SpaceX confirmed after the U.S. stock market close on June 11 that its IPO pricing is set at $135 per share. It plans to list on Nasdaq on June 12 (Friday) under the ticker SPCX, issuing approximately 555.6 million shares, raising $75 billion, corresponding to an estimated valuation of about $1.78 trillion. Unlike traditional IPOs that provide a price range, SpaceX directly sets a single fixed price of $135.
Fixed-pricing strategy: How SpaceX breaks the traditional IPO process
In a traditional IPO, the company and underwriters review orders and ultimately set the price within a pre-announced price range, typically above or below the midpoint of the range. In its updated prospectus, SpaceX sets the price directly at $135 without offering a price range, and the pricing had already been determined before the roadshow began; the official pricing on June 11 is a procedural confirmation.
SpaceX has informed investors that it will stop accepting subscriptions on Wednesday—one day earlier than in the traditional process; Robinhood has moved the subscription cutoff time up to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday.
Reuters reported that the subscription multiple reached 4 times, but also noted that institutional investors often artificially raise the subscription multiple to ensure they receive enough allocation, meaning there is uncertainty about actual market demand.
Retail allocation and subscription channels: Targeting 30%, with five major brokers confirmed
SpaceX’s target retail allocation is about 30% of the float, far higher than the proportion of most IPOs, which are typically 5% to 10%. The exact final allocation percentage has not yet been confirmed. Retail investors can subscribe through the following broker platforms: Charles Schwab, Fidelity, Robinhood, SoFi, and E-Trade (under Morgan Stanley).
Musk’s equity structure: More than 84% of voting power and confirmed governance risks
By holding two classes of shares—Class A and Class B—Musk holds about 40% of SpaceX’s total equity and more than 84% of the voting power. According to an analysis by Harvard Law School, even if Musk sells some Class A shares in the future, he will still maintain control of the company due to the large amount of Class B shares.
Harvard Law School also pointed out that this structure allows insiders at SpaceX to make decisions on business transactions, including potentially acquiring other entities owned by Musk and related compensation arrangements, which are potential risk factors for investors. Because of Musk’s high level of control, SpaceX does not need to arrange “independent” directors for the board. SpaceX has acquired Musk’s xAI, and xAI itself acquired the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) in 2025.
Frequently asked questions
What is the practical significance of SpaceX using a fixed-pricing strategy instead of a price range?
Traditional IPOs provide a price range (such as $120 to $140), with the final price only determined after the roadshow, giving the market more room for price negotiation. SpaceX directly sets a fixed $135, and the pricing was already determined before the roadshow began—effectively skipping the dynamic pricing mechanism found in traditional IPOs. This is one of Musk’s unconventional IPO strategies, as confirmed by Yahoo Finance.
Does a subscription multiple of 4 times confirm that market demand is definitely strong?
Reuters reported that the subscription multiple reached 4 times, but also noted that institutional investors often artificially raise the subscription multiple to ensure they receive sufficient allocation. Therefore, a 4x subscription multiple represents a nominal subscribed amount and is not a definite number that guarantees certainty about the actual demand multiple; actual market demand remains uncertain.
What confirmed effects does Musk’s voting control have after SpaceX’s listing?
According to Harvard Law School’s analysis, more than 84% of the voting power allows Musk to make major business decisions without needing other shareholders’ approval, and SpaceX does not need to set up independent directors. Harvard Law School’s analysis confirms that this poses potential governance risks for investors, because Musk can decide on business transactions that involve his personal interests (such as compensation and acquisitions).
