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

SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 542 posts

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#501

Post by tristanj »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #454
tristanj wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fair point that the inclusion criteria are applied consistently, not arbitrarily. But I fundamentally disagree with their inclusion criteria. It was designed for traditional companies with low growth and high GAAP profitability, not high-growth companies rapidly reinvesting into the core business. Amazon is infamous for having positive cash-flow yet running near-zero GAAP earnings for nearly two decades, bec…

You can just buy the stock, you know. Nobody is keeping it off the exchanges. Or you can buy another fund that includes it.

Thanks for entirely missing the point. My argument is for benchmark purity, and to not exclude significant parts of the market from the benchmark to accommodate the whims of passive investors.

The benchmark has much more use than just a list of stocks passive investors should blindly follow.

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#502

Post by conception »

Robotbeat wrote: post #382
conception wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or at least they are selling the idea of orbital data centers since the technology for orbital data centers does not exist yet or in the short term.

It’s literally just a satellite with GPUs on it. SpaceX already has about 100MW of satellites in orbit. They’re making an upgraded version of these satellites, V3, designed for launch on Starship. Making a bigger versions of those with larger radiators (because of the duty cycle) and putting them in sun-synch is all that is required, if it can be done cheaply enough. And Starship, if it works, should be cheap enough…

Ok… but thats not a data center?

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#503

Post by tionate »

wbl wrote: post #465
malfist wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But then you wind up with a portfolio that isn't balanced and isn't tracking like an index fund. An index fund doesn't simply buy a flat amount of stock and hold it, they buy stock in proportion to the relative weight of the exchange. Which is always moving

Market cap weighting is special. If company A has 500 shares, company B 500 also, than a fund that has 5 shares of A and 5 of B is market cap weighted.

This is only true if those 500 shares had identical value, as market cap is the number of shares x the price.

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#504

Post by qnpnpmqppnp »

tristanj wrote: post #497
qnpnpmqppnp wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there's some truth in your point, I think you're being unfair in framing this story as passive investors betraying their own philosophy because they suddenly realize this passivity would cause some "overpriced turds" to be included in their portfolio. Passive investors did not "backtrack", on the contrary their preference on this matter is that index rules should remain unchanged. Conversely, it seems fully con…

The reasoning here is backwards, because the rules in their current form exclude all three of the major upcoming IPOs of civilization changing companies (spacex, anthropic, openai). These companies are all large-caps, are currently in the top 20 largest companies in the US, but the S&P 500 index which claims to be a measure of the 500 largest companies in the US will systematically exclude these. Very likely for 3-5…

You're changing the discussion.

I was specifically not discussing whether S&P would be right to change the rules. As I said, there can be good and legitimate reasons for such change; I'm not disputing it.

The point of your previous comment was a critic against individual passive investors, accused of backtracking and betraying their own credo. This is what I was reacting to.

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#506

Post by jazzpush2 »

infecto wrote: post #364
vannevar wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're an outlier in the industry in terms of profit per car. But they don't actually get revenue from selling cars, their revenue comes from selling car loans. So they're making the additional margin on the financing. They are also famous for not turning down loan applications. So putting the pieces together, it seems like they are selling high risk loans at a healthy profit. Which brings up the question of who is…

This is how many businesses operate. You have still not provided example of fraud or scam behavior.

You don't think the last sentence, if proven to be true, is fraud? Or, at the minimum, an example of scam behavior?

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#507

Post by chrisandchris »

rsanek wrote: post #234
Animats wrote: post #217

The decision means companies like SpaceX would not be eligible for inclusion in the S&P 500 until at least one year after its listing and would also need to satisfy the index’s existing requirements for profitability and public float. Sudden outbreak of common sense. SpaceX is going "public" with only 4% of the stock being sold to outsiders. The S&P 500 requires a 50% public float. That may disqualify SpaceX for a lo…

It'll be at 50% within 6 months, then 100% within a year. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/06/01/c...

If Elon said that, it's probably more like 4% now, 12% in 5 years, then a chicken-out because whatever and never 100%.

See full-self-driving.

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#508

Post by barfingclouds »

rchaud wrote: post #112

Good. Indexes are supposed to be slow-moving, precisely due to their entry requirement of sustained profitability that skews towards mature companies. All that an inclusion of these new companies would accomplish is a bailout of their stockholders by pension funds and ETFs where millions of regular people shoulder all the downside risk. SpaceX and OAI stock will be available through Robinhood, Questrade and all the o…

Thank god

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#509

Post by Rebelgecko »

rsanek wrote: post #234
Animats wrote: post #217

The decision means companies like SpaceX would not be eligible for inclusion in the S&P 500 until at least one year after its listing and would also need to satisfy the index’s existing requirements for profitability and public float. Sudden outbreak of common sense. SpaceX is going "public" with only 4% of the stock being sold to outsiders. The S&P 500 requires a 50% public float. That may disqualify SpaceX for a lo…

It'll be at 50% within 6 months, then 100% within a year. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/06/01/c...

Is that a legally binding requirement, or just Elonspeak? (Like sending people to the moon by 2018 and summoning cars hands-free from NYC to LA)

Re: SpaceX, Other Mega IPOs Denied Fast Index Entry by S&P

#510

Post by ant6n »

chrisandchris wrote: post #507
rsanek wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'll be at 50% within 6 months, then 100% within a year. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/06/01/c...

If Elon said that, it's probably more like 4% now, 12% in 5 years, then a chicken-out because whatever and never 100%. See full-self-driving.

Can't he just list his own shares but just keep holding them without selling.
Post reply on HN