Jeff Stein

In 1999, the peak of the Microsoft stock was 6% of GDP.

So that number was the top.

And then after the dot-com bubble burst, the number went to 3% of GDP.

Today, we've seen Nvidia stock

come close to 20% of GDP.

So more than three times the relevant metric for evaluating how much money as a percentage of the economy is pouring into these really frothy tech stocks.

And that to me suggests, you know, obviously Microsoft did become an extremely profitable, successful company.

So it's a little bit of a nuanced picture where I think there's a good chance that SpaceX is making products that make money and that it will take time.

you know, some time to do that.

But that is not a sign that, you know, no one would look back and say Microsoft was a failure, right?

But that reality was simultaneously true with the reality that this was a bubble.

And

from what you mentioned, right, about sort of the profitability and the revenue that SpaceX is generating is so far from the valuation.

And we're seeing that across the tech sector, not just NVIDIA, not just SpaceX, but open and anthropic.

It doesn't mean that this technology is unimportant or unvaluable for this, for us to be heading towards a major course correction in the valuations.

I hadn't seen that report, but that is really interesting.

I saw another report basically that SpaceX has been trying to essentially circumvent the normal process for being put on the stock market.

They wanted to essentially move it up faster than any other company has done, which is probably not a great sign of the confidence of the long-term durability of the stock if they're like, we have a ton of momentum to cash in on right now, and if we

let people take the average amount of time to invest, that is a threat to us.

That seems inauspicious to put it mildly.