The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century • Hacker News Board

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#61

Post by prolly97 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:47 AM UTC

bmink wrote: post #43

prolly97 wrote: post #35

So this guy was pretty active in the TeslaQ community. They believed Tesla to be (extremely) overvalued in 2017-2019 on the grounds that they would never become profitable.. or something. They lost a lot of money shorting Tesla. https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/91aha1/montana... Anyways, seems like he's keeping the grudge alive. They were right about a couple of things back then. But majorly wrong in agg…

To be fair, few could have anticipated that Tesla and Musk would be unaffected by valid scrutiny and criticism. This is also addressed in the article: > E. DON’T TRY TO SHORT SPACEX!! > Elon Musk is a cult figure. Moreover, he has again and again proven himself immune to any meaningful market, legal, or regulatory scrutiny. > Musk’s detractors have been correct about Tesla’s terrible fundamentals, its Full Self-Drivi…

All that. But also he makes products so compelling that people who dislike him drives in them. "Fuck Elon" gotta be an all time top seller among bumper stickers.

> few could have anticipated that Tesla and Musk would be unaffected by valid scrutiny and criticism.

This almost implies that the scrutiny itself, and not the economic reality, should be the reason of Teslas demise or otherwise lesser financial outcome. Which seems a little self referential. If Elon doesn't wash his hands after peeing, and we pointed it out, that would be valid criticism. Ewww pee-hands. But the economic reality and aggregate outcome wouldn't change.

Like not even if the frontpage of WSJ, The Times or FT said "eww Elon pee-hands".

And that the thing - with enterprises of this scale, you could always nitpick and find some things that are suboptimal. But we gotta see it in proportion. 100mm accounting error in Tesla is not the same as a 100mm accounting error in the local McDonalds franchise. For one the error is magnitudes larger than their real economic footprint. For the other it's a rounding error.

TL;DR: I hear you - yes there is valid criticism. We just gotta see it in proportion. I like Teslas cars. But I don't like pee-hands.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#62

Post by Pooge » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 7:56 AM UTC

l23k4 wrote: post #48

mordae wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most have their pension automatically track index. Nasdaq changes rules so that the pension funds are forced to buy stock while very volatile and likely overpriced.

Those poor pension funds, unable to make their own decisions. Forced to keep all of their money in $NDX forever. It must be terrible to be so utterly powerless.

Pension funds use (you guessed it) index funds like your average passive investor.

Sure we can hate pension funds but fuck the management of those indexes.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#63

Post by l23k4 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:10 AM UTC

Pooge wrote: post #62

l23k4 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those poor pension funds, unable to make their own decisions. Forced to keep all of their money in $NDX forever. It must be terrible to be so utterly powerless.

Pension funds use (you guessed it) index funds like your average passive investor. Sure we can hate pension funds but fuck the management of those indexes.

Pension funds are perfectly capable of switching to a different product if they don't want index funds that reflect the market. But they do want index funds that actually reflect the market, so they want these rule changes.

The management of those indices is just doing exactly what the vast majority of their customers want.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#64

Post by l23k4 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:12 AM UTC

chii wrote: post #19

simonjgreen wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This IPO marks and inflection point where a fund that tracks whole market value shifts in definition, because of the forced rush value nature of the rule changes. If the fast entry rule changes hadn’t happened I would agree with you entirely.

The rule change where nasdaq adds a weighting factor to spacex's float is what causes distortions - it artificially increases the size of spacex's cap weight without actually having more shares. Fortunately, this only affects indices that follow nasdaq, and from what i know, no other index is following this. That means it's "safe" to purchase a globally diversified, cap weighted index fund (safe as in the float isn't…

[flagged]

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#65

Post by general1465 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:12 AM UTC

l23k4 wrote: post #60

general1465 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Grudge? I would say he was spot on. And he still is.

