12 ms·

Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

286 points by leopoldj 4mo ago

kingleopold 4mo ago
[flagged]
- leopoldj 4mo ago
  New York City Comptrollers published similar concerns [1]. I suppose you could apply your point equally to NYC these days :-) 1. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/letter-to-spacex-re-ipo-from-nyc-comptroller-levine-nys-comptroller-dinapoli-and-calpers-ceo-frost/ https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/letter-to-spacex-re-ipo-...
  - kingleopold 4mo ago
    YES, remember who they elected in NYC :)
    - malcolmgreaves 4mo ago
      A mayor who balanced the city’s budget.
      - leopoldj 4mo ago
        the balance heavily relies on a mix of state bailouts and new tax revenues
        sehansen 4mo ago
        Increasing taxes is a textbook method of balancing government budgets.
    - BigTTYGothGF 4mo ago
      It's pretty surprising considering all the bums they've elected over the previous few decades.
  - rayiner 4mo ago
    [flagged]
    - malcolmgreaves 4mo ago
      With their balanced budget and no social services cut?
      - rayiner 4mo ago
        What "balanced budget?" Mamdani got a massive bailout from the state of New York, and deferred pension payments. It's classic third worldism, made possible by a low-information electorate that not only can't do the math, but lacks instinctual skepticism of the idea of a free lunch. Chicago went down the same path, and found that these gimmicks work until they don't.
- parliament32 4mo ago
  Why would you expect "future growth" from something that's literally making negative dollars? If you take a step back it makes zero sense.
red-iron-pine 4mo ago
is anyone surprised? the IPO documents are a disaster, and the finance-tube talking heads are all tearing it to shreds
rvz 4mo ago
Good. Would love to buy SpaceX stock at a 90% discount after the IPO and the next tech / AI correction.
- hparadiz 4mo ago
  Imagine not wanting to own a piece of the first company to make a re-usable orbital class booster.
  - 43fg 4mo ago
    [dead]
  - horsawlarway 4mo ago
    Yeah, I also don't want to eat a tasty morsel if you roll it around in the dirt and serve it up covered in bugs and hair. And that's basically what SpaceX is right now after you account for xAI and twitter in the mix. So I'd love to own a piece of the SpaceX from a decade ago - but the current offering smells pretty bad. Combined with the fact that at this point, Musk clearly isn't opposed to running a business with dramatically inflated valuations based on vaporware, lies, & hype (cough - Tesla - cough) it just makes me far more skeptical than I might otherwise be. I think caution is warranted here. Essentially - I want to own the SpaceX that could have been if we didn't end up with the shoddy k-hole version of musk in charge of things.
    - hparadiz 4mo ago
      The current SpaceX is in a far better financial and operational position than 10 years ago. By an order of magnitude. 90% of all payload to orbit right now is SpaceX alone. Starlink is profitable all on it's own. Right now. And they are just now picking up steam. American Airlines just signed onto Starlink just last week. This company is most likely gonna be the Coca-Cola of transportation between celestial bodies in solar system for the next 500 years but people on here are arguing over peanuts. On HN of all places.
      - 4mo ago
SilverElfin 4mo ago
It’s obviously a scam. First xai acquires failing Twitter and then SpaceX acquires xai? At a made up valuation number that’s too high? The voting structure of SpaceX prevents Elon from ever being held accountable. Not to mention that the revenue and profits are simply not enough to justify the desired value.
- nolok 4mo ago
  Merging the failling companies into the other ones is the usual Elon thing, Solar City didn't get acqui-merged into Tesla for its great result. It's not a "scam" in the traditionnal sense, it's riding the bubble while it's there, stock value is "supposed" to be about the company performance and potential but technically it doesn't have to be, it's about what some people are willing to pay for it (the stock, not the product the company sells) and that's all. That's also why tesla has such a valuation. You can see it in the comments even here and other thread about this IPO, some people read the numbers, and some have just religious sounding comments about it being the biggest revolution ever or making the history book etc ... And that's also why they need to keep elon as CEO because in the scenario where they remove it and get the best car company CEO and become a great regular car company that works and ships lots of great car ... Their valuation would be reduced a factor of ten
  - Danox 4mo ago
    It’s a scam and the party will be over when Tesla finally bites the dust, and it will. The worldwide trajectory is not in their favor.
