21–30 of 68 posts
For the sake of clarity, it's well above its historic IPO price, but near or slightly below where it began trading that day once it officially opened.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of them are heavily invested in index funds that added SpaceX at IPO due to market cap.
The big indexes have a cooldown period before buying, which these scam artists attempted to radically shorten before the IPO, but they failed (at least partially). The S&P500, for example, will delay a year before adding it to the index. Nasdaq 100 was talked into reducing it to 15 days, so you might want to get out of the Nasdaq 100.
I now use the Interactive Brokers MCP to make a "pseudo QQQ" which has all companies except Tesla and SpaceX in there, and I otherwise use the same weights as the official QQQ. In order to avoid tax overhead, my rebalancing is buy-only, no selling, so it's not a perfect analog to QQQ but it's close enough and I at least got some of my capital out of SpaceX.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of them are heavily invested in index funds that added SpaceX at IPO due to market cap.
The big indexes have a cooldown period before buying, which these scam artists attempted to radically shorten before the IPO, but they failed (at least partially). The S&P500, for example, will delay a year before adding it to the index. Nasdaq 100 was talked into reducing it to 15 days, so you might want to get out of the Nasdaq 100.
The IPO price for SpaceX was _delusional_. The price now is delusional. Especially since it's so dependent on the US government for revenue and he's done everything possible to irritate the party that's about to take over the federal budget.
It was insane to me that a company that had less than thirty-billion in revenue was valued at more than a trillion. I'm not sure how the People in Charge didn't call bullshit.
This is why people sometimes use forward P/E but that does have the obvious drawback of the denominator not actually existing yet.
However with SpaceX the valuation is extreme and also can they grow at that rate for years on end? Potentially not
For the sake of clarity, it's well above its historic IPO price, but near or slightly below where it began trading that day once it officially opened.
Historic IPO price? It opened at $160 10 days ago, did it not? Currently it is below that price. What historic price are you referring to?
I remember the same headlines right after Facebook's IPO. The discourse was very much that it was obvious that a website to connect with your friends wouldn't make money.
pump and dump scheme, but your 401k bought some.
One thing I learned recently is that Vanguard Total Stock Market Index (VTI) is float-weighted. That means that SpaceX's percentage in the index is based on the value of the floating shares, not the total market cap. As a result, a fund like VTI, for now, doesn't have that much SpaceX. It will add more as the lockup periods expire and the float increases, but increasing float might also drive down the price.
https://advisors.vanguard.com/investments/products/vti/vangu... (there's a search by ticker under Holdings)
Let's grab some popcorn. - Price/Sales about 128x (NVIDIA had a peak of a 40x at its peak) - Bought Twitter per 44 billions. Inflated its valuation to $250 billion just by integrating it into X.AI - EnterpriseValue/EBITDA about 219x (30x for scaleup business) and negative Price-to-Earnings - Low free-float trick (minimal public shares available) Even the market efficiency hypothesis struggles to justify it