Palantir Could Be the Most Overvalued Company That Ever Existed
102 points
5 hours ago
| 17 comments
| 247wallst.com
| HN
duttish
3 hours ago
[-]
I'll throw the British South Sea Trading Company into the ring for that title of most overvalued company ever.

It had the king himself on the board. The company value represented a decent fraction of the national gdp at the time. All without actually never producing anything of actual value. It was just bribes and speculation all the way through. It's wild.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Sea_Company

Extra History did a more easily digestible series, which was how I learned about it in the first place. https://youtu.be/k1kndKWJKB8

reply
saagarjha
23 minutes ago
[-]
Unrelated question: did we have a good enough idea of the world map in 1711 for the coat of arms shown on Wikipedia to be accurate?
reply
aetherson
9 minutes ago
[-]
No, and the article shows a not-even-attempting-accuracy period version of the coat of arms a little below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SouthSeaCompany_TradeLabe...
reply
petesergeant
2 hours ago
[-]
> The company value represented a decent fraction of the national gdp at the time.

The company's market-cap was almost 3 times national GDP

reply
maratc
2 hours ago
[-]
We should stop comparing incomparable things, like companies market cap (measured in dollars or pounds) to national GDPs (measured in dollars or pounds per year,) unless we want to reach outrageous but incorrect conclusions.
reply
omnicognate
2 hours ago
[-]
It's a dubious comparison but not because of "per year". The comparison is implicitly to one year's worth of GDP, which is a currency amount.

It's dubious because whereas a year's worth of GDP has some claim to actually being the value of something (with many caveats but it's engineered to behave like that as much as possible), market cap isn't. It's the amount all the shares would cost if someone bought them all in one go for the price some shares were most recently purchased for, which would never happen.

reply
Nevermark
2 hours ago
[-]
Well, based on that last share purchase, we have incontrovertible proof that there was indeed one person in history who thought it was worth 3x GPD.

And the fact that in the entire BSSTC shareholder universe, there wasn't any noticeable volume for a sell, or a registered sell limit, at a lower value leading up to the last peak.

That must have been a rough trade, but someone got something out at the last moment.

reply
antonvs
1 hour ago
[-]
What’s the issue? If a market cap is three times an annual GDP, it means it would take three years of that economy’s entire production to purchase the company. It’s obviously a very fuzzy measure for various reasons, but it can give some idea of the market value of a company.
reply
duttish
2 hours ago
[-]
Oh wow, thanks. I misremembered, thought it was like 1/3 and didn't have time to look it up again.
reply
arghandugh
1 hour ago
[-]
One illuminating factor as to why: watch their CEO Alex Carp overdose on cocaine while on stage in public.

https://bsky.app/profile/ronfilipkowski.bsky.social/post/3m7...

reply
bigbuppo
1 hour ago
[-]
And then you have Thiel going crazy about biblical end times prophecies involving the anti-christ and I'm starting to wonder wtf they're doing at Palantir.
reply
tessierashpool9
49 minutes ago
[-]
It seems like he is just trying to make a point with his moving around about being "annoying" - which is what he is talking about.
reply
djdjsjejb
35 minutes ago
[-]
reply
epolanski
7 minutes ago
[-]
Palantir has terrific sales and lobbyists. I'd never bet on them, nor against them.
reply
chii
4 minutes ago
[-]
if you had the money to spare (and don't mind losing it), would you still not bet on them then?
reply
whycombinetor
3 hours ago
[-]
This is the first time I've seen an ad presented as a bullet point in a list of otherwise-salient bullet points. Nefarious.
reply
piker
1 hour ago
[-]
It is pretty clearly labelled with "(Sponsor)". Couldn't be less obtrusive, either. I think on balance it's at least neutral compared with the other nonsense available to both the publisher and advertiser these days.
reply
_ink_
2 hours ago
[-]
Yeah, all credibility was immediately lost when I read that. I just closed the tab and put it away as ad piece.
reply
dataflow360
2 hours ago
[-]
Try using Safari’s Reader view on this ad-riddled page, and you’re greeted with all-text content that’s… 100% ad!
reply
porridgeraisin
2 hours ago
[-]
Yeah that's insane.
reply
corentin88
1 hour ago
[-]
Unreadable...
reply
jqpabc123
3 hours ago
[-]
TSLA has to be in the mix with a PE over 300.
reply
Quothling
3 hours ago
[-]
To me it would depend a lot on how US/EU relations continue to grow/break. If digital sovereignty ends up putting Palantir in a position where they won't be able to seel their intelligence tools to European secret police organisations, then it's probably overvalued. If relationships work out fine, then they'll basically be the Microsoft of mass survailance, which may make them overvalued but surely not the most overvalued company that ever existed?
reply
dididn284d
2 hours ago
[-]
Once you’re embedded in govt, the ‘OS’ for government, then you can raise charges in order to keep the hoards at bay. Hoards that are angry at cuts to public services made in order to finance Palantir profits…

