Zhihu Review: SpaceX/OpenAI/Anthropic Stack Up for Mega IPOs — How Much Hot Air?
Three AI companies file IPO in the same week, xAI pivots from AI lab to GPU landlord. High factual accuracy but key conclusions are off
Original Narrative
Three events collide:
- Morningstar sets SpaceX IPO target at $63 (vs $135 offering price)
- OpenAI secretly files S-1
- xAI leases Colossus 1 data center to Anthropic and Google, pivoting from AI lab to GPU landlord
Conclusion: The most profitable business isn’t AI — it’s renting out AI infrastructure. Being a landlord at $1.75T valuation means lots of hot air.
Data Verification
Point-by-point fact-check against CNBC, NYT, Bloomberg, SpaceX S-1 filing, and OpenAI’s website.
| Claim | Verdict | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Morningstar target $63, 53% discount | ✅ | CNBC 6/3: $780B valuation, ~48% below $1.5T private valuation |
| SpaceX IPO $1.75T valuation | ✅ | CNBC: targeting $75B fundraise at $1.75T valuation |
| SpaceX launched 83% of Earth’s orbital mass in 2025 | ⚠️ Conservative | Musk & Eric Berger claimed 90% (Reddit r/spacex, Dec 2025) |
| Starlink 2025 revenue $11.3B | ✅ | S-1: Connectivity $11.39B (61% of $18.7B total) |
| Starlink operating profit $4.4B | ✅ | CNBC 5/21: $4.42B operating income, 39% margin |
| Anthropic rents Colossus 1, 300MW, 220K GPUs | ✅ | CNBC 5/6: “all compute capacity, more than 300MW” |
| Anthropic pays $1.25B/month | ⚠️ Not in CNBC | CNBC confirmed the deal but didn’t disclose monthly rent |
| Google rents 110K GPUs, pays $920M/month | ✅ | NYT 6/5: $30B deal, Oct 2026-Jun 2029, 110K Nvidia GPUs |
| Combined annual revenue ~$26B | ✅ | $1.25B×12 + $920M×12 = $26.04B (pending Anthropic figure confirmation) |
| Colossus 1 built in 122 days | ✅ | xAI website x.ai/colossus |
| OpenAI filed S-1 on June 8 | ✅ | OpenAI website + CNBC 6/8 |
| Anthropic filed S-1 on June 1 | ✅ | Anthropic website |
| OpenAI valuation $852B | ✅ | OpenAI website 3/31: post-money $852B |
| Anthropic valuation $965B | ❌ Too high | Bloomberg/FT 5/12-14: $900B pre-money, not $965B |
| SpaceX 2025 net loss $4.94B | ✅ | S-1: net loss $4.9B in 2025 |
| SpaceX latest quarter loss $4.28B | ✅ | CNBC: net loss $4.28B in latest quarter |
Factual accuracy: 15/17 claims verified or substantially correct. Very high for a Zhihu answer.
Key Corrections
1. xAI is “SpaceX’s most profitable business”? — Wrong
The article says xAI “might be SpaceX’s most profitable business.” But the S-1 segment data tells a different story:
| Segment | 2025 Revenue | Operating Income/Loss |
|---|---|---|
| Connectivity (Starlink) | $11.39B | +$4.42B |
| Space | $4.09B | Loss ($3B R&D on Starship) |
| AI (xAI) | $3.20B | -$2.5B |
Starlink is the only profitable segment. xAI lost $2.5B in 2025.
The article’s logic is: Anthropic + Google leases = ~$26B/year, power costs < 1%, so xAI as “GPU landlord” is very profitable.
The direction is right, but two caveats:
- Google’s deal doesn’t start until October 2026 — no revenue yet
- Anthropic’s exact monthly rent isn’t in public reporting ($1.25B/month claimed by article, not in CNBC)
So “xAI most profitable” is false for 2025 data. May flip in H2 2026 when Google deal starts, but that’s future tense.
2. Anthropic valuation $965B? — Too high
Article says $965B. Bloomberg and FT in mid-May say $900B pre-money. $30B round post-money is ~$930B. The $965B figure is either miscalculated or from an unreported secondary market price.
3. Orbital mass 83% vs 90%
Article says 83%. Musk and Eric Berger (senior space journalist) claim 90%. The article is actually conservative here.
Deeper Analysis
The article’s framing is sharp — three companies filing IPO in the same week, each a different facet of the AI bubble:
- SpaceX: Core business (Starlink + launch) worth ~$780B, but xAI inflates valuation to $1.75T. Morningstar calls xAI a “material threat of value destruction.”
- OpenAI: Files S-1 while market share is being eroded. Emarketer calls it a “precarious moment.”
- Anthropic: Pays $1.25B/month to rent xAI’s GPUs, valued at $900B+.
The “GPU landlord” pivot is the article’s best insight. When AI models commoditize faster than expected, selling shovels (compute infrastructure) is more profitable than mining gold (training models). This pattern repeats throughout history — Levi Strauss made more money selling jeans to gold rush miners than most miners made mining.
But the article ignores a key variable: what if compute supply exceeds demand?
Google and Anthropic rent from xAI because compute is scarce today. But every hyperscaler is building data centers at breakneck speed. If supply-demand flips in 2027-2028, xAI’s landlord model comes under pressure too. Colossus 1’s 122-day build speed is an advantage, but it also means competitors can replicate quickly.
Conclusion
Score: 7.0/10
- Very high factual accuracy (15/17), sources are mostly verifiable
- “xAI pivots from AI lab to GPU landlord” is the article’s best insight
- But “xAI most profitable” is wrong for 2025 data (lost $2.5B)
- Anthropic valuation $965B is overstated; should be ~$900B
- Missing discussion of compute oversupply risk
The author clearly did their homework. The angle of connecting HN trending, Morningstar report, and S-1 filings is effective. Deductions mainly for two factual errors and lack of counter-arguments.
Three AI companies IPO. The most profitable business is indeed infrastructure — but it’s not xAI. It’s Starlink.