The Apollo program was a money sink because it was an experimental project based entirely on untested technology and subjected to very tight time constraints, whose client was willing to paying a premium to get the results he ordered in record time.

SpaceX doesn't have to deal with many of those constraints, and the project needs to be profitable in order to get the program running. Consequently, while the Apollo program design in a 10-year timespan about four launch vehicles, rebuilt from scratch about two dozen launch vehicles and conducted over a dozen manned flight missions to the moon, after nearly two decades of existence SpaceX is being lauded for using a rocket more than once.

Requirements are different. Therefore, planning is different and results are also different.

I would guess each Apollo was a profit for Boeing, North American, and Douglas, too, but that doesn't matter.

SpaceX has indicated that it wants to be more than a way cheaper way to launch stuff into orbit. That means it needs to find sponsors willing to spend lots of money, and keep them interested for a long time. If new tricks like reusing a rocket soon become "meh", that means it needs many such tricks.