What 4/5yr term govt can turn off or replace their OS?

reply
gethly
2 hours ago
[-]
Palantir is only the 15th most overvalued:

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/stock-screener

reply
MikeNotThePope
2 hours ago
[-]
P/E isn't the only way to value a company. A company can be unprofitable, and therefore not have a P/E, and still be worth something. A quickly growing startup that is losing money on paper but has free positive cash flow is one example.
reply
aswegs8
1 hour ago
[-]
Well, Palantir is the only really large company in the P/E top section. You could argue smaller companies have more upside and could thus justify their valuation easier
reply
richardatlarge
3 hours ago
[-]
Michael Burry shares his own thoughts on the subject, toward the end

https://pca.st/episode/17966c7b-a56e-46f7-ab2d-03d86dbad650

reply
gbriel
1 hour ago
[-]
The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.
reply
owisd
53 minutes ago
[-]
Michael Burry famously did quite well betting against that advice.
reply
danpalmer
2 hours ago
[-]
Like Tesla, Palantir is an ideological investment for many, and likely why it's so over valued. Retail investors buy these stocks because they're buying into a world view. Tesla's is obvious (and it's not about green investments). Palantir's is a little less so, but they have built up an image that's right wing (but mostly not culture war), military-coded, and layered on American exceptionalism. They sell to the CIA, they sell to ICE, they help private healthcare companies milk their customers. This is all part of a world view that many people are in favour of, and Palantir represents it well. Andruil will likely do well for similar reasons once they go public.

This is not really to fault them. I see the company as far more mature than Tesla. They've cultivated a brand that works well for them. This is also not intended to be a criticism of Palantir investors, there are many reasons to invest, and even if you subscribe to the above that is of course your right! Many people invest for ideological reasons, myself included, and that's fine.

reply
davedx
1 hour ago
[-]
> Many people invest for ideological reasons, myself included, and that's fine.

It's fine if you don't mind losing your shirt.

For us normal people, we invest to try and grow the money we've saved for the future (in my case, for my retirement), so investing in a company whose stock is insanely overvalued is a great way to blow up my pension pot.

I don't understand the rationale behind "investing for ideological reasons", can you explain it?

reply
rcxdude
53 minutes ago
[-]
Investment for ideological reasons is basically "I like what this company is doing and want to see it succeed/want to make my returns on investment via it", and that investment helps it succeed, to at least some degree. You also get the opposite: "I don't like what this company is doing and don't want it to succeed/don't want to make money from this activity, so I won't invest in it". ESG investments were largely built up from this (much as they generally turned into box-ticking exercises as opposed to a useful distinction). Of course this is generally going to make less money than "I just want to make money/predict winners in the marketplace", but that's not everything people want to do with their money.
reply
davedx
24 minutes ago
[-]
The difference being not investing in something for ideological reasons won’t jeopardise your assets; whereas YOLOing your 401k on Palantir because “AI surveillance capitalism is dope lol” is potentially risking significant portions of your future.

