Elon Musk is Richest Person in the World

Tesla is trading at about $800 per share. Elon Musk is now worth about $187 billion.

CNBC reported that Elon Musk is the richest in the world earlier this morning as Tesla traded at about $790 per share.

This is just the beginning. Tesla will be heading for another ten times increase in share price by 2025. SpaceX, Boring Company and Neuralink will become publicly traded and also will become trillion dollar or multi-trillion dollar companies.

Elon Musk will have a greater share of the world economy than Rockefeller did when Nelson Rockefeller dominated the oil industry.

Nextbigfuture has discussed Musk becoming a trillionaire in 2015.

Congrats to Elon Musk and people can hop onto the Musk wealth train by investing in his companies. Investing in “expensive” companies should be done with dollar-cost averaging. (buy over time 20% each month). Build a position over time.

SOURCES- CNBC
Written By Brian Wang, Nextbigfuture.com (Brian owns shares of Tesla and is not a financial advisor).

47 thoughts on “Elon Musk is Richest Person in the World”

  1. Tom, $150Bn is less than the current valuation of $840Bn.
    It would mean that the price per share would be somewhere around $160, which is considerably less than the current $880.

    Reply
  2. But even at $150B valuation, that's ~$1500/share. And that's probably at ~5M cars a year (net ~$1000/car, ~$5B/yr, PE 30 – not unreasonable for a large but rapidly growing company) – they could be there in 5 years or so at recent rates of production/sales increase.

    And that's before their car insurance plan, and they're starting to charge extra for self-driving, and at some point they want to get into SD taxi service, and they'll probably monetize the in-car entertainment system once there's enough Teslas on the road to make it worth the effort. Maybe financing?

    Reply
  3. We really don't have any data at all on 1/3g.
    This goes for those people who claim that 1/3g will be just fine, as well as those who claim it'll be terrible.
    And a lot of the biological effects will probably be subtle and weird, like the eye thing, and would probably come as a surprise. Biology is still a science with a whole lot of unknowns, and unknowns unknowns.
    To investigate this regime by sticking a colony on Mars is straight out human medical experimentation. Like investigating human reactions to radiation by developing a line of radium dial watches and putting them into mass production. You might get lucky? Or you might not.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls

    Reply
  4. I agree. And we should NOT wait for Mars anything before building 1 g rotating settlements. Then, after the problem is solved, we will realize there is no reason to settle Mars.

    Reply
  5. I took growth into account. Growth doesn't mean infinite price.
    Assuming all the promised things happen without a hiccup and the company gets to millions of cars sold like a breeze, Tesla is worth maybe $150bn (optimistic view).

    FYI,I got in early (2012) and then sold it because I thought it was overvalued then. So, I made money on it… Could have been more, but I had to believe in magics, like some people seem to do at the moment.

    You're right, people want a piece of his vision. He's successfully selling the dream. But I'm not up to buy dreams, I'm in the market to buy equity shares = claims on future profits.

    Reply
  6. Elon also does anabolic steroids and other PED like HGH and takes stimulant drugs like provigil. He was also taking benzos to sleep but quit that. Test + HG + provigil is a powerful cocktail but there may be a price to pay for that.

    Reply
  7. What you are overlooking is growth, volume and technological advances. He owns the fastest growing auto manufacturer in the world. Also, between his battery technologies, gigafactories and self driving technologies he is decades ahead of his rivals.
    Those technology advances just keep growing exponentially. Electric vehicles are improving at a geometric rate while ICE vehicles not so much, barely incremental. He and his team are almost single handedly making electric vehicles not just economically viable but the future of the automobile industry, and that is not even considering his other companies.
    People who are buying his stock believe Tesla is the future. With the rapid improvement of his tech and the realization of his vision, people want a piece of it. If you don't believe in it, then don't buy the stock. I am sure you have saved a lot of money by not getting in early.

    Reply
  8. We ought to build rotating habitats before truly colonizing Mars anyway because we will need to study the effect of partial gravity on human health.

