Back to Markets
Crypto▼ Bearish
SpaceX Token Sale Refunds Nearly $1B After Allocation Failure
Nearly $1 billion in SpaceX tokenized equity orders went unfilled as a regulated platform capped allocations at under 10%. The failure exposes execution risk in tokenized placements that traditional book-building avoids.
Continue with
A tokenized equity offering tied to SpaceX collapsed after the platform running the sale refunded nearly $1 billion in investor orders. The allocation failure is one of the largest in the history of tokenized securities.
The offering was structured as a digital representation of SpaceX common shares, sold through a regulated tokenization platform. Demand far exceeded supply. Investors who placed orders received allocations covering less than 10% of their requested amount. The platform processed refunds for the unfulfilled portion within 48 hours.
This is not the first time SpaceX-linked products have drawn outsized demand. In early 2024, a set of perpetual contracts referencing the company's valuation saw $1.2 billion in notional volume over a single weekend. In that case, holders got price exposure but no equity. This product carried actual ownership rights, making the allocation math more sensitive. The platform had to reconcile demand against a fixed pool of shares made available by selling shareholders.
The mechanics matter. Tokenized equity offerings rely on a sponsor to source the underlying shares and a platform to digitize the claim. When orders exceed the available float, the platform must either expand the pool or cut allocations. Expanding the pool requires the sponsor to find more willing sellers at the same price, a process that can take days. This platform chose to cut. The result was a wave of refunds that surprised investors who expected a prorated fill closer to 50%.
The implications extend beyond this single deal. Traditional equity offerings use a book-building process that lets underwriters manage allocations across institutional and retail buckets. Tokenized offerings often operate on a first-come-first-served basis or a simple percentage cut. Neither method scales well when demand spikes.