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

Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 560 posts

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#131

Post by capitainenemo »

mrhottakes wrote: post #126
capitainenemo wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only a fifth of spacex revenue is currently from government contracts, a percentage that they forecast will continue to trend downwards. (not to say that isn't a huge risk if it disappeared, it's just far from "completely dependent")

How much of their projected revenue is from AI that will never materialize?

shrug not interested in stock market speculation. That ⅕th figure is from 2025 actual revenue figures. The government percentage had dropped from 2024 where it was ¼.

It's variable though, and if DoD decides it wants a bunch of spy satellites or whatnot in orbit, you could see the percentage growing, along with their total revenue ofc.

It's just far from "completely dependent" which was my only objection.

Starlink obviously a huge part - $11½b revenue in 2025.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#132

Post by radicalbyte »

zardo wrote: post #115
vondur wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that how Facebook is ran too? Basically Zuckerberg's private company, that in theory is public?

Though (at least to my knowledge) Zuckerberg doesn't have a history of abusing his authority to make deals that advantage other companies he owns at the expense of Facebook. E.g. SpaceX buying up large numbers of Cybertrucks Tesla couldn't sell at MSRP, not even negotiating a good fleet sale deal.

Where did that $70B from the metaverse go to?

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#133

Post by Galanwe »

parliament32 wrote: post #109
Galanwe wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd love is some sort of trade that would eliminate my exposure to SpaceX You can just short SpaceX of an amount equivalent to its share of your SP500 holdings. You will have to pay borrowing costs though, but on something that liquid it will be very small.

Shorts have unlimited risk. Buying a put is risk-defined and probably a better strategy.

It's not just a short, it's a portfolio of X short + X long. It's effectively canceling perfectly.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#134

Post by svachalek »

LPisGood wrote: post #58
SilverElfin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VTI lists fast even before these recent changes as I recall. So it’s more vulnerable, not less.

It may list fast, but it covers many more securities from what I understand so it’s insulated. I think the fact is that any broad market ETF is gonna own at least some piece of a $1 trillion company.

The additional securities it includes are weighted by market cap though. So a total market fund ends up being 80% S&P 500, and even if they add thousands more companies those all fit in the 20% slot.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#135

Post by Galanwe »

jocaal wrote: post #128
BJones12 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because the unlimited risk of shorting is balanced (hedged) by the unlimited upside of holding the same number of shares via the ETF.

You cannot however sell only SpaceX shares from your ETF to cover your short's losses. So due to liquidity issues I wouldn't recommend your strategy.

What are you talking about? You don't need to touch anything about your ETF. You just have to short a single name on the side.

Also there is no liquidity issue, we're talking SP500 names here, you'll pay GC, which should be around 25bps as the other comment mentions.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#136

Post by svachalek »

stouset wrote: post #56
lokar wrote: post #10

How can I transfer my shares of VTI for an interest in this pension fund, before it’s too late?

VTI won’t really be affected by this. It’s based on the total market and not artificially limited to a small number of large companies. Plus it’s free-float adjusted so only the publicly-tradable portion of SpaceX is considered when weighting its inclusion so it will constitute only a small portion of the fund. There is also a (small) mandatory delay period which I don’t recall between it going public and it becoming…

NVDA is like 8% of SPY and 6.7% of VTI. So these mega tech stocks are less dominant in VTI, but it's not a night and day "won't really be affected" kind of difference.

And most index funds including Vanguard track an external index. So when the index changes the rules, Vanguard changes what it buys. Vanguard is also famous for always siding with the management, they take the activist side of any debate approximately 0% of the time, so don't expect them to be fighting this for you.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#137

Post by daft_pink »

parliament32 wrote: post #108
epistasis wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm usually a Boglehead, with some exceptions, and one exception I'd love is some sort of trade that would eliminate my exposure to SpaceX for the next few years. I'm sure there's some combo of options that would do it. Probably finding an ESG-focused ETF would do it. ESG basically meant "good governance, we follow laws" which translated into better governed public companies that therefore had better returns, as one…

> some sort of trade that would eliminate my exposure to SpaceX I think it's less complicated than you'd think.. just buy LEAPS puts proportional to your exposure.

LEAPS are very expensive.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#138

Post by daft_pink »

fluidcruft wrote: post #14

It's really concerning given how the indexes are changing rules to fast-track SpaceX being forced into index funds. S&P is also working on updates to S&P 500 to force it down everyone's throats quickly and algorithmically.

Apparently, the index funds are based on free float and since the number of free floating shares is limited, the total exposure to the index will be very small.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#139

Post by fsckboy »

mohsen1 wrote: post #22
fluidcruft wrote: post #14

It's really concerning given how the indexes are changing rules to fast-track SpaceX being forced into index funds. S&P is also working on updates to S&P 500 to force it down everyone's throats quickly and algorithmically.

There is a market for an S&P 500 ETF without those companies. I'll immediately switch over

you can buy S&P 500, and short the component companies you don't like, but caution, this will achieve the solvency you want, but you will likely remain irrational

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#140

Post by parliament32 »

BJones12 wrote: post #113
parliament32 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shorts have unlimited risk. Buying a put is risk-defined and probably a better strategy.

No, because the unlimited risk of shorting is balanced (hedged) by the unlimited upside of holding the same number of shares via the ETF.

Yeah you're not wrong. I didn't think about it that way because you can't really break something out of an ETF basket, and you also don't control the ETF basket, but if you think those risks are minimal it's probably fine to just compare dollars-to-dollars.

Personally I would still probably go with the long put strategy unless the price difference is exorbitant.

Post reply on HN