If eg SpaceX spins out Starlink would it still count towards SpaceX's valuation?

Also, how does this resolve if it's unclear which is worth more?

Just realised the creator is banned and thus we won't be getting any clarification; do @traders want to come to a consensus on the best interpretation?

@Nat I haven't traded but I'm not sure there's an objective measure of SpaceX's value you could get. Dunno about openAI. I would include Starlink as it's part of SpaceX at the time of market creation.

@Mqrius @Nat
https://www.ft.com/content/c4a7eb14-1f3e-4b14-8e04-abe52c317dd6
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/03/openai-boosts-size-of-secondary-share-sale-to-10point3-billion.html

The frequency of these sorts of deals can be low, there may not be any for a year or more for one or both of them. Should we use

1. Latest deal valuation. (Prevents long delay before resolving.)
2 Use nearest date to the year end and use that valuation.
3. Assume constant change in valuation between dates of first deals before and after year end. (could be a long wait for resolution)
4. If there are no more deals perhaps $400B and $500B in links above are sufficiently different that we use those but if there are upcoming deals or it gets closer we use method 3 above?
5 Something else.

Any thoughts @traders wish to share?

@ChristopherRandles I know people don't really like N/A resolutions but the vagueness of this is exactly why I didn't bet, and why I think the market can't be resolved as is. If both companies were publicly traded it would be a different story, as that would be a reasonable Schelling interpretation. But lacking that I wouldn't think anything is solid enough to resolve on.

That's all I have to contribute tbh, I still have no stake so the traders can decide.