Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 560 posts

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#171

Post by adamiscool8 »

gbil wrote: post #167
throwfaraway135 wrote: post #166

The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.

>Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me

Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#172

Post by spacebanana7 »

Hamuko wrote: post #168

I've recently been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have. I really don't want my investments to be in SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic.

Why not Anthropic? They’re a very rare company capable of charging $200 per month per seat level fee across the corporate workforce.

Yes their compute costs are astronomical, but that can be managed down over time by more efficiency or mild enshittification that doesn’t create too much churn.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#173

Post by close04 »

adamiscool8 wrote: post #171
gbil wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me

Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.

Musk appears far less predictibile, more volatile than Zuck. Musk also got directly involved in US politics aligned with of a man who singlehandedly butchered US relations with almost everyone in the world. A man who threatened Denmark with taking their territory by force.

You’re calling it “political motivation” as some sort of blind hate or vendetta out of principle, cutting off the nose to spite the face. But you can no longer separate Musk from politics and aggression towards Denmark.

The pension fund’s assessment looks entirely valid, objective and justifiable to me. But for anyone who personally favors Musk and his political views any dismissal will look politically motivated. It’s easy to cry foul. In this light your shallow dismissal might be just as politically motivated.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#174

Post by spacebanana7 »

adamiscool8 wrote: post #171
gbil wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me

Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.

Google too, and this was in the long term best interests of shareholders.

Imagine in 2010 if investors had real transparency into how much money YouTube or Maps was losing, along with the governance structures to enforce their concerns.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#175

Post by Hamuko »

andsoitis wrote: post #169
Hamuko wrote: post #168

I've recently been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have. I really don't want my investments to be in SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic.

> been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have What’s holding you back? And what alternative investments are you considering? I recently did homework to decide whether to double down on VOO (S&P 500 index) or to diversify via VXUS (ex-US index), and concluded VOO is better for my risk-adjusted ROI outlook and time horizon.

Momentum, really. I usually just buy more of a given fund and don't really take any out. My small portfolio is split across different funds, so I'd probably just split around the money I'd withdraw from the US-based ones into the other ones.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#176

Post by zamadatix »

throwfaraway135 wrote: post #166

The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.

Most of the 1.8T hype is not at all related to the rocketry business. Well, I suppose if you buy the "AI DCs in space" pitch they could be somewhat related.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#177

Post by gbil »

adamiscool8 wrote: post #171
gbil wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me

Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.

More than 10times higher (possible valuation), 10+ years of Musk showing what kind of liability he is and at that time Zuck didn't have all the main CxO positions.

I don't think it is similar therefore.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#178

Post by vrganj »

adamiscool8 wrote: post #171
gbil wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me

Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.

The political motivation is on Musks part. There's no unpolitical view of a man who ransacked the US government and is propping up far-right movements all over Europe.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#179

Post by Hamuko »

spacebanana7 wrote: post #172
Hamuko wrote: post #168

I've recently been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have. I really don't want my investments to be in SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic.

Why not Anthropic? They’re a very rare company capable of charging $200 per month per seat level fee across the corporate workforce. Yes their compute costs are astronomical, but that can be managed down over time by more efficiency or mild enshittification that doesn’t create too much churn.

Because I don't really trust any of them, and I don't believe that the business is self-sustainable. At the moment we're in a phase where CTOs are able to withdraw money from the corporate bank accounts to be "on the cutting edge", but I don't think that's going to last. I'd rather have my money in something else.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#180

Post by 100ms »

spacebanana7 wrote: post #172
Hamuko wrote: post #168

I've recently been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have. I really don't want my investments to be in SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic.

Why not Anthropic? They’re a very rare company capable of charging $200 per month per seat level fee across the corporate workforce. Yes their compute costs are astronomical, but that can be managed down over time by more efficiency or mild enshittification that doesn’t create too much churn.

Chinese hardware and energy headwinds aren't going to be great for Anthropic, apparently not even over a 1 year time horizon.
Post reply on HN