Can’t people just retweet Karp on X if they want to “support Palantir ideologically”?

This is GME all over again.

reply
Jean-Papoulos
3 hours ago
[-]
>Palantir would need to grow its revenues roughly 15-fold (yes, 1,500%) over the next quarter century, implying sustained annual revenue growth in the 35% range over this time frame.

That's actually a pretty reasonnable ask for a tech company, if you believe Palantir can grow to the level of FAANG.

reply
rsynnott
2 hours ago
[-]
Sustained growth of 35% p/y over a _quarter of a century_ is not a 'reasonable' ask, tech company or no tech company. Virtually no company has ever done that.
reply
aoeusnth1
1 hour ago
[-]
15x over 25 years is a reasonable ask for probably half of tech companies because you don't need 35%/y do accomplish it, you only need 11.4%.
reply
terminalshort
28 minutes ago
[-]
Dumb analysis. Assumes that profit margin stays the same as revenue grows, which is particularly untrue for software.
reply
cmiles8
20 minutes ago
[-]
One of the concerns with the company though is are they really “software.” Many cite experiences with the where they deploy armies of people doing things to clean up data and other hands on labor for the “software” to work just “software” where you buy a license and off you go.
reply
aoeusnth1
1 hour ago
[-]
Their math is just wrong. If they need to grow 15x over 25 years, they only need a modest 11.4% growth per year.

15^(1/35) = 1.11

1500^(1/35) = 1.34

Did the author maybe put a few extra zeros in their calculator when figuring out the annual revenue growth which would equal 15x over a 25 year span?

reply
nextstep
3 hours ago
[-]
For the sake of democracy and freedom of human expression, I hope that their software is a bloated, bureaucratic mess and can’t power the efficient dystopia which Alex Karp wants.
reply
tessierashpool9
46 minutes ago
[-]
If they keep their shit together and ride the surveillance wave then I don't see what should keep them from increasing 15fold by 2050. Their technology is not at all dependent on AGI, which is why I don't understand why they are always thrown in together with OpenAI et al.
reply
uxhacker
3 hours ago
[-]
Can somebody explain how the software actually adds value? How is it really that amazing? Or is it just a buzz word?
reply
davedx
1 hour ago
[-]
There was a great blog post by an early employee on here a while back that did a deep dive. It's a good read: https://nabeelqu.substack.com/p/reflections-on-palantir
reply
omnimus
1 hour ago
[-]
No. Thats the point. There nothing groundbreaking except their branding and lobby. Every other enterprise sofware company has data analytics platforms similar to Palantir - including the big microsoft / google. Palantir might even be best by a big margin but none of that matters. Nothing would justify this valuation. But what matters is that govs around the world will buy Palantir to show their alliance to US/Trump/Thiel. European far right politicians will happily push Palantir everywhere.
reply
m4r1k
1 hour ago
[-]
Palantir is a shit show
reply
wavefunction
3 hours ago
[-]
they're gonna build the american social-discredit system for many filthy dollars
reply
hunglee2
3 hours ago
[-]
it may well be terrible software, but Palantir are effectively an arm of the new Trumpian state, so guaranteed access (and ownership?) to the largest public sector projects of the largest economy in the world. It's got a good chance of becoming the Samsung of the US, so any value is not an overvalue
reply
davedx
1 hour ago
[-]
> any value is not an overvalue

Ridiculous statement. If you're actually investing your money in a company then you need to run the numbers, it's the most basic kind of due diligence you should do.

reply
gamma42
3 hours ago
[-]
Let's reconsider what you think the word value means
reply
BLKNSLVR
2 hours ago
[-]
So get in now, but get out soon before the Trumpian reign is over.
reply
petesergeant
2 hours ago
[-]
> an arm of the new Trumpian state, so guaranteed access (and ownership?) to the largest public sector projects of the largest economy in the world

That puts them in a precarious situation when the political winds change

reply
mgh2
4 hours ago
[-]
As long as the AI hopium flies
reply