    - eberkund 4mo ago
      What makes you say that? Chinese EVs?
      - nolok 4mo ago
        Not parent, but Tesla is currently worth more in the stock market than the ten biggest car seller combined That's with falling sales, with no new product in sight and their latest release a big dud (despite SpaceX ordering massive amount of it to prop it up), and with a pricing and thus margin that is going to be massively lowered or beaten by Chinese ev. Protectionism by the US can only go so far, the US alone doesn't have a trillion dollar worthy car market. They're also losing the race in self driving, and the biggest innovation in EV (semi instant charging) is coming from China not from them. They had a lead and a massively advantageous legal situation and they squandered it, now you add the association of Elon to the brand making it toxic in many places and it's not looking rosy, the brand can be fine but it's valuation at one point or another will have a wake up day.
thesimon 4mo ago
Matt Levine described it well (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-05-21/spacex-investors-can-t-complain https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-05-21/spa...) > The deal, with SpaceX, is that Elon Musk runs it however he wants, and he does weird stuff, and you have to trust him, and if you don’t like it you can’t complain. > When SpaceX acquired xAI a few months ago, did a special committee of independent directors approve the transaction? Did Musk recuse himself from negotiations? Was the price set by independent valuation experts using a rigorous process? Did outside shareholders sue to block the deal? Stop. Musk wanted SpaceX to buy xAI, so it did. > [...] Surely SpaceX has created all that shareholder value more because Musk does what he wants than in spite of Musk doing what he wants; it is hard to accidentally create $1.75 trillion of value. SpaceX’s shareholders signed up for this deal — letting Musk cook — and have been rewarded;
- vondur 4mo ago
  Isn't that how Facebook is ran too? Basically Zuckerberg's private company, that in theory is public?
  - tonetheman 4mo ago
    [dead]
  - grassfedgeek 4mo ago
    Right, if Meta had good governance Zuck wouldn't have been allowed to invest so much in Metaverse.
  - jdgoesmarching 4mo ago
    Tech bros reinvent autocracy
  - stefan_ 4mo ago
    Facebook is still a Delaware company, with lots of established case law for what Zuckerberg can and can not do, voting majority or not. SpaceX is now some Texas corporation with a state legislature ready to enable whatever Musk wants.
lokar 4mo ago
How can I transfer my shares of VTI for an interest in this pension fund, before it’s too late?
- tgv 4mo ago
  BY getting a job in Denmark in the sector that this pension fund covers. It's a "member-owned pension fund for academics."
- stouset 4mo ago
  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 included in the index which should give time for the SpaceX valuation to stabilize on something notionally realistic. Thankfully, Vanguard and its member funds are investor-owned so are likely more resilient against someone like Elon trying to change the rules.
  - lokar 4mo ago
    The index they use is altering the rules. I complained to my account rep, he agreed it was not great and is asking the fund mgmt what the plan is. I doubt there is a lot they can do.
    - ambicapter 4mo ago
      VTI > Seeks to track the performance of the CRSP US Total Market Index. The index that is changing its rules is the NASDAQ100, commonly referred to as the NASDAQ, although NASDAQ is also the name of the exchange.
      - lokar 4mo ago
        https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/morningstar-considers-revamping-index-construction-ahead-spacex-ipo-2026-04-20/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/morningstar-conside... Morningstar said its CRSP Market Indexes will "undergo enhancements to introduce an alternative liquidity screen", making it possible to add SpaceX and other giant IPOs to these benchmarks more rapidly. The funds that use the CRSP indexes as a portfolio benchmark include Vanguard's $607 billion Total Stock Market ETF.
DivingForGold 4mo ago
[flagged]
- gmerc 4mo ago
  Calm down Grok
hparadiz 4mo ago
[flagged]
- NuclearPM 4mo ago
  ???
