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

SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 638 posts

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#561

Post by inigyou »

wredcoll wrote: post #520
idiotsecant wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

plows and mill stones and spinning wheels are excellent examples of exactly what a feudal lord owned. They owned the land, the major structures on that land, and the major implements on that land. If you wanted to use them you paid the lord in fees via goods, labor, etc. It's basically the gig economy - you will own nothing, your labor will be for his benefit, and if you want to keep participating you'll make it wort…

That did occasionally happen but I don't think it was the majority case by any means. That being said, if we're talking about the lord owning the mill you labor at, how is that different than tesla owning the car factory you work at?

It isn't, and that's why people speak about technofeudalism?

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#562

Post by futevolei »

xutopia wrote: post #61

I can't comprehend for the life of me that people put their life savings in what Elon Musk is doing. Are people not seeing how he's lying about the future all the time? He said he aimed to have 5000 Optimus robots out by end of 2025, 50000 by 2026 and 10 times that in 2027. He promised in 2015 that full autonomous driving would arrive in 2 years and we aren't there yet 11 years later. He even said in 2016 that there…

Yeah yeah yeah he lies all the time but Tesla cars exist and are awesome and the company is worth more than all other car companies combined going on how many years now? Do you really believe you have some unique insight that the rest of the market has not discounted? Spacex was probably just over valued and this sell off has nothing to do with “people starting to finally wake up that he isn’t as good as his ego”. I suspect the best thing you could for yourself, at least as far as the stock market goes, is humbly acknowledge you know nothing and just buy index funds.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#563

Post by quickthrowman »

malfist wrote: post #537
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wasn't making the case he isn't harmed. He was making the case that the effect isn't large. You don't appear to understand the claim itself, let alone the reasoning. Just because you don't understand the basics of the financial system, or the different indices, or the amount of money flowing into the funds that track each, it doesn't mean others don't. The impact if it had been included in the S&P500 would have be…

Your honor, I only murdered one person, that effect size isn't large, there's 9 billion people on earth. You should dismiss this case.

There’s around five trillion dollars indexed to the S&P 500 in large funds. QQQ is half a trillion dollars.

If you look at Fidelity mutual funds, the difference is even greater. FXAIX has $827B in it, USNQX has $9.6B in it.

The absolute dollars do matter, as do the risk characteristics of both baskets of stocks. If and when SPCX meets the S&P 500 index criteria it will be included.

Also, NASDAQ both operates the NASDAQ exchange and also decides what is in the NASDAQ 100. S&P decides what is in the S&P 500 but they do not operate an exchange. Allowing SPCX into the NASDAQ 100 was good for NASDAQ the exchange and it was legal, so it happened. The S&P 500 committee was not facing the same incentive so SPCX will have to wait until it meets the criteria for inclusion.

If you understand the incentives, you can predict the outcome. I agree that it sucks that QQQ holders had to swallow SPCX.

One last thing, if you reread my post, I explicitly acknowledge I have exposure to SPCX through VTI which I own in my Roth IRA. As of right now, 0.14% of VTI is SPCX which means I have $91 of exposure. I think I’ll be OK if it goes to zero :) I said I have no SPCX in my 401K which is just FXAIX, an S&P 500 index fund.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#564

Post by inigyou »

8note wrote: post #504
scottyah wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see socialism benefitting from capitalism, but how have capitalistic nations benefitted from socialist ones (other than a place to put military bases)?

smartphone glass: corning, gorilla, etc is an east german invention the soviet union also pushed humans into space cuba produces a ton of doctors who then go on to heal people too poor to train local doctors in terms of, how does socialism benefit jeff bezos and elon musk and the actual capitalism of epsteins and the like using money as power mad exption from the law, i guess musk built space x on soviet rocket desig…

Bezos and Elon receive socialism from the American government, no need to talk about other countries there. They are backstopped, they have all their needs met by the government and the government gives them tax money from all of us and then grants them exclusive control over an economic monopoly so they can extract more directly from us

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#565

Post by inigyou »

leonidasrup wrote: post #400
danudey wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually "true capitalism" means one of two things: 1. Capitalism where there is no government or regulatory interference, and the "invisible hand of the free market" produces some kind of utopian society based purely on every business abiding by rules enforced by no one, where somehow corporations don't take advantage of workers they way they do now despite there being no laws against it. 2. The same thing but sarcas…

The "invisible hand of the free market" works only, if you have many market participants competing one against another. When a participant wins the competition you get monopoly, when multiple participants collude you get oligopoly, or cartel. Market can not solve this. Historical examples: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Oil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_price_…

If competition was economically efficient, it would happen. Monopolies prove that monopolies are efficient.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#566

Post by rchaud »

Sol- wrote: post #47

Isn't it realistically only worth talking about SpaceX stock a few years out? The random walk the stock will do after an IPO seems very uninformative.

Burton Malkiel's "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" was published in 1973, well before significant changes to financial markets that affect its theoretical randomness.

