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

S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 524 posts

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#281

Post by uyzstvqs »

danielovichdk wrote: post #16

Stocks and money. It's so boring. I will go drive my old German car now, and get a bit drunk in a bottle of Nebbiolo while listening to some French lunatic with a piano. Enjoy your trip to Mars and your self driving toy cars. The world is off its rails. Bit time.

I will go ride my horse, and get a bit drunk off some ale at the local pub. You go enjoy your automobile, electricity, and telephony.

Electricity is overhyped anyway. Nikola Tesla is a scammer with his crazy ideas. Not to mention the scam that is Bell's telephony. Electricity is causing a copper shortage for us common folk. This electricity bubble is built only on hype, and will pop soon enough!

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#282

Post by MichaelDickens »

anonu wrote: post #272
zhivota wrote: post #30

Big relief for me. As a passive investor, I want the indices to follow the same passive strategy they always have, and specifically not make exceptions for specific companies like SpaceX wanted. Plenty of ways to get exposure to that stock without it going into the indices it is not qualified for.

You'll eventually get exposure to it when it gets added in 12 months. Unless there are better profitability criteria. Ultimately it's all about market returns. If other indexes add it and outperform then eventually money will shift to those funds that do better.

What do you mean "better profitability criteria"? I don't want an index to exclude companies on the basis of profitability. I want it to hold the market.

(I also don't want them to create special exceptions. The S&P 500 has pre-existing inclusion criteria, and I'm glad they're sticking to their rules.)

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#283

Post by dylan604 »

mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #274

Letting new stocks marinate in the market and get 4 quarters of SEC filings along with following all the GAAP accounting practices will definitely help evaluate them before inclusion. The last large boom/bust cycle had a couple of companies, at least, that were doing illegal things. I'm not stating that these three are, just that nobody knows and the process should play out. I do wonder if any of these three companie…

I would expect actual human professional accountants to be involved somewhere in the due diligence stage of those approving the IPO. Then again, I know nothing of the IPO process, and am definitely thinking of mergers and acquisitions due diligence and hoping something exists for IPOs.

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#284

Post by groundzeros2015 »

anonu wrote: post #272
zhivota wrote: post #30

Big relief for me. As a passive investor, I want the indices to follow the same passive strategy they always have, and specifically not make exceptions for specific companies like SpaceX wanted. Plenty of ways to get exposure to that stock without it going into the indices it is not qualified for.

You'll eventually get exposure to it when it gets added in 12 months. Unless there are better profitability criteria. Ultimately it's all about market returns. If other indexes add it and outperform then eventually money will shift to those funds that do better.

You’re assuming their success is a done deal. But there is a large amount of risk in these companies.

Any individual can buy as much as they want.

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#285

Post by groundzeros2015 »

KPGv2 wrote: post #277
throw7 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always favoured Tessier-Ashpool S.A. as comparable. The creation of AI's and Freeside and Musk's pronatalism slots in nicely.

Musk isn't a natalist. The global population is going up. And yet, he complains about not enough births. Because he is a white supremacist. He wants white people to outnumber other races. The current state of affairs would be satisfactory to him if he were merely a natalist.

Source?

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#286

Post by evolve2k »

dylan604 wrote: post #283
mattbrewsbytes wrote: post #274

Letting new stocks marinate in the market and get 4 quarters of SEC filings along with following all the GAAP accounting practices will definitely help evaluate them before inclusion. The last large boom/bust cycle had a couple of companies, at least, that were doing illegal things. I'm not stating that these three are, just that nobody knows and the process should play out. I do wonder if any of these three companie…

I would expect actual human professional accountants to be involved somewhere in the due diligence stage of those approving the IPO. Then again, I know nothing of the IPO process, and am definitely thinking of mergers and acquisitions due diligence and hoping something exists for IPOs.

The software that most accountants use is leaning into AI as hard as it can and unlike coders, accountants are being sold the benefits but can’t directly see the shortcomings and don’t have the programming know how to engage with the technical nuance.

Like many other sectors quality is gradually turning to slops as people “let the AI do it”.

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#287

Post by aloha2436 »

zerobees wrote: post #222
zhivota wrote: post #30

Big relief for me. As a passive investor, I want the indices to follow the same passive strategy they always have, and specifically not make exceptions for specific companies like SpaceX wanted. Plenty of ways to get exposure to that stock without it going into the indices it is not qualified for.

I get what you're saying, but I think there's a contradiction between wanting to be a passive index-fund investor and having opinions like that. The core tenet of index investing is that the market knows better than you.

Plenty of active funds also give you roughly market returns, and it's not very difficult to do the same if you're investing for yourself. The important differentiator for index funds is that they have extremely low fees and take up none of your time.

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#289

Post by cool_dude85 »

vmg12 wrote: post #239
cool_dude85 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Selling winners and buying losers sounds an awful lot like "buy low, sell high".

Company performance doesnt follow a uniform distribution where each company is as likely to overperform as any other. Selling companies that are run well because their stock went up is a great way to miss out on a lot of money.

If you're reliably beating the market over a long time horizon by picking specific stocks, you're a billionaire, or soon to be.

Re: S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic

#290

Post by groundzeros2015 »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #184
LinguaBrowse wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve moved my S&P 500 investments to the Equal Weight index to reduce my exposure to AI. Quite aside from SpaceX, I think the large-cap tech companies are making some uncomfortably large bets on AI and any major upset could cause a domino effect. But as so many ETFs have a significant stake in large-cap US tech stocks (the top 10 holdings of the iShares MSCI World ETF is entirely comprised US Big Tech, making up 20%…

I've been doing research on this subject for an article I'm writing, and the only way things end well if the government gets involved is if we pass legislation deprivatizing AI data centers. Like the dark fiber laid during the dotcom, the compute is the valuable thing here that will remain after the speculative bubble has burst. The deal isn't bad for the AI companies, they can depreciate on a short schedule while st…

Why is government seizing data centers a good thing?
Post reply on HN