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

591–600 of 638 posts

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

#591

Post by wubbawibba »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #583
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t consider that angle—thanks. I don’t day trade and don’t think anyone should. Lots of folks do anyway, however, and then they predictably lose money. It should be similarly predictable that they’ll then get upset and lash out, sometimes in the correct direction, often not. (And the influencers pitching day trading and whatnot, lo and behold, are probably also selling the corruption of indices and why you shou…

Mostly like I think they simply long for communal property ownership with a benevolent overseer that invests and distributes resources according to values that match their own. Therefore they are offended that private individuals can allocate as they choose, and make losing gambles on other private institutions. Some of these people were taught indexes are safe havens, and recoil at the idea they might not be safe as…

When faced with an information asymmetry (lack of knowledge of other posters) you engage in a kind of phrenology... taking a few sentences of others and filling in huge gaps in your knowledge with biases that you cannot confirm are true and meaningful

Grammatically correct sentences you can come up with are not at all guaranteed to be accurate.

Sincerely... stop it. Get some help. You're a typical human dimwit. Your grasp of contemporary economic language is not a sign of correctness. Just your own limited vocabulary and literacy. You're repeating language you memorized. You're not solving the gap in information.

Surviving this long does not mean you are especially

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

#592

Post by KellyCriterion »

inigyou wrote: post #557
KellyCriterion wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_(finance) There are, as said, depending on juristic regime, products which do not let you lose more than you invested. On top of this comes national regulation: E.g. in some EU countries, retail traders are exempt from s.c. "margin calls" and the broker is required by regulation to "just close and not ask for more" Source: Im living in one of these EU countries

A turbo is not a short position. It is more similar to an option.

and an option is not "a position" then? :-)

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

#593

Post by jt2190 »

idiotsecant wrote: post #449
jt2190 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a massive downside to premature inclusion of a stock that is initially overvalued Define “massive”. SpaceX is only 1.2% of QQQ.

Can I please have 1.2% of your total net worth

No, but I will bet you that QQQ will not loose 1.2% of its value due only to SpaceX going to $0.

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

#594

Post by TFYS »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #539
fragmede wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No you didn't, all you did was complain about taxes and say that there exist regulations by counting the number words in them. Not all words are equal, not does it mean that they're effectively enforced. Looking at various monopolies like Ticketmaster or the UnitedHealth group and how they've been allowed to flourish it doesn't seem like America has anywhere near enough regulations to be considered true capitalism. I…

First of all I didn't complain. I don't care what happens personally. Secondly it's just a fact that the US has a tremendous amount of regulations compared to the past. Just look at how few regulations existed in the 70s vs today. Apparently you don't like word counts, but the reality is there are a enormous amount today that didn't exist in the past. That's not a free market economy. "it doesn't seem like America ha…

For capitalism to exist we must have a system in place to protect private property, e.g. a government. That government must be the most powerful entity to be able to protect property. The capitalist system is competitive, and controlling the decision-making of the most powerful entity is an enormous competitive advantage. Once you control that entity you'll naturally want to expand its powers. Hence capitalism will always lead to a growing government that capitalists will use to get a competitive advantage in their market. This is what capitalism will always lead to.

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

#595

Post by JKCalhoun »

ratelimitsteve wrote: post #481
idiotsecant wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

complaining about reddit is the most redditor thing you can do on HN, congratulations.

it's just a generic dismissal, a way of putting someone in a box without actually engaging with anything they say. which lumps it in with 90% of all internet arguments really. "Your argument must be invalid because you're the type of person whose arguments are invalid."

Go back to AOL.

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

#596

Post by lenkite »

tavavex wrote: post #309
marcosdumay wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Lucrative" is not really the word you are looking for.

What do you mean? I was under the impression that including SPCX has been massively beneficial for Nasdaq. It creates lots of trading volume and sends a quiet signal to other massive tech companies looking to IPO to come to them, rules be damned. So they're definitely extremely lucrative for Nasdaq.

I think he meant you should use the word "corrupt", not "lucrative".

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

#597

Post by lenkite »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #567
Terr_ wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I went through the thread twice and unsure what precisely is the "real issue" you are talking about ?

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

#598

Post by lenkite »

phil21 wrote: post #527
timacles wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socialism capitalism, history shows basically all human systems devolve into corruption regardless of how sound the underlying concepts are. Which I’m surprised people don’t point out more. What does it matter which system is the best when at the end of the day the powerful people are going to make back room deals to subvert it and that always leads to a feedback loop

Yep. This is how I view the world these days too. All systems will inevitable devolve into corruption and centralized power. The best system I suppose is the one that starts with the most distributed means of power possible, and then that gives the most quality of life years out of anything before it's time for a horrific reset again.

The best way to sort this out is to have truly random election winners and heads of organizations and bids for govt contracts. And yes, you must have enough numbers in the input for random selection.

If a Pvt corporation fails to deliver a bid or lies in customer features, then CEO is caned (Singapore style) and taken out of the next pool for random selection.

If a politician fails to deliver an election promise in his term, then politician is caned and taken out of the next pool for random selection. Randomly selected judges decide the severity of crime and magnitude of punishment.

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

#599

Post by infecto »

runarberg wrote: post #558
infecto wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, do you have anything constructive to add to the conversation? Your words are insulting and just putting words in my mouth. The Nasdaq 100 is not that special or unique. You’re comparing a quirky index to earthquakes which is weird. They don’t have much of any rules, the three month modification is maybe not great but also not that big of a deal. Price discovery is pretty quick and for the Nasdaq 100 it fits fo…

I am pointing out (what I think is) a logical fallacy you made earlier. This what your parent said: > The worst about the SpaceX IPO is Nasdaq changing their inclusion rules for the Nasdaq 100. And you replied with: > It would be shocking if we were talking about the SP500. My critique is that this is not a valid refutation of your parent’s original claim. If you don‘t think this is constructive, then that is on you.…

[flagged]

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

#600

Post by overlord1109 »

lokar wrote: post #219
fouc wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nasdaq, FTSE Russell, and CRSP all implemented fast-track options. Fortunately S&P kept its 12-month requirement.

CRSP has always had a short waiting period, they did not change it. They did lower the free float rule

CRSP did change their rule earlier in Feb, where they added a clause that later allowed SPCX to be included, despite having Source: https://www.crsp.org/crsp-market-indexes-changes-to-float-sh...
Post reply on HN