I think you're overstating the case for all three, because Tesla is a normal company that may or may not succeed, and SolarCity isn't a Ponzi scheme but simply a business dependent on regulatory decisions (like most every solar company).
But the inclusion of SpaceX there is frankly baffling to me; it's a completely different business model only tied to the others by Musk's involvement. And their "little tech" has involved at least two major achievements no one else has ever come close to. Maybe they lose to Orbital or NASA stops outsourcing or something, but "sometimes companies fail" is a far cry from "Ponzi scheme".
A Ponzi scheme is essentially a investment that promises you a too good to be true return (ex:10% per month). It is actually paid by late investors, unless you "reinvest" it. It is typically backed by promises : shares of a company that doesn't produce anything yet, land that will supposedly become extremely valuable, etc...
The companies you cited have nothing in common with Ponzi schemes. While profitability is debatable, they have real customers and produce real goods and services. They also don't promise you anything in term of ROI. Of course, Elon Musk will tell you his companies are the best, but that's just standard advertising.
SpaceX made reusable rockets a thing.
Tesla made great cars with bleeding-edge EV technology.
SolarCity made "solar roof" a viable & aesthetic product.
All three are still thriving on a lot of tech advancement.
Long-term success remains to be seen in three very difficult industries, but current performance is certainly not the facades of Ponzi schemes.
The space shuttle was reusable. It just wasn't cost-effective. So far, SpaceX hasn't proven their resuable rocket is cost-effective either.
> Tesla made great cars with bleeding-edge EV technology.
Model X ranked dead last in reliability: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/consumer-reports-survey-m...
Model S owners have also complained about reliability and build quality problems.
I don't know much about SolarCity as a business, but the Tesla buyout has a lot of sketchy signs about it https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/10/18/solarcity-teslas-s...
I don't necessarily think Musk's companies are literally "Ponzi schemes", but they are less impressive than the hype surrounding them, and they all rely heavily on government subsidies.
I just wish HN would take the same critical eye to Musk that it does toward other business luminaries. It seems like far too many people are easily seduced by "Mars colony! Hyperloop! Rocket around the world!"
And yes, I think SpaceX has been working constantly to reduce cost of reuse of their boosters. Do YOU have proof, given their track record of improvements, that they are anywhere near as expensive as the Shuttle in terms of launch costs?
What "bleeding-edge" EV tech? Tesla hasn't made a single "bleeding-edge" contribution to EV tech.
> SolarCity made "solar roof" a viable & aesthetic product.
That's why solar city went bankrupt and had to be "bailed out" by musk?
> All three are still thriving on a lot of tech advancement.
SpaceX, tesla nor solar city made a SINGLE contribution to tech advancement. SpaceX hasn't made a single contritubion. They are rehashing DECADES old tech. Tesla hasn't made a single contribution. And solar city went bankrupt and had to be bailed out - just like tesla 10 years ago.
They proved that an all-electric car is viable. While certainly not an advancement in the truest sense of the word since we already had Li-Ion batteries and large electric motors, it was definitely a contribution.
In any case, Tesla/SolarCity/SpaceX definitely aren't scams. Go ride in a Model S and see how much of a "scam" it is. Go watch videos of SpaceX rockets returning to Earth and landing vertically and gently so they can easily be reused and try to call it a scam.