    Reply
  9. Comparing it to Amazon is an oversimplification.
    Comparing it to other automakers is more accurate; even if you take into account all the rosy sales forecast and the tech elements, the math still doesn't add up.
    Don't get me wrong, I think Tesla is a pretty good company, just not a $800Bn company right now or in the foreseeable future. I suppose that when the laws of physics will start working again we'll see…

    Reply
  10. The future of Science is clear: Science always wins. Now that Primal Science is 50 years *old*, the required *ignore this* time for revolutionary Science has past. The race for who wins "Icon of Neurosis" and "Exemplar of Power Addiction" is narrowing to two politicians, one in China, one in the US.

    Reply
  11. Speaking of Elon Musk…he'll be 50 soon and keeps insane hours at too many companies to list. What about Key Man risk?
    BTW, Warren Buffet is invested in China's BYD EV company. It's only a matter of time before BYD comes to America, especially with less anti-China Biden coming into office. Kandi is already here and makes an EV for <$10k:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrVGTzM81L8
    If Tesla wants to muck around in the low end market, they're going to have to offer value-added for that value-conscious consumer, above the flood of cheap EVs just starting to hit the market now. I look forward to the Microlina myself, if it comes to America. Of course, the biggest story in EVs might be charge center availability. Find the company who can build out very fast – under 10 minute – charging stations, and you might really have a market winner there. Most people cannot afford a car for commuting and a second ICE car for long trips, and range anxiety is still a thing.

    Reply
  12. 1/3 gravity is not 0 gravity. For all we know, it might be enough or even better than 1g.

    Harmful effects of 0 gravity are known. I was specifically looking for studies or even good inferences, on low gravity.

    Reply
  13. They have found certain eye fluid migrations in 0 g that could be quite bad, as even after back at 1 g they have a horizontal path back down, and don't drain. But just the known skel and musc probs are enuf to stop children growing 1/3. Clearly! Also, if our lifeboat pop cannot return to Earth, what was it for? The cost answer is simple and obvious, rotating settlements are dirt cheap compared to no children.

    Reply
  14. You read wrong. Solar and battery are now part of Tesla. Boring and SpaceX are independent with a little bit of cross-holding.

    Reply
  15. I am looking for a source for this need for gravity. Is 1/3 really bad for health? I have searched but don't have any cost answers. Looks like you do?

    Reply
  16. "Elon Musk will have a greater share of the world economy than Rockefeller did when Nelson Rockefeller dominated the oil industry."

    Go figure. And here I thought Nelson Rockefeller was just a politician.

    Reply
  17. Why Brian is not covering the riots in Capitol Hill?
    Answer: Because it is not futurism.
    Why he is not covering that Trump is getting kicked out of office? Answer: Because it is not futurism.
    Why he is not covering that Iran has kicked the buttocks of the USA?
    Answer: Because it is not futurism.
    Why is he silent on all this?
    I think you are on the wrong website.

    Reply
  18. If Starlink went public, it's not like Elon wouldn't get paid.
    But agree that SpaceX will remain private. How else will Elon get a fully fueled & equipped Starship in geo transfer orbit, ready to add a Lunar assisted delta v to anywhere in the Solar System?

    Reply
  19. It is almost diabolically the *only* thing you can think of to do in Space that has no possible $$$ pay out. Can't afford launch from Mars either!

    Moon gravity well also bad, in fact I would go for NEO/TCO for resources, but there are very many reasons to go to Moon, so setting up mass driver good too. Just don't think of it first. Think of Space first, only use for Moon is raw material. A huge change in perspective. I call it "understanding O'Neill".

    Reply
  20. Concur.
    I've been asking for a decade, "What will be produced on Mars & sold for a profit on Earth?"
    The only gravity well worth pursuing is the Moon.

    Reply
  21. Perhaps Musk is in a Mars frenzy because the *overall* Mars plan is being undercut by O'Neill ISS popularity, O'Neill mine the Moon poularity, or O'Neill Halo Orbit Gateway hab, for further 0 g lunar material processing and refuelling. Plus, Space Solar will make $$$$ from these lunar material sats, O'Neill too! Now, if we put the right *spin* on things, we can figure it out: The surface of a planet is not the right place.

    Reply
  22. The problem with Mars is that it has no profit potential. And makes no sense even as a solution to rather explicit requirements, other than the unstated requirement that by "Space" we must actually mean "gravity prison". Any Space activity helps our suvival chances, so make $$$ in the belt works better than stuck on Mars. Clearly.

