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

481–490 of 524 posts

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

#481

Post by latchkey »

gymbeaux wrote: post #461
latchkey wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cerebras is a good example here. Largest IPO of 2026 and as of Friday, down 33% from their top and about $15 away from their initial price. CFO was at Bird (a SPAC flop) and CEO was previously charged by the SEC with a felony... for cooking the books. Everyone wants you to believe that a giant wafer is the future (and soon enough layers of wafers), but a P/E of $500, just doesn't make sense for a company selling AI f…

(P/E ratios aren’t expressed in dollars) So a PE of 500 means it would take 500 years for the earnings of the company to equal the current market cap (price per share X number of shares). This implies absurd (almost certainly impossible) growth over the next 500 years. Of course anyone expecting to pull their investment out and spend it on retirement can’t be looking at a 500-year investment horizon. I suppose the 1%…

Yea, sorry... didn't mean to include the $... my mistake.

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

#482

Post by fny »

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?

Forget AI. Any company in the S&P could set fire to their entire business in a pivot to Labubus.

A certain amount of required scrutiny and experience derisks that possibility. Also remember pre-IPO the valuation isn't set by the broader market, so you don't know if any of these valuations are even real. Do we want to set a precedent where banks can put any price tag they want on a pig everyone is forced to buy?

Once these companies go through the same process Google or any other S&P member did, they're welcome to join the party.

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

#483

Post by mannanj »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #330
mannanj wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about because they used tax payer money to help fund them? Why should my money make AI executives & shareholders richer? And let them own the products of my tax? edit: We used to call that Fraud.

I agree governments shouldn’t throw money in these. That didn’t answer my question of why we want to seize them. > because they used tax payer money to help fund them Source showing a significant part of the investment was tax money?

The administration is funding the data centers are they not? Maybe I got bamboozled into believing fake news, let me check that real quick.

Ok couldn't find that tax payer money went specifically to it, so taking that back.

On the other hand, incentives, of other forms, and rates and agreements with the data centers that mean I pay more myself for my own electricity (happening in VA where I live) is an indirection form of taxation or I'll say still means my own need to work greater (to pay for the higher electricity) is whats supporting that data center. Or said in another way, their presence has led to a greater burden on me and others, and they haven't contributed locally in the way that satisfies me or others locally. If ascribe that to a leech/parasite: if a local leech or parasite is in my community, step one to removing it is seizing it. edit: Maybe seizing it can show that removing it isn't needed, as seizing gives a greater level of control over said parasitic entity.

Hope that answered your question better. If not, I can try again in another way.

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

#484

Post by tim333 »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #445
tim333 wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SpaceX got NASDAQ to change their rules so I guess people thought S&P might be similar. NASDAQ probably did it because they make money by the listing going to them rather than the NYSE.

Did you consider they are adding SpaceX to the index because it is a good idea?

SpaceX going in the index is fine but I think changing the rule to make it different from other stocks is iffy and was at the request of Musk. There's a Patrick Boyle vid talking about it https://youtu.be/8rS3fTbC7TE

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

#485

Post by AzzieElbab »

jaylittle wrote: post #280
anonu wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

More than likely none of these AI companies will exist 12 months from now. Their carcasses will be devoured by entities with enough money to buy up the scraps after the bubble pops and the market implodes. Neither SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic have a future. What's a shame is that had Elon not merged SpaceX with xAI it might've actually had a future - but he had to go and ruin it. What an idiot.

The end is near!

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

#486

Post by lumost »

kortilla wrote: post #53
lumost wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite clear that there is an effort to engineer mega financial vehicles that index tracking funds are forced to buy. The incentive to do so is massive, and there is nothing illegal about it. As a holder of index funds such as the S&P, I'd much prefer that these vehicles are excluded for at least some period of time to ensure that the greater fool isn't simply my index portfolio.

Are you happy to be invested in Tesla? It is not profitable quarter to quarter and is included in your fund. Why do you tolerate that and not this?

TSLA has been around for many years, whether I agree with its value or not. It has been able to retain its valuation in the public market.

An IPO with massive insider selling counterbalanced by a flood of index fund rebalancing is entirely different.

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

#487

Post by sseveran »

codegeek wrote: post #298
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.

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.

Its cool. I will buy. And you will buy in 12 months.

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

#488

Post by mcmcmc »

tdesilva wrote: post #477
zugi wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> using AI to do their accounting and bookkeeping A friend gave AI access to his accounts to summarize his finances. On reviewing the AI-generated report, he spotted a $500 monthly loan payment that he didn't recognize. He asked AI where it came from, and AI admitted that it was a mistake. Perhaps in its training data, most people have a $500 loan payment, so AI just stuck one in there.

is this the ChatGPT finance features they launched in May? it keeps asking me to integrate my finance data, but I have doubts about how useful it would actually be (not to mention some distrust about how well they would actually protect my data).

It would be extremely useful data for things like dynamic pricing as ad targeting, just not on the user side

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

#489

Post by frozenseven »

lelanthran wrote: post #430
frozenseven wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

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

Why so intent on putting me in these scenarios and then telling me what I should do/feel?

>how do you imagine

By not imagining a world of that both contains superintelligence and people still mopping the floors.

Post reply on HN