An 8-K puts SpaceX's close on Anysphere at August 14, and 17 remaining days of August plus September, October and 12 days of November gets you to the cutoff: 90 days [2][1][1]. That is a boilerplate interval, the sort of post-closing exit window that sits in a bespoke supply agreement and gets exercised by calendar rather than by argument, and OpenAI says it went to the far end of the one it had, describing November 12 as the most delayed stop date the contract allowed and the decision itself as "incredibly tough" [7]. Taking the longest runway the contract allowed reads as leverage-timing more than pure conviction.
The consideration is worth turning over too, because none of it was cash. Sixty billion dollars of Cursor equity against roughly 389.3 million SpaceX Class A shares works out at about $154 a share [3][2], which is the rate SpaceX set on its own unlisted paper. Until a third-party trade prints at that level, call the $60B a self-set price, still awaiting independent confirmation as a value.
Michael Truell's roughly 5% is the figure everyone will quote, but it measures the wrong denominator [9]. Five percent of traffic is a routing change, executed once, by someone else. What Cursor actually sold was the ability to pick a model by task [10], and that promise does not divide by traffic share; the source's own read, that the loss bites companies signing long-term agreements harder than it bites the user count [10], is the right instinct. A multi-year commitment underwritten by model breadth just lost an item from the menu with no repricing event and no counterparty to ring, because the contract being terminated was never theirs.
OpenAI is giving up wholesale revenue from one of its earliest customers, by Truell's account [11], in exchange for control over where its forthcoming Astra model, which it says sharpens the question of who gets access, does and does not show up [12][8] - and the surface it is closing belongs to a buyer that told the market the acquisition brings access to the largest fleet of GPUs in the world [4].
Read it as Musk-specific and it carries no freight for anyone else: OpenAI's stated grounds are an alleged pattern of breaches at Twitter, now inside SpaceX, and at xAI, which it says Musk admitted under oath had violated its terms this year [5]. Read it as evidence that substitution works and the weapon is blunt, since 5% can be rerouted without visible incident in a market that the same report has growing from $103.58 billion in 2025 to $161 billion in 2026, a 55% jump and the kind of forecast to hold loosely [13][3]. The reading I lean toward, and this is probably wrong in the specifics, is duller and more expensive: change-of-ownership termination rights in model supply contracts have become a diligence item for anyone whose tooling vendor is acquirable, which is all of them, and the buyer of a seat has no visibility into a clause two levels up their supply chain.
What would falsify it is straightforward. If no comparable termination follows over the next year, if supply is quietly restored under the exit talks Truell said were under way [9], or if Cursor's usage does not move at all, then this was a feud with a contractual pretext and the clause was incidental.
