Live data from Hacker News

New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

reuters.com

21–30 of 139 posts

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#21
> Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars

This trope needs to die. SpaceX has no plans to go to Mars. Elon meanwhile regularly says forward looking stuff to attempt to justify the lofty valuations of his companies. Let's just say there is a ... mixed track record on these proclamations (Full self driving, Hyperloop anyone?)

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#22
post #12

Option 1: Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars, and maybe abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever. Option 2: the market has control, and optimizes for short term starlink revenue and the launch business. I prefer Option 1.

Elon has control and optimizes for ability to abuse the corporate entity as much as possible. Expects other people to pay for issues he caused, causes as much harm as possible to feel as a manly man with no empathy and his friends in government and Epstein circles back all that up.

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#23
post #12

Option 1: Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars, and maybe abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever. Option 2: the market has control, and optimizes for short term starlink revenue and the launch business. I prefer Option 1.

I prefer Option 2 as musk has an alleged track record of trading things between his companies with no oversight, and how sAfE cybertrucks are

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#24
post #18

I'm more worried about the early inclusion into the Nasdaq 100 index and if other indexes will follow. I don't want my retirement to be passively buying Elon's latest shell game.

This is why he (and other billionaires) are pining to get Social Security replaced with an indexed based retirement fund?

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#25
post #19
post #12

Option 1: Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars, and maybe abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever. Option 2: the market has control, and optimizes for short term starlink revenue and the launch business. I prefer Option 1.

You must be living under a rock if you think all super rich billionaires like Musk are doing is "abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever"

You can either concentrate power or disperse it. NASA, Boing, etc. is what happens when you disperse it. Committees aren't bold. The reason SpaceX exists is because Elon willed it into existence.

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#26
post #12

Option 1: Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars, and maybe abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever. Option 2: the market has control, and optimizes for short term starlink revenue and the launch business. I prefer Option 1.

If you want Option 1, then stay a private company.

Don't ask the public for money and then not provide any of the corporate requirements under the SEC for the proper operation of the markets.

You can't have both.

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#27
post #6

Same article syndicated on msn.com, without paywall: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/new-york-californi... The issues: > The New York and California pension systems would become holders of SpaceX shares through their passive allocations if the company is admitted to major U.S. stock indexes. > The officials… objected to the amount of power the board has given Musk over the company, including: - voting contr…

I’d love to hear one of you staunch capitalists tell me why the description of this persons control over 13,000+ employees is any different than a feudal “Lord” Over the entire lifetime of SpaceX Nearly 100% of the revenue comes from the government They pay gifts and tributes to the government They spend an absurd amount of money on lobbying and writing laws to take monopoly control of the subsection of the market Wh…

Why lie about something that's easily proven false with a Google search? Over last 5 years government revenue is under 25% and if you go off of last 2 years its closer to like 10-15% (and declining!) Starlink is the vast majority of spacex revenue

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#28
> The New York and California pension systems would become holders of SpaceX shares through their passive allocations if the company is admitted to major U.S. stock indexes.

If they have discretion, these pensions can replicate the S&P500 minus SpaceX if they don't like SpaceX's governance.

If they're forced to passively hold precisely the S&P500 then shaddup and stop active managing.

Next.

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#29
post #16
post #12

Option 1: Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars, and maybe abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever. Option 2: the market has control, and optimizes for short term starlink revenue and the launch business. I prefer Option 1.

Option 3: Elon takes over the Federal government, causes some major security incidents, and cuts off USAID stranding a number of Federal employees and cutting off short term food support for hundreds of thousands of people depending on it. Option 4: Elon takes over a social network and tries to Orbanize the West with it.

It’s not just cutting food support. Hundreds of thousands of people have died because we cut USAID.

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts

Re: New York, California pension leaders oppose 'extreme' SpaceX control structure

#30
post #23
post #12

Option 1: Elon has control and optimizes for cool shit and going to Mars, and maybe abuses the corporate entity a bit, as a piggy bank, or whatever. Option 2: the market has control, and optimizes for short term starlink revenue and the launch business. I prefer Option 1.

I prefer Option 2 as musk has an alleged track record of trading things between his companies with no oversight, and how sAfE cybertrucks are

[flagged]
Post reply on HN