    Reply
  23. I normally do not bring this up, as it is not always a problem with every planet, but it will take some doin' to get sustainable population w/o children. And children on Mars 1/3 g is waaaaay harder than rotating settlement 1 g. Also, more generally, the ability to put asteroid stuff in a balloon for radiation shield is waaaaay easier in 0 g than moving or digging stuff on planet gravity prison floor. Clearly!

    Reply
  24. Honest question: I thought I read somewhere that Space-X (including Starlink), Boring Company, and Solar City/ Battery Power Banks were all part of Tesla. Am I mistaken? If so, wouldn't all of those factor into the value of Tesla? Can anyone clarify this?

    Reply
  25. Amazon did not make a consistent profit until 2016. If you were analyzing Amazon back before 2016 then would you be able to make the case to buy Amazon?

    So you missed Amazon and its 25 year run up. Is it a $1.6 trillion ponzi scheme?

    Reply
  26. I hope you're not just saying that to make me feel better about not owning any Tesla stock. Because it does, at least a little bit…

    Reply
  27. If Starlink became public, the shareholders are very unlikely to tolerate spending "their" profits on Mars adventures.

    If SpaceX owns x% of Starlink, they get x% of any dividend. And can spend it however they wish.

    Reply
  28. Once established as a reliable revenue stream in a few years, Starlink can perfectly go public without impacting Musk's Mars goals.

    In fact, it would be better for the Mars plans if it's eventually delegated to a board of directors.

    But as I said, after it is taken to a good working, revenue making state.

    Reply
  29. Congratulations Elon! I hope his success results in bolder advances and more calculated risk taking by other billionaires following in his footsteps who want to emulate his achievements. Advances like Starship and other Elon Musk companies will be opening a lot of opportunities for those with the resources, vision and boldness to take advantage of. Makes me want to submit a few business plans for VC review myself!

    Reply
  30. can somebody explain why this isn't a bubble? Tesla sells $50k cars ($25Bn in total) with a 3% profit margin. Other carmakers sell more cars with a bigger profit (6% avg); they also have pretty decent battery tech and even autopilot. However, Tesla is valued at $1.6m per car sold. Other automakers? $8-10k maybe.
    Right now Tesla market cap is at 1600x earnings. The market believes it will grow sales, understandably, but is it realistic to expect to basically outsell every other competitor without them even trying to react? How big has the profit margin to be to make the math work and have a decent return? Because, you see, if the return is just selling the share at a higher price to a greater fool, this isn't an investment, it's a Ponzi scheme that will eventualy pop.

    People are buying Musk's myth and all the values that come with his persona. It's an impulsive sentimental decision, not based on anything rational about the company itself.

    Reply
  31. Elon, it would be nice if you could fund and build world's largest anti aging, nanotech( researching and building nanorobots) and robotics(building advanced humanoid robots and other forms) companies. Next 3 big projects
    If I would have $200billions I would kickstart them and invest 2-5 bilion in each(at the beginning)

    Reply
  32. I think the expectation that SpaceX will become publicly traded is wrong. That would eliminate Musk's ability to focus on the long term goals he has for it. Maybe the other Musk companies you mentioned could become public without harming Musk's goals (I'm not certain of that), but I can't see him allowing SpaceX to become public.

    Although not mentioned in this article, I have often seen people say they expect Starlink to become public. Sometimes the same people who say the profits from Starlink will fund Musk's Mars colonization plans. Those two thoughts are incompatible. If Starlink became public, the shareholders are very unlikely to tolerate spending "their" profits on Mars adventures.

    So I believe SpaceX and Starlink must remain private companies. I'm not sure whether the other Musk companies could become public without harming Musk's long term goals, but I am very sure that he'll have to keep SpaceX and Starlink private, at least until humans are firmly established on Mars.

    Reply
  33. New York(CNN Business)Elon Musk edged past Amazon founder Jeff Bezos to grab the title of world's richest person, according to Bloomberg.
    A 5% rise in Tesla (TSLA) shares early Thursday lifted the value of its CEO stock in options by about $9.3 billion, to about $190 billion. A more modest rise of less than 2% lifted Bezos' Amazon (AMZN) shares by $2.7 billion, putting him at $187 billion.

    Reply

Leave a Comment