- wizzwizz4 4mo ago
  Can you provide an example of a history book that lists minor shareholders of companies?
  - hparadiz 4mo ago
    https://old.reddit.com/r/EconomicHistory/comments/zynvvq/who_invested_in_the_dutch_east_india_company_an/ https://old.reddit.com/r/EconomicHistory/comments/zynvvq/who... Their names are known and are part of history now. Maybe not famous but certainly better than being a forgotten weathered tomb stone after 5 centuries.
    - wizzwizz4 4mo ago
      Those appear to be major shareholders.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
fluidcruft 4mo ago
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.
- aNoob7000 4mo ago
  Add Anthropic and OpenAI to the list. Companies that are bleeding money. Personally, a company should be making money before adding it to the index.
  - hparadiz 4mo ago
    [flagged]
    - alpha_squared 4mo ago
      > Because from where I'm sitting it seems like you're just operating on hopes and feels. I hate these flippant comments. Similarly, from where I'm sitting it seems you're struggling to disentangle revenue from profit.
      - hparadiz 4mo ago
        I buy 50 billion of hardware. Make 45 billion back in year 1. My losses are 5 billion. I Pay of all my creditors by year two. Then spend another 55 billion on hardware in the second half of year two. My profit is at this point zero. <you are here> By year three I am printing money. It's not a flippant comment. It's basic math.
        zzleeper 4mo ago
        Sorry that's confusing cash flow with profits, where things get amortized
        rchaud 4mo ago
        It's not basic math when the numbers are this big. There's not going to be $50 billion coming in Year 3 if there's a market correction and lenders scale back financing. Borrowed money is how companies are paying for AI, and that's the first thing that disappears in a recession.
zerotolerance 4mo ago
Should have renamed the company xGoodwill.
pu_pe 4mo ago
Wouldn't the same argument apply against Tesla?
- fuglede_ 4mo ago
  https://akademikerpension.dk/nyheder/vi-ekskluderer-tesla/ https://akademikerpension.dk/nyheder/vi-ekskluderer-tesla/
ArchieScrivener 4mo ago
[dead]
kome 4mo ago
again, i’ve been posting this a lot recently, but i still think it’s worth sharing: it’s a summary of an academic paper i wrote, “it’s not finance, it’s your pensions” https://theloop.ecpr.eu/its-not-finance-its-your-pensions/ https://theloop.ecpr.eu/its-not-finance-its-your-pensions/ the piece explains how modern finance is de facto built on the shoulders of the privatization of the welfare state. i find it particularly relevant here: the finance class - in this case musk - wants pensioners money via mutual funds, even modifying the rules of indexing... it’s not a great sight tbh.
formvoltron 4mo ago
prediction: SpaceX will not escape Earth's gravity. Meaning... what goes up will come down.
jmyeet 4mo ago
The part that gets me is that changing of the rules by exchanges and financial regulators to essentially force mass purchases on a small float. That's disgusting and in a just world, those people would go to jail. The funny part of all this is that SpaceX has achieved a lot but what might break them, or at least weigh them down heavily, is the impulsive and forced purchase of Twitter. Before anyone claims it was some kind of master plan, Elon went to court to get out of it but was forced into it [1]. What happened? Mass firings, pushing his own tweets because his fragile ego couldn't handle Joe Biden getting more likes [2] and Twitter opened the floodgates for hate speech [3] and worse [4]. Advertisers fled. Fidelity (who foolishly was part of the acquisition) massively wrote down the value [5]. Elon had used Tesla shares as collateral and was possibly facing a margin call. How did he get out of it? Well, in 2023 Elon founded xAI to challenge OpenAI. People invested in this for some reason. And by 2025, Elon merged Twitter with xAI, overvaluing Twitter at $33 billion (which is still down 25% from the purchase) [6]. Now, I imagine the xAI investors were unhappy with Elon using xAI to bail out himself so what did he do? Easy. Make SpaceX acquire xAI of course [7]. Thing is, xAI and Twitter/Grok are a massive drain on SpaceX's finances, losing more than $10 billion annually allegedly [8]. Twitter did not have to end up as part of SpaceX. SpaceX would've been a better company without it. SpaceX already faces headwinds from the incredibly expensive and behind-schedule Starship program. Part of all of this regulatory fixing is to make sure the insiders (and Elon himself) get bailed out. It's also not the first time [9]. [1]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/elon-musk-offers-to-end-legal-fight-pay-44-billion-to-buy-twitter https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/elon-musk-offers-to-end... [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/15/elon-musk-changes-twitter-algorithm-super-bowl-slump-report https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/15/elon-musk... [3]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/technology/twitter-hate-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/technology/twitter-hate-s... [4]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/27/twitter-csam-dom-lucre-elon-musk/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/27/twitter... [5]: https://www.axios.com/2023/10/29/fidelity-twitter-x-value-elon-musk https://www.axios.com/2023/10/29/fidelity-twitter-x-value-el... [6]: https://www.fintechweekly.com/magazine/articles/xai-acquires-x-twitter-merger-elon-musk-ai https://www.fintechweekly.com/magazine/articles/xai-acquires... [7]: https://www.reuters.com/business/musks-spacex-merge-with-xai-combined-valuation-125-trillion-bloomberg-news-2026-02-02/ https://www.reuters.com/business/musks-spacex-merge-with-xai... [8]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-17/musk-s-xai-burning-through-1-billion-a-month-as-costs-pile-up https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-17/musk-s-xa... [9]: https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/21/13698314/tesla-completes-acquisition-solarcity-elon-musk https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/21/13698314/tesla-completes...
amarant 4mo ago
Any chance of bypassing the paywall? Does someone have a archive link perhaps?
- iso1631 4mo ago
  Pay perhaps? Or do you work for free?
  - explodes 4mo ago
    You don't subscribe to twenty five news outlets, what are you, a freeloader? /s
- mikeodds 4mo ago
  Just prepend url with archive.is/ if you want to check
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
- frm88 4mo ago
  Here you go: https://archive.ph/dsVfR https://archive.ph/dsVfR
  - amarant 4mo ago
    Thanks! Looks like they have a rather reasonable take. I agree that spaceX has some very impressive capabilities and there is no doubt that their engineering talent is the best in the world in their field, but 1.8T is indeed a ridiculously high number! I interpret their management risk analysis as being more about the buss factor of 1 than it being about not liking musk, which I also think is a reasonable take.
LightBug1 4mo ago
Good for Denmark. Yeah, for all the technical excellence by Shotwell and the team ... I don't want my ETF's and pensions buying into that piece of shit CEO and his corrupt 'at a whim' entity manipulation. Sorry, fuck SpaceX
- wg0 4mo ago
  Now are we going to bomb Denmark? Or Venezuela style? Greenland of course is part of Miami anyway so that needs to be regaineed ASAP which is another top priority.
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
mikewarot 4mo ago
That's a great start, now they need to add pretty much anything swept up in the AI Ponzi scheme that NVidia and others are running. The circular money flows are astounding once on see them. LLMs and "AI" is great, until you actually have to pay for it an an un-subsidized price. I'm working to do that locally, on a machine I control, for my own personal uses. (I'm old, and retired) The whole market is running on fumes, most of the actual value of the physical economy has been extracted by the Epstein class. It will not be pretty when it implodes, and people have to actually make things for a living again. (I've worked in a job shop, making gears, I know what its like).
throwfaraway135 4mo ago
The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.
- gbil 4mo ago
  >Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me
  - adamiscool8 4mo ago
    Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.
    - close04 4mo ago
      Musk appears far less predictibile, more volatile than Zuck. Musk also got directly involved in US politics aligned with of a man who singlehandedly butchered US relations with almost everyone in the world. A man who threatened Denmark with taking their territory by force. You’re calling it “political motivation” as some sort of blind hate or vendetta out of principle, cutting off the nose to spite the face. But you can no longer separate Musk from politics and aggression towards Denmark. The pension fund’s assessment looks entirely valid, objective and justifiable to me. But for anyone who personally favors Musk and his political views any dismissal will look politically motivated. It’s easy to cry foul. In this light your shallow dismissal might be just as politically motivated.
