Like the 1990s when you could make a bundle just by adding ".com" to your company name.

I'm reminded when 3Com/Palm saga. At the time, the mobile device/PDA/Internet space was super hot. So 3Com IPO'd a small portion of Palm, with plans that 3Com shareholders were to eventually receive 1.5 shares of Palm for each share of 3Com.

So in theory, 3Com was worth at least 1.5 times as much as Palm, and that doesn't include the rest of 3Com's business. But when the initial Palm shares IPO'd, Palm's market cap jumped to about double that of 3Coms. Which implied the market was placing negative value on the non-Palm portion value of 3Com.

SpaceX doesn't seem quite that bonkers, but it isn't far off. SpaceX is basically a datacenter/AI play, with a yet-to-be profitable launch business tacked on. As of today, SpaceX's market cap exceeds Amazon's--which is also a datacenter/AI play. The difference is Amazon already makes tons of money from its datacenters, and has an enormous and profitable retail business as well. Google tells me SpaceX has about 0.2 GW capacity, compared to about 5-7 GW for Amazon. Amazon has a big head start, in other words.

The market is wildly mispricing one of these companies, and I don't think it is Amazon.