus of the space travel business? Possibly

Offline bigden40

SpaceX made a $4.9 billion loss in 2025

That’s far from the whole story.  Most of the 2025 loss is due to accounting adjustments and infrastructure investments in relation to xAI where they built out Colossus 1 and 2 last year.  Excluding xAI SpaceX is profitable, driving primarily by Starlink. 

2024 profit was $4 billion.




Offline bigden40

Ultimately, Starlink and the other parts of SpaceX will. Rockets will always be relatively low volume though. You're probably not going to ve making 100s or 1000s of them a year. Could they become the Boeing or Airbus of the space travel business? Possibly

Wrong again.

SpaceX target is to build one starship per day, so hundreds a year.  Musk is talking about 10,000 starships to build a self sustaining city on Mars.




Offline RandomGuy99

Wrong again.

SpaceX target is to build one starship per day, so hundreds a year.  Musk is talking about 10,000 starships to build a self sustaining city on Mars.
Nobody needs 1 starship a day. Nobody has a need for 10,000 starships right now. Maybe he's talking about the year 3136?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2026, 04:36:44 pm by RandomGuy99 »

Offline bigden40

Nobody needs 1 starship a day. Nobody has a need for 10,000 starships right now. Maybe he's talking about the year 3136?

I think you need to read more on the subject, you seem ill informed.

Offline Norwichwood

That's 1110 years

"The first computers, such as the 1940s ENIAC, were room-sized behemoths weighing 30 tons and requiring 150 kilowatts of power to perform just 5,000 additions per second. Today, a standard smartphone can process trillions of operations per second, fitting into your pocket while running on a tiny fraction of a watt" - that's only 80 years and speed of R&D is getting faster.

He just needs to figure out how to cut cost of getting each ship into space - once costs go down and safety up opportunities will open up. First flight was 1903. Now we fly everywhere. And the moon landing was in 1969. Only cost is stopping things.

Offline RandomGuy99

I think you need to read more on the subject, you seem ill informed.
Rockets aren't reliable enough to be made in large numbers and the resources required to launch one is limiting. The whole propulsion system needs to change, so building 1,000s of the current one would lead to a lot of starships that need scrapping when the new version comes along in 12 months. The design hasn't stabilised enough to make it sensible to building large numbers of them.

There isn't the launch pads in the correct position to safely launch 1,000s of starships.

I can't see a time when people will be riding on a rocket to go from Florida to Australia.

I think supersonic flight will be a more cost effective and safer way to cut travel times.

At the moment we haven't got anywhere to travel to and Mars will not be a base for 100s or 1000s of people for at least a hundred years.  More innovation is needed on the propulsion systems before they become viable.

Elon is trying to be a visionary and there's nothing wrong with that.  However, the timeline for actually delivering on his team is much longer than he thinks.

You think people are going to be blas

Offline RandomGuy99

My reading suggests that there might be 10,000s of spacecraft meaning mostly satellites orbiting various planets. However, we don't need 10,000s of launch vehicles like starship.

Offline bigden40

Rockets aren't reliable enough to be made in large numbers and the resources required to launch one is limiting. The whole propulsion system needs to change, so building 1,000s of the current one would lead to a lot of starships that need scrapping when the new version comes along in 12 months. The design hasn't stabilised enough to make it sensible to building large numbers of them.

There isn't the launch pads in the correct position to safely launch 1,000s of starships.

I can't see a time when people will be riding on a rocket to go from Florida to Australia.

I think supersonic flight will be a more cost effective and safer way to cut travel times.

At the moment we haven't got anywhere to travel to and Mars will not be a base for 100s or 1000s of people for at least a hundred years.  More innovation is needed on the propulsion systems before they become viable.

Elon is trying to be a visionary and there's nothing wrong with that.  However, the timeline for actually delivering on his team is much longer than he thinks.

You think people are going to be blas

Thanks for confirming my last post.

Offline bigden40

That's 1110 years

"The first computers, such as the 1940s ENIAC, were room-sized behemoths weighing 30 tons and requiring 150 kilowatts of power to perform just 5,000 additions per second. Today, a standard smartphone can process trillions of operations per second, fitting into your pocket while running on a tiny fraction of a watt" - that's only 80 years and speed of R&D is getting faster.

He just needs to figure out how to cut cost of getting each ship into space - once costs go down and safety up opportunities will open up. First flight was 1903. Now we fly everywhere. And the moon landing was in 1969. Only cost is stopping things.

Exactly, and they’re already making huge and rapid  progress.  They’re planning 5 uncrewed Starships in the late 26/early 27 window to show that they can safely transport cargo to Mars.

Thats followed by a large-scale fleet in 2028.  During that next orbital window, SpaceX plans to send a much larger fleet of roughly 20 Starships. This fleet would carry ground infrastructure, autonomous equipment (like Tesla's Optimus robots), and potentially the first human passengers.

Early 2030s is the target for crewed settlement.


Offline RandomGuy99

Exactly, and they’re already making huge and rapid  progress.  They’re planning 5 uncrewed Starships in the late 26/early 27 window to show that they can safely transport cargo to Mars.