    - spacebanana7 4mo ago
      Google too, and this was in the long term best interests of shareholders. Imagine in 2010 if investors had real transparency into how much money YouTube or Maps was losing, along with the governance structures to enforce their concerns.
Hamuko 4mo ago
I've recently been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have. I really don't want my investments to be in SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic.
- andsoitis 4mo ago
  > been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have What’s holding you back? And what alternative investments are you considering? I recently did homework to decide whether to double down on VOO (S&P 500 index) or to diversify via VXUS (ex-US index), and concluded VOO is better for my risk-adjusted ROI outlook and time horizon.
  - Hamuko 4mo ago
    Momentum, really. I usually just buy more of a given fund and don't really take any out. My small portfolio is split across different funds, so I'd probably just split around the money I'd withdraw from the US-based ones into the other ones.
  - gigatexal 4mo ago
    Same. Though I’m 85%+ VOOG
- spacebanana7 4mo ago
  Why not Anthropic? They’re a very rare company capable of charging $200 per month per seat level fee across the corporate workforce. Yes their compute costs are astronomical, but that can be managed down over time by more efficiency or mild enshittification that doesn’t create too much churn.
  - Hamuko 4mo ago
    Because I don't really trust any of them, and I don't believe that the business is self-sustainable. At the moment we're in a phase where CTOs are able to withdraw money from the corporate bank accounts to be "on the cutting edge", but I don't think that's going to last. I'd rather have my money in something else.
seydor 4mo ago
I mean it isn't like it was automatically included.
jonasf1337 4mo ago
hope my Danish pension fund PFA doesn't do the same
brikym 4mo ago
I really want a QQQ/VOO replacement that excludes these new rushed IPOs that are just exit liquidity. There are ETFs that exclude harmful industries like gambling, weapons and tobacco. How about an ETF that doesn't include IPOs for six months or until insider lock ups periods are over.
- lain98 4mo ago
  VTI avoids these issues. It's float adjusted market cap weighted. More float allows better price discovery. So a company like spacex has negligible weight.
  - u1hcw9nx 4mo ago
    So are other major index funds. That's not the problem. The problem is that the NASDAQ 100 and most likely also S&P 500, change their rules to permit SpaceX to be added early without traditional time for price discovery. It happens jsut five trading days before the major index rebalance. After float adjustment SpaceX could be 1% of NASDAQ and 0.7% of SP500, but after full tranche escalation that takes over 130 days, SpaceX weight can be over 3% of NASDAQ and almost 2% of SP500 if the market cap stays near $1.5T. (I think the price will decrease, so the weight will be smaller) This is just a ploy to get exit liqudity as brikym, said. SpaceX collects enough capital to pay Twitter acquisition loans and then some, but the IPO not major boost for SpaceX finances. The coming merger with Tesla is clearly in the plans (C stocks).
    - brikym 4mo ago
      > five trading days before the major index rebalance. I didn't realize this. That's really scammy.
      - vkou 4mo ago
        Musk in a nutshell, but as long as the stock price goes up everyone looks the other way.
beardyw 4mo ago
[flagged]
- tomaskafka 4mo ago
  Or tell Trump to start a war with them.
  - BYazfVCcq 4mo ago
    I'm pretty sure Trump threatening to invade Greenland/Denmark played a part in the decision to not invest in the company.
runeks 4mo ago
I wanted to see how well Akademikerpension has done wrt. returns. This graph shows average yearly return from the financial crisis 2009 until 2021 and they are actually the best performing among other Danish pension funds [1]. [1] https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensionsselskabers-afkast-2009-21.png https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensions...
- adamtulinius 4mo ago
  Ah, time to dump Velliv it seems.
  - hosteur 4mo ago
    Well, often you don't get to "dump" your pension fund. In Denmark, it is your employer deciding what pension fund to use, and you will then have to use it. It is kinda ridiculous.
