hahaha jokes on you I have no money for retirement anyway

  • Yes, I laid it out in more detail in another reply, but index funds buy shares of every company in an index (S&P 500, NASDAQ, etc.) as a way of investing in the entire market or a sector. This is seen as very safe since presumably over the long term line goes up. By waiving all of these requirements all of these hedge funds and retirement funds that use these index funds will be forced to immediately buy huge numbers of SpaceX shares and pump up the price right after the IPO and then hold the bag as the price goes back down.

    • RNAi [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      But, why? If anyone can see that shit is not really worth their stupid self-asigned price, why would they actually buy that bag of shit?

      • radio_free_asgarthr [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        https://archive.vn/dqVcc

        This article goes over it briefly. But it doesn’t really cover how SpaceX got the waivers other than stating that index providers are becoming less risk averse and more willing to make these exceptions. It is just with the very large size of the SpaceX IPO and the fact that it is not profitable and its valuation being based on large scale space travel soon becoming a thing and everyone getting their internet from starlink soon that this is such an extremely bad idea.

          • Of all the stupid business plans… I really do not understand this. Who the fuck wants to go to “space”?

            Mars bases and colonization is what Musk tries to sell. Similarly asteroid mining, data centers and factories in space, and massively increased rollout of satellites. All of these are stupid because they all rely on massively over-inflating the upsides and really thoroughly underestimating the costs and expenses of doing things in space, even if we could theoretically put some of these things up there. The only plausible part of the plan that makes sense is increased demand for satellites, but that includes a lot of double-dealing, since Starlink is going to be a supposed driver of that.

            and everyone getting their internet from starlink

            Similarly I don’t think it is theoretically impossible. I have not looked at the numbers or how much of the electromagnetic spectrum that that would require with current technology, nor have I seen anyone else try to address it. But my feeling is that this is unlikely to work at that scale and would be prohibitively expensive to keep such a large covering of satellites in low earth orbit, aside from other issues like making ground based astronomy impossible and risk of space debris. I think this is the same thing as everything else, of just really trying to low ball and ignore the actual costs and just rely on the idea of “Musk launches a few more satellites and everyone can just get internet everywhere and we don’t have to maintain all of this pesky ground based infrastructure like wires and fiber”

          • 30_to_50_Feral_PAWGs [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            14 days ago

            I just wish that the billionaires lining up to shoot themselves into space on shoddily constructed hardware could find a less ecologically devastating way to do it, like maybe a really damn big trebuchet.

        • chgxvjh [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          everyone getting their internet from starlink soon that this is such an extremely bad idea.

          Literally dotcom bubble 2.0

          Well at least copper and fiber doesn’t deorbit and can be used for decades.

      • Honestly, I have not looked too deeply into how SpaceX got all of these waivers. I am guessing there are enough people holding equity in SpaceX with influence that can pull strings to get their exit liquidity. And they can try to justify it to rubes as SpaceX being the super future company that should be treated specially (It bought xAI, and is trying to sell itself as the future of internet through starlink and having control of all space travel when we all start moving to space and Mars bases any day now)

        • RNAi [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          So it’s the funds’ managers bankrupting their own funds? Just openly stealing from the company you manage by using all the company funds to buy magic beans from your cousin?

          Hmm, classic

          • radio_free_asgarthr [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            My understanding is that it is the index managers not the fund managers. Indicies started just as nice ways to track the market or sectors in one number (which is why in reporting and checking on the market you will see those numbers quoted). When an index fund decides to track an index and define and market themselves as doing it, the fund is legally obligated to follow the index. Several analysts at the FT has been complaining about how much power this gives the people in charge of the indicies and that most people haven’t really caught on to.

            Edit: to make it clear guys at something like Standards and Poor (S&P) decide on what to include in the index and the rules around it and then someone at a company like Blackrock or Vanguard markets an index fund that will track that index to investors. So in this hypothetical, it is S&P screwing over Vanguard investors.