NextFin News - Alexandra Merz is skipping SpaceX’s initial public offering because she expects Elon Musk to merge it with Tesla. That turns a hot IPO into a bet on Musk’s capital structure, not on rockets.
Her view has drawn attention because she is a longtime Tesla holder and a prominent retail voice, but it is still advocacy, not proof. Reuters described her as a self-described “all-in Tesla investor” since March 2020, and she said she would rather remain in Tesla “with the conviction that there is a merger on the horizon.” On the surface this looks like a call on SpaceX’s listing; the real issue is whether Tesla becomes the cheaper entry point to any future combination.
The attraction is obvious. If SpaceX lists on its own, Tesla investors who want exposure would have to sell Tesla, trigger a taxable event, and then buy the new stock. A stock-for-stock deal would change that math: Tesla holders could participate in any acquisition premium and, in Merz’s view, avoid being left behind if index funds later drive demand for a combined company. SpaceX is not about launch cadence or satellites here — it’s about who captures the value if Musk decides his companies work better together than apart.
That is the part that would actually matter. A merger would not just combine two famous companies; it would redraw where value sits across Musk’s businesses, which shareholders get diluted, and which cost base supports the growth story. Bulls can argue that Tesla brings large-scale manufacturing and public-market liquidity, while SpaceX brings a premium narrative tied to defense, launch and Starlink. The real trade-off is that Tesla shareholders would be swapping a business the market can model, however imperfectly, for one whose valuation could lean more heavily on ambition than on cash flow comparability. The risk nobody is talking about is that “synergy” in this case may simply mean asking one shareholder base to pay for the other’s multiple.
The math doesn’t add up yet. SpaceX is targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation and a $75 billion raise, which already leaves little room for execution misses and even less room for merger optimism to be priced twice. If Tesla were eventually absorbed into SpaceX, or if SpaceX were folded into Tesla, valuation, governance and legal complexity would move from theory to the center of the trade, especially if shareholders object to exchanging one highly liquid public asset for another built on a different growth narrative. Whether this works depends on whether the key assumptions can be verified: how any share exchange would be priced, what governance rights each shareholder group would receive, and whether regulators would treat the combination as strategic integration or as a structure designed mainly to recycle Musk premium. Bloomberg’s report did not establish any of that. It showed only that one committed Tesla investor would rather wait for a merger than buy into a $1.75 trillion IPO and a $75 billion raise on day one.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