Thats followed by a large-scale fleet in 2028.  During that next orbital window, SpaceX plans to send a much larger fleet of roughly 20 Starships. This fleet would carry ground infrastructure, autonomous equipment (like Tesla's Optimus robots), and potentially the first human passengers.

Early 2030s is the target for crewed settlement.
It's an interesting dream which is going to take a long time to deliver.

Offline Blackpool Rock

Exactly, and they’re already making huge and rapid  progress.  They’re planning 5 uncrewed Starships in the late 26/early 27 window to show that they can safely transport cargo to Mars.

Thats followed by a large-scale fleet in 2028.  During that next orbital window, SpaceX plans to send a much larger fleet of roughly 20 Starships. This fleet would carry ground infrastructure, autonomous equipment (like Tesla's Optimus robots), and potentially the first human passengers.

Early 2030s is the target for crewed settlement.
I do know someone who hero worships Elon and he always laughs at his predicted timescale whenever he announces things and says he'll never do it by then however he will achieve it albeit outside of the original target date

The world does need visionaries like Elon (despite me also thinking he's a right twat regarding other things) as they have the out of the box ideas that drive change and progress through.
I believe that historically many of these people who thought differently really struggled to get their ideas actioned and they weren't always very good at business so things failed from a commercial POV, they were regarded as being freaks or highly strange but these days we know about things like autism and the various niches in the overall spectrum

Offline bigden40

I do know someone who hero worships Elon and he always laughs at his predicted timescale whenever he announces things and says he'll never do it by then however he will achieve it albeit outside of the original target date

The world does need visionaries like Elon (despite me also thinking he's a right twat regarding other things) as they have the out of the box ideas that drive change and progress through.
I believe that historically many of these people who thought differently really struggled to get their ideas actioned and they weren't always very good at business so things failed from a commercial POV, they were regarded as being freaks or highly strange but these days we know about things like autism and the various niches in the overall spectrum

I think he’s a twat too, but what he’s achieved is undeniable and he continually defies expectations. 

His Mars ambitions are likely optimistic, but I’m sure he’s going to have a good crack at it. 

Offline bigden40

I do know someone who hero worships Elon and he always laughs at his predicted timescale whenever he announces things and says he'll never do it by then however he will achieve it albeit outside of the original target date

The world does need visionaries like Elon (despite me also thinking he's a right twat regarding other things) as they have the out of the box ideas that drive change and progress through.
I believe that historically many of these people who thought differently really struggled to get their ideas actioned and they weren't always very good at business so things failed from a commercial POV, they were regarded as being freaks or highly strange but these days we know about things like autism and the various niches in the overall spectrum

And on that topic I thought this was amusing



Hidden Image/Members Only

Offline Blackpool Rock

And on that topic I thought this was amusing



Hidden Image/Members Only
Well he's almost there already, Twatman  :lol:

Offline bigden40

Best explanation I’ve seen of the SpaceX IPO …..

It’s a massive bet on the entire future of humanity.

The valuation is pretty much disconnected from the current financials - which would be fairly decent for a lower valuation; a very profitable connectivity segment funding a massive building and R&D program. The $2T is largely on the promise of a revolution in space.

Buy or not based on your belief in that revolution.

Offline RandomGuy99

Elon is playing a few games with this IPO.

His AI company isn't really a credible competitor to Anthropic and OpenAI, so Elon is not floating that company separately as it wouldn't do well, so he's bundling it up with SpaceX.

Starlink should have been sold off separately. It will have many competitors in the satellite internet connection space as Amazon is slowly building its constellation of satellites External Link/Members Only  Once it has a competitor then prices for its service will need to drop. They're also cluttering up the space around Earth with 1,000s of satellite.

The military stuff it does he doesn't want to say that much about.

Launch vehicle design and construction consumes a lot of money and is high risk. His vision is interesting but I think the technology isn't quite ready to deliver on it. Someone needs to figure out a way of launching space vehicles and cargo without massive engines. We're stil using the same approach as back in WWII although with simplified engines that should be more reliable as fewer moving parts.

Airbus and the Russians have got relatively quiet about their launches.

Having more launch vehicle options reduces the price of getting stuff into space and there is less competition for slots on vehicles to launch satellites.

I can't see the world needing 10,000 launch vehicles anytime soon and where would they keep these things?  There's only maybe 4 or 5 places in the world where they can launch rockets from (Florida, Elon's town in Texas, Russia Cosmodrome and French Guiana for Airbus. Where would launch 10,000 of the things from and keep them fueled?

Maybe in 100 when there are some real breakthroughs in rocket propulsion.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2026, 08:31:39 am by RandomGuy99 »

Offline bigden40

Elon is playing a few games with this IPO.

His AI company isn't really a credible competitor to Anthropic and OpenAI, so Elon is not floating that company separately as it wouldn't do well, so he's bundling it up with SpaceX.

Starlink should have been sold off separately. It will have many competitors in the satellite internet connection space as Amazon is slowly building its constellation of satellites. Once it gas a competitor then prices for its service will need to drop.

The military stuff it does he doesn't want to say that much about.

