Expert advice can be wrong
I don’t follow Suze Orman, but you probably know her from her PBS specials and other media, including her books and podcast. From what I have heard, she promotes sound financial habits, living within your means, and being careful with your money. When she speaks, undoubtedly many people listen. So, I was a bit shocked that in a recent podcast (6/18/26), she recommended “dollar-cost averaging” into SpaceX stock. Dollar-cost averaging is a technique that involves making multiple purchases to average out volatility, but SpaceX stock?
I believe her intent was to say that if you’re going to invest, dollar-cost averaging into a volatile stock is the way to go. While dollar-cost averaging is an appropriate technique for smoothing out price volatility, even the hint of recommending a single, recent IPO stock is not. She did not question the wisdom of a SpaceX investment, but also said: “eventually it should be ok.” She did not offer an opinion one way or the other on the wisdom of owning that particular stock, but more importantly, she didn’t caution that such an investment is wrong for most people.
What she didn’t explain is that any company at the point of an Initial Public Offering (IPO) with such a weak business model like SpaceX’s should be avoided like the plague. While speculation is part of any equity investment, especially in growth stocks, investors want returns based on profitability, not because greater fools can be found to buy it. With SpaceX, there is no plausible forecast of when it will become profitable. Growth companies are always given more leeway to reach profitability, but that progress is usually visible in the near term. Using the Apple analogy, they emerged from the garage and were profitable by the time the Macintosh desktop became a common consumer purchase. All the other products and markets that came after, such as phones, music, and wearables, were possible because of the culture of innovation built on those original user-friendly home computers. SpaceX is nowhere near the same position at this early stage, promising moon bases, data centers in space, and AI. They will only stay in business if they ditch the far-fetched ideas and focus on making money rather than living off more stock sales and debt (which of course dilutes the current stock value even more).
Now that I’ve made the case that SpaceX is a questionable investment at this time, the question for anyone who wants to speculate is: at what price do you take the gamble? And that’s what it is, a gamble. Not a fund of 100 companies involved in space technology. Rather, it’s a single stock operating in the most speculative of technologies, space and AI, both of which require massive amounts of cash. Many inexperienced small investors make the same mistake, taking a huge gamble without estimating the odds, looking only at promises, not proof in a financial statement.
But as I listened to the Suzy Orman podcast and her answers to other questions besides the SpaceX purchase, it was obvious that her advice is given without knowing all the facts. When someone asks, "Should I buy this or sell that?" especially when a lot of money is at stake, if the answer does not consider time, age, assets, liabilities, budget, family responsibilities, taxes, and risks, it can be the wrong answer. The answer, while technically correct, may be wrong for the individual asking the question. Whenever you are reading an expert's advice, always consider that it could be the wrong advice when applied to you and your situation at this point in time.
TM Tools, LLC ©2026