Steve Eisman Questions SpaceX IPO Math, Says He Would Not Want Tesla in the Mix

Steve Eisman, a prominent investor and host of The Real Eisman Playbook podcast, said he is “not a fan” of SpaceX’s upcoming initial public offering, warning that the company’s growing focus on artificial intelligence has made it far more capital intensive than many investors may expect. Eisman also questioned the latest rumor mill around a possible SpaceX-Tesla combination, arguing that Tesla’s own operating struggles make it a poor fit for SpaceX shareholders. The comments, delivered on CNBC’s Squawk Box and summarized in a Monday report, landed as SpaceX prepares for what it has described as one of the biggest IPOs in modern markets.

SpaceX’s public IPO materials outline a timetable and market debut that closely match the near-term headlines. In a filing posted to the SEC, the company said it expects the final IPO share price to be set on June 11 and shares to begin publicly trading on June 12 on Nasdaq and Nasdaq Texas under the ticker “SPCX.” The filing also gives a window into SpaceX’s valuation framework, including a stated total addressable market (TAM) of $28.5 trillion, broken out between space-enabled solutions, connectivity, and AI infrastructure and services.

Eisman’s critique centered on spending and competitive positioning. He pointed to SpaceX’s increasing capital expenditures tied to AI infrastructure, saying that capex was 42% of revenue in fiscal year 2023 when SpaceX was more focused on its Starlink satellite internet business, but rose to 215% of revenue by the first quarter of the current year as the company ramped up AI spending. He framed the transition as a shift away from the traditional “asset-light” tech model toward something closer to heavy industry, while arguing that large language models and “agentic AI” products are still not meaningfully differentiated across competitors. Eisman also criticized the notion of near-term asteroid mining, saying the probability of it happening soon is “pretty low,” and likened the idea to science-fiction fare.

Beyond the investor’s remarks, SpaceX’s own SEC document emphasizes why capex concerns are likely to remain central for investors evaluating the IPO. The filing warns that SpaceX expects to incur significant capital expenditures over a period of years before AI products and services and other strategic initiatives become profitable, and notes it may never happen. It also spells out that expanding AI compute capabilities involves major investments, including data center infrastructure and specialized computing hardware. While Eisman’s comments are not an official financial projection, they align with the kind of risk framing SpaceX itself places around AI-related spending.

On Tesla, Eisman was even more direct. He said he is skeptical about any potential merger involving Tesla, citing Tesla’s declining earnings over four straight years in a business that he described as highly competitive and capital intensive. He further pointed to competitive pressure from lower-cost Chinese rivals. In the CNBC segment described in the report, Eisman said: “If I was a SpaceX shareholder, the last thing I’d want would be for him to buy Tesla.”

The merger speculation continues to circulate in part because SpaceX’s and Tesla’s worlds overlap in the broader Musk ecosystem. In its IPO filing, SpaceX references strategic collaborations with Tesla, including Terafab, described as a chip manufacturing facility collaboration. The filing also notes that Elon Musk serves in senior roles across his companies. But in the SEC materials reviewed for this story, SpaceX does not lay out a plan to merge with Tesla as part of the IPO process itself. That gap matters, because it means the rumored “deal” scenario remains speculation rather than something anchored in disclosed transaction terms.

What to watch next is whether market expectations for the SpaceX IPO fully factor in the pace and durability of AI-related investment. After the IPO begins trading around June 12, attention will likely shift to how investors interpret SpaceX’s valuation assumptions versus the company’s own disclosures about substantial, possibly multi-year capital requirements. For Tesla, the key question is how the market prices the company’s competitive and earnings challenges, especially if merger chatter resurfaces. Until SpaceX or Tesla discloses concrete deal discussions, Eisman’s skepticism remains a warning about the risks investors may overlook, not a confirmation that any combination is inevitable.