Launch vehicle design and construction consumes a lot of money and is high risk. His vision is interesting but I think the technology isn't quite ready to deliver on it. Someone needs to figure out a way of launching space vehicles and cargo without massive engines. We're stil using the same approach as back in WWII although with simplified engines that should be more reliable as fewer moving parts.

Honestly, why are you doubling down on something you don’t understand. 

It’s a vertical integration play for AI data centres in space. 

External Link/Members Only

And you’re wrong to say that xAI is not competitive with OpenAI and Anthropic.  It is a leading “frontier” AI company, it started later but has its own strengths and weaknesses like the others.  It’s made incredible progress in less than 3 years.

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only


Offline RandomGuy99

Honestly, why are you doubling down on something you don’t understand. 

It’s a vertical integration play for AI data centres in space. 

External Link/Members Only

And you’re wrong to say that xAI is not competitive with OpenAI and Anthropic.  It is a leading “frontier” AI company, it started later but has its own strengths and weaknesses like the others.  It’s made incredible progress in less than 3 years.

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only
xAI isn't. Personally, I don't really trust any of Elon's products as he behaves like a child and turns them off when he feels like it. I'd prefer to go with someone a little more stable. This is also why I have nothing to do with Meta and Zuckerberg.

AI data centres in space is BS.

AI relies on good quality reliable data. xAI's Grok gets its data from X which is full of misinformation and thus not reliable at all.  :dash:
« Last Edit: June 12, 2026, 09:01:43 am by RandomGuy99 »

Offline Blackpool Rock

Regardless of what people think about Musk or this stock market launch it's already raised $75Bn ahead of the launch with financial analysts expecting interest to be high and the price to rise

Musk is already the richest man in the world but now looks set to become the 1st Trillionaire  :scare:

External Link/Members Only

Offline bigden40

xAI isn't. Personally, I don't really trust any of Elon's products as he behaves like a child and turns them off when he feels like it. I'd prefer to go with someone a little more stable. This is also why I have nothing to do with Meta and Zuckerberg.

AI data centres in space is BS.

AI relies on good quality reliable data. xAI's Grok gets its data from X which is full of misinformation and thus not reliable at all.  :dash:

Thanks for confirming.  You just don’t like Musk and are not willing to entertain anything positive about his ventures.  Thats fine, I wont waste any further effort.  Sometimes you need to separate the artist and their art.


Offline RandomGuy99

Thanks for confirming.  You just don’t like Musk and are not willing to entertain anything positive about his ventures.  Thats fine, I wont waste any further effort.  Sometimes you need to separate the artist and their art.
No, it's separating fact from fiction.

External Link/Members Only

Offline bigden40

No, it's separating fact from fiction.

External Link/Members Only

It’s not separating fact from fictions when you keep getting the facts wrong.  :hi:

I think the vision is aspirational and the valuation frothy, but the great thing about a public offering is that you can decide based on the prospectus. 

Offline RandomGuy99

It’s not separating fact from fictions when you keep getting the facts wrong.  :hi:

I think the vision is aspirational and the valuation frothy, but the great thing about a public offering is that you can decide based on the prospectus.
You're just believing the marketing BS.

Offline Blackpool Rock

You're just believing the marketing BS.
But surely the proof is in the pudding or basically whether the share price goes up or down  :unknown:

Let's not forget that most Tech stocks don't pay dividends, the payback is in the increased share price and often with Tech it's not necessarily about the profits that are being made in the here and now but what the potential is for future profits / earnings

Offline RandomGuy99

But surely the proof is in the pudding or basically whether the share price goes up or down  :unknown:

Let's not forget that most Tech stocks don't pay dividends, the payback is in the increased share price and often with Tech it's not necessarily about the profits that are being made in the here and now but what the potential is for future profits / earnings
No, it'll go up because of all the hype about it. It doesn't mean it's actually a good company going forward. The behaviour of financial markets are often disconnected from the real world.

Offline Blackpool Rock

No, it'll go up because of all the hype about it. It doesn't mean it's actually a good company going forward. The behaviour of financial markets are often disconnected from the real world.
You may well be right however this thread is about finance & investments so surely it's not so much about whether anyone thinks the bloke is a wanker (I do) or whether it's a good profit making company but whether or not we think or otherwise that it's actually a good investment to make  :unknown:

Offline RandomGuy99

You may well be right however this thread is about finance & investments so surely it's not so much about whether anyone thinks the bloke is a wanker (I do) or whether it's a good profit making company but whether or not we think or otherwise that it's actually a good investment to make  :unknown:
Long term investment maybe.

Good for Elon's ego? Yes

What happens when Elon retires or dies? Elon is now 54.

The US government must be SpaceX's main customer. Does it have deep enough pockets and will to build bases on Mars and keep them resupplied on a regular basis? Possibly not given the state of the world right now and DJT spending $187 million in one night bombing Iran.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2026, 12:10:38 pm by RandomGuy99 »

Offline RandomGuy99

BBC News - Elon Musk's SpaceX raises $75bn ahead of world's biggest stock market launch
External Link/Members Only