Boaz Weinstein is the founder of Saba Capital Management.
Cite asCryptoQuant has tracked the directional calls on SPCX by @boazweinstein on X since Mar 2026: not yet scored on SPCX (as of Nov 11, 2026).
1 SPCX call on record, a thin history.
Relative view by default: fewer than 30 SPCX calls or days on record.
Sentiment timeline shows relative sentiment within this analyst's history. A perma-bull showing 8 bullish : 2 bearish in a bear market sets that as their baseline. If you notice any errors, claim @boazweinstein to submit corrections.
Hover the chart to read the thesis of that period · click a day to pin it
Fair - I don’t know who would have investigation experience. As it is with IRS whistleblowers, if an insider at Baillie or the firm that bought their SpaceX came forward to the board privately and provided material value, I’d be supportive of them receiving 10% of any payment Baillie makes to shareholders to settle this ugly chapter.
View original →Andy, I think you’re on to something. I believe @BaillieGifford was trying to raise cash in advance of their ill-fated USA and EWI merger plan to get rid of Saba. Both funds had always carried a much larger SpaceX weighting than SMT, which was 10-15x their AUM. They claim it was to fund new private investments of an equivalent size. Name them. Why couldn’t they have waited even a few months? Who did they sell it to at such a low price? At the same time as they reported the merger idea, SpaceX was already trading at 800bn which appears to be more than double their sale just 2 months earlier. Something is rotten here.
View original →The question as to why EWI and USA sold a huge chunk of their SpaceX position and the other two @BaillieGifford investment trusts with similar sized positions sold none needs to be investigated. Right after they sold at a valuation that might have been as absurdly low as 385bn valuation they disclosed that they planned to merge the funds as part of a settlement with Saba. No shareholder asked for this and the consequences were disasterous for everyone. The EWI board should now do a thorough investigation of the facts. If it’s the case that SpaceX was sold because Baillie hoped it would benefit them in their activist defense, shareholders in both funds need to be compensated for their massive loss!
View original →The UK investment trust structure is under pressure for good reason: managers rush to issue shares whenever their funds trade at a premium, yet fight tooth and nail against buying them back at a discount unless activists like Saba force the issue. That asymmetry is bad enough. But @BaillieGifford’s timing on SpaceX is especially remarkable. While Simpson-Dent makes muddled attacks on Saba over SpaceX, it was $EWI.LN that sold 35% of its SpaceX stake in October — just two months before the valuation more than doubled. Now $SMT.LN has been issuing new shares every day this week, effectively diluting existing holders at a $1 trillion SpaceX valuation the market widely expects could double at IPO within 2–3 months. Will any UK journalist ask Baillie why it is selling existing shareholders’ SpaceX exposure so close to a potential IPO? @QuotedData — anything?
View original →