How exactly do those numbers add up in your mind? At around $60B valuation sometime in 2018, how was TeslaQ spot on? Are you maybe claiming that Tesla is lying in their current disclosures?

So what is the reason of Tesla having greater valuation than Toyota while making 3 car models and you can't connect Apple Car / Android Auto into either ?

Do you think that Kathie Woods trying to memestock Tesla to 2000USD/share is normal?

Or do you think that promises like 20 million cars / year within 2030 while having extremely limited amount of models were ever achievable?

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#66

Post by l23k4 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:16 AM UTC

gorgoiler wrote: post #29

Why do index funds follow the exact companies in the index itself? Is it simply a branding thing? I’m buying into S&P500 because S&P500 is a highly recognized term used to mean “The US Economy”? I feel that what this article is telling me is that passive funds are becoming active funds by way of manipulating the index itself. Kind of like if you’re passively invested in Brazil winning the World Cup but you can’t adju…

>I feel that what this article is telling me is that passive funds are becoming active funds by way of manipulating the index itself.

It's wrong. They're undoing a previous manipulation and making the index more accurately reflect the market.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#67

Post by l23k4 » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:19 AM UTC

general1465 wrote: post #65

l23k4 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly do those numbers add up in your mind? At around $60B valuation sometime in 2018, how was TeslaQ spot on? Are you maybe claiming that Tesla is lying in their current disclosures?

So what is the reason of Tesla having greater valuation than Toyota while making 3 car models and you can't connect Apple Car / Android Auto into either ? Do you think that Kathie Woods trying to memestock Tesla to 2000USD/share is normal? Or do you think that promises like 20 million cars / year within 2030 while having extremely limited amount of models were ever achievable?

Tesla has been able to demonstrate significant growth which Toyota hasn't.

>Do you think that Kathie Woods trying to memestock Tesla to 2000USD/share is normal?

Frankly, I don't see why any sane adult would care enough to have an opinion.

>Or do you think that promises like 20 million cars / year within 2030 while having extremely limited amount of models were ever achievable?

I doubt the timeline was, I don't see why the model range would really be an issue.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#68

Post by Veedrac » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:22 AM UTC

avaer wrote: post #15

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #5

This is just the dude that's famous for getting Tesla wrong constantly? If he's convinced it's going south it's probably an easy 100% gain from the IPO.

That's not an argument for. Maybe we don't want to live in a world of thievery, or be thieves ourselves.

You don't have to argue the opposite of a prediction to disbelieve sources with poor track records.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#69

Post by Pooge » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 8:52 AM UTC

l23k4 wrote: post #63

Pooge wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pension funds use (you guessed it) index funds like your average passive investor. Sure we can hate pension funds but fuck the management of those indexes.

Pension funds are perfectly capable of switching to a different product if they don't want index funds that reflect the market. But they do want index funds that actually reflect the market, so they want these rule changes. The management of those indices is just doing exactly what the vast majority of their customers want.

What? Absolutely not. They are doing what the President is telling them to do.

The customers of indexes are providers of funds (Vanguard, BlackRock, ...). In turn, people like you and me are clients of those providers.

Indexes are changing the rules thanks to lobbies by the world's richest people so they can get even richer by dumping their overvalued stocks.

If you are not a SpaceX investor, you are losing money. Including pension funds.

Re: The SpaceX IPO will be the theft of the century

#70

Post by onel » Thu, Jun 04, 2026, 9:05 AM UTC

l23k4 wrote: post #48

mordae wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most have their pension automatically track index. Nasdaq changes rules so that the pension funds are forced to buy stock while very volatile and likely overpriced.

Those poor pension funds, unable to make their own decisions. Forced to keep all of their money in $NDX forever. It must be terrible to be so utterly powerless.

That's not how pension funds work though. Pension funds are extremely conservative. They invest on horizons spanning decades. They can't just make decisions from one month to the next. The very short time frame of an index accepting Tesla is the problem. It's like telling a train "quick, make a right here"