1. 401Ks were introduced in 1978, making mainstream the concept of automatic payroll deductions that funded an investment account. Trillions more dollars moved into pension funds that might otherwise have been spent elsewhere.

2. Bloomberg Terminals went online in 1982, kicking off an ever-growing information assymetry between investment professionals and retail investors.

3. Electronic trading didn't take off until 1992 with Globex, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange's platform

4. High-frequency trading didn't take off until 2005 or so

5. Finally, the Nasdaq changed its rules in 2026 in a way that directly benefited new IPOs like SpaceX, triggering automated purchases from investment funds, propping up its price beyond what its business fundamentals might have justified.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#567

Post by DoesntMatter22 »

Terr_ wrote: post #553
DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"since so much of it (and so much of its growth) is for the military" So clearly you are pretty uninformed as the military spending is only 13% of the federal budget. Social Security (AKA a socialist program, IDK if anyone can deny that) is 22%, Medicare (another socialist program is 14.2%). Interest on our prior spending (a lot of it from SS and Medicare, etc, some military too. is 14% So, if you add social programs…

> you are pretty uninformed [...] SS and Medicare This is another aspect where your thesis is not-fully-baked. If you want people to receive what you meant, you have to stop writing it wrong. 1. You spoke about " the federal tax rate" and claimed it was "0" in 1900. 2. The most charitable interpretation of that is that you meant to say income tax: That's usually what people mean when they're too-vague; It would liter…

The vast majority of you money goes to the federal level. You are here nitpicking and not dealing with any of the real issue. You are dancing around it for the sake of semantics rather than dealing with the actual issue.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#568

Post by yobutdude »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #543
yobutdude wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it is not. Appeals to equality of condition have existed for centuries. Among them are that term used verbatim. Ignored the other points and redirected to the least salient. Will take it as acceptance you realized how silly your carrying water for people who don't know or care you exist is. Age of account makes it clear you need the social system to remain solvent as you're likely rich on paper. Nothing more.

> Ignored the other points In this comment [1]? Seriously, what salient points were you trying to make? Nobody is arguing anything is fairly valued. That's your straw man. There's a bit ironically complaining about innumeracy in a series of comments with zero numbers. Then a general appeal to Twitter tropes around sheeple and whatnot. If anything, the quality of this comment thread sort of points to the quality of th…

Back n forth with someone who used "a bit silly" as a justification.

You set a low bar out the gate. I merely met you down there.

Numbers don't make a difference. They can be shaped to any argument like English or German because they're picked by the biases of the author.

You seem to live in a rhetoric derived neural hallucination and are completely detached from physical reality, meaningful thresholds for verification.

Will stick to the skills I picked up studying applied physics and electrical engineering for checking hypothesis and formal verification. No interest continuing a conversation with a functional illiterate who cannot reason outside their native cultural bubble.

To paraphrase Feynman, doesn't make much sense to get hung up on the syntax and their semantics.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#569

Post by defrost »

yobutdude wrote: post #568
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ignored the other points In this comment [1]? Seriously, what salient points were you trying to make? Nobody is arguing anything is fairly valued. That's your straw man. There's a bit ironically complaining about innumeracy in a series of comments with zero numbers. Then a general appeal to Twitter tropes around sheeple and whatnot. If anything, the quality of this comment thread sort of points to the quality of th…

Back n forth with someone who used "a bit silly" as a justification. You set a low bar out the gate. I merely met you down there. Numbers don't make a difference. They can be shaped to any argument like English or German because they're picked by the biases of the author. You seem to live in a rhetoric derived neural hallucination and are completely detached from physical reality, meaningful thresholds for verificati…

FWiW you were reading a lot better before this self aggrandising me and my STEM background twaddle.

Read the room, you can't chuck a rock around here w/out hitting two.

Re: SpaceX bond worth 10% less than issue price – heading for junk bond status

#570

Post by Havoc »

elbasti wrote: post #406
Havoc wrote: post #91

Which is all sorts of backwards. Debt has liquidation preference over equity. And equity market say spacex has trillion+ of supposed equity buffer before it cuts into debt value

This is incorrect. SpaceX has a trillion in Market Capitalization, not a trillion in Equity. These two concepts are no the same. The equity value is the theoretical intrinsic "worth" of a company, and has a very simple definition: Equity = Assets - Liabilities. Market capitalization takes into account the future value of the business, while equity (an accounting concept) only looks at present day cash & liabilities.…

By „equity buffer“ I don’t mean equity in the balance sheet sense you seem think.

In this case the gap between the value bond market and equity markets assign to spacex is equal to market cap ie a trillion.

If equity markets are right there is a trillion of spare equity buffer ( ie equity in the enterprise value sense not accounting equity) before endangering bonds and the bond people are idiots for marking their bonds down. If bond market is right equity is worthless and equity people are silly to push it to a trillion market cap.

Either way someone is wrong by a trillion.

Post reply on HN