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

421–430 of 524 posts

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

#421

Post by codegeek »

jstummbillig wrote: post #408
codegeek wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. S&P 500 needs to be seriously gatekeeped. We need safer boring companies in there thatbhave been peoven over a long period of time. Nothing against these companies but they are not proven and ready for S&P 500.

Let's say Alphabet shifts further to ~become a 100% AI company in the same way that Anthropic and OpenAI are. Should they be removed from the index? If not, why not?

Not the same comparison. Alphabet/Google has a solid 25+ year history. It's not 100% AI or not. It's about a Healthy and proven business model.

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

#424

Post by jfyi »

codechicago277 wrote: post #351
dfedbeef wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There should be a word for paying investors with money from other investors

Seems structurally sound, kind of like a pyramid.

Depends a lot on which end is pointing down.

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

#425

Post by asadotzler »

muadddib wrote: post #47
kortilla wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is essentially a wealth transfer to the rich. They don't need it. These are not valid arguments. The companies that get added to the S&P are always owned in some fraction by rich people. SpaceX is obviously majorly owned by Elon, but it’s also owned by regular employees, a bunch of private investors and other funds that regular people invest in. > They're not profitable. Right > When they prove they're worth t…

So is spacex growing like Amazon was? There is no evidence of growth. And no, Google renting them infra grom then is not growth. If it waa, AllBirds is the next unicorn

SpaceX isn't what it once was, but its Starlink division has grown from 50k users to 12 million in 5 just years.

We don't have good public numbers, but that should be over $13B in revenue and about $2B of income over the last 12 months. Given the growth trend of that 5 years, that approx. $2B of income is likely to double by the end of this year.

Add to that the space launch business around Falcon 9, which had 40+ commercial launches that generated about $4B revenue and something close to $3B of income, and SpaceX was looking strong.

Again, SpaceX isn't what it was 6 months ago, before all the xAI fuckery, but the core business, Starlink and space launch, are doing well by themselves.

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

#426

Post by fsckboy »

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

S&P 500 rejects MPT when it decides not to issue a waiver from its ordinary rules which require at least a year long track record, a rule that is clearly a throwback to slower days when companies would invariably grow their way to be among the largest 500, and not IPO at that size. This old fashioned view throws a monkey wrench into the universally recommended, least-risk MPT/CAPM investment strategy of diversification because investors will need to individually buy these individual stocks to balance their ETF portfolios to reduce their overall risk, and then sell these stocks when they get added to the indices, incurring capital gains taxes that they wouldn't otherwise pay.

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

#427

Post by galleywest200 »

balls187 wrote: post #389
wg0 wrote: post #63

This is very smart of these folks because for just three companies, they can't ruin the trust and impeccable reputation they have built over the years. This decision alone is worth several trillion dollars.

It had nothing to do with smarts. They held a public comment about the changes and responded accordingly.

You would be surprised how many supposedly "smart" people ignore public comments about changes.

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

#428

Post by recursive »

r-w wrote: post #400
Groxx wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you honestly trying to imply that Excel is as easy to invisibly manipulate as ChatGPT?

Who said anything about it needing to be invisible?

It's implied. If the manipulation is obvious then it can be directly addressed.

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

#429

Post by SubjectToChange »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #297
abustamam wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stocks and money should be boring for most people. I'm not a financial adviser and this isn't financial advice but I believe no one with a net worth less than $2m should ever buy an individual stock. Invest in a target date retirement fund for your 401k. Same for Roth Ira. If you have more money to invest after that, invest in an index that aligns with you values (for example I invest in an ESG index for environmenta…

It’s because you just lived through a 10 year period of the best growth for passive, and there is a tremendous amount of marketing online for passive. I don’t disagree with your basic idea, but not being able to articulate alternatives so that you know when they make sense is going to hurt you. We are possibly seeing a major failure mode for passive for the first time.

>and there is a tremendous amount of marketing online for passive.

There’s a lot of advocacy for passive investing because it’s practically the only good option for retail investors. Managed funds can actually afford to advertise.

There are problems with passive investing becoming such a large portion of public investment, it is practically corporate welfare. But when the alternatives are at or around 2 and 20, with most performing worse than index funds, it’s irrational for the average person to do anything but passive investing.

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

#430

Post by lelanthran »

frozenseven wrote: post #339
lelanthran wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The greatest tech revolution by far and people on this site are trying to movie their money away from it. I hope y'all will do an honest retrospective in a year or so. I see this sentiment often, and think it is short-sighted: 1. The tech fails at the goal - profitability is what we see for any tech that augments humans, which isn't anywhere close to satisfying the trillions in debt, busting the market and bleeding…

My general prediction is that we'll see an immense amount of wealth creation and this will naturally trickle everywhere. This is both a continuation and speeding up of the trend we're seeing right now. I think the unusual outcome would be for us to stray from this path. >you will have nothing of value to contribute too So perhaps I can finally rest and solely focus on the stuff that I like. For this to be a problem,…

> So perhaps I can finally rest and solely focus on the stuff that I like.

You can do that now anyway, but you aren't.

I repeat my question - how do you imagine the economy will function if humans have nothing of value other than janitorial work to offer?

Post reply on HN