    - sehansen 4mo ago
      AFAIK only pension contributions mentioned in a collective bargaining agreement is mandatory. If you get offered a regular contract offering a salary plus 10% pension you can accept the job, write an email to HR stating that you opt out and get the extra 10% as take home pay. You can the make voluntary pension contributions to whatever pension fund you have a private agreement with. And all the private pension companies are very happy to make such an agreement, though the terms will be worse than an employer plan from the same company. Or you could do a completely self-administered one, e.g. through Nordnet.
- NoahZuniga 4mo ago
  Judging a pension fund by how it performs in a bull market seems wrong. Like their main job is to limit your downside from market crashes (if they're not doing that then they offer nothing compared to an index fund), so its strange to not include 2008 crisis (or .com bubble popping). Checking this shows that the top 2 performers in this graph lost more money (~8%) in 2008 than the bottom 2 (~2%)
ksimukka 4mo ago
(Apologies for the bad grammar, my son was born a little over 24 hours ago. I’m choosing not to use a LLM, so you are getting the real me) Even sovereign funds (example Norway) are invested in American tech, funds, and indexes. It is interesting to think about (from the perspective of an immigrant to Norway) how I moved my life’s savings from the US to Norway. I’m now fully invested into Norway (real estate, savings, and retirement). My understand is that Norwegians (and the nordics) have historically looked up to the US as a world leader. I think that is no longer true and maybe this decision by Denmark is a data point of how the Nordics are changing? It kind of feels like we all have been caught holding the bag (US reserve currency) and now we have to carefully unwind our position. I’ve lost my point. Maybe my goal here is to just contribute to this discussion to distract from the exhaustion.
- l23k4 4mo ago
  >I think that is no longer true and maybe this decision by Denmark is a data point of how the Nordics are changing? No, this is just standard pension fund governance.
  - ksimukka 4mo ago
    Right, that makes sense. I assume it happens often as part of the governance process. my original statement could have be better phrased as a question. What are your thoughts on the general consensus of Nordics views and opinions about the US?
- shivpat 4mo ago
  Get off your phone and enjoy the time lol - journal instead if you must write something
  - yokoprime 4mo ago
    Gatekeeping is never a good look.
- pimeys 4mo ago
  As a Nordic (Finland), I think this is true. In the history, US has been always admired and we've loved to travel there and cherish the culture. Damn, I was there when Conan O'Brien traveled to Helsinki, and greeting him with this massive crowd of people who really love him. I married an American, I've traveled through the country multiple times with my partner. Love the food, people, the nature, the cities. But this has definitely changed for me now. The idea of crossing the border and having to flip a coin is the border control guy a nice guy or not is not appealing as a diabetic who needs his phone to be with him untampered and who doesn't want to sit in a cell somewhere for days/weeks because they posted a funny meme of a person you can't joke about. Or who just witnesses this absolute inequality happening, and who witnesses the leaders of this country coming to my country and giving their support for parties who want me to not marry and who doesn't want to see me existing. I am just tired. And sad. I wish I could get our relationship back with the US but I don't know... Even if we backtrack from here, get back to the "olden times", it will take a moment until I can enjoy US again. P.S. Conan is still a treasure!
swingboy 4mo ago
Apologies for the naivety, but, why is SpaceX valued so high? Starlink? Are rockets really a lucrative business? Don’t get me wrong, being able to send objects up into orbit is cool, but is it $1.8T cool?
- Hendrikto 4mo ago
  Because of the Musk reality distortion field. The claim is that all data centers will move into space, and that SpaceX will completely own that market.
  - UltraSane 4mo ago
    I truly do not understand why anyone believes anything Musk says anymore.
    - bar000n 4mo ago
      could it be that those people don't actually believe him and just appreciate the genuine shit-show he puts up enabling them to laugh at people who get sad about what he says, and their eagerness to believe
      - Forgeties79 4mo ago
        “Pretending” to be a fan of a troll because he tries to troll people who think he’s a troll is a good thing…?
  - Izmaki 4mo ago
    This sounds amazing until something needs replacement. Until data centers on earth has a 99.99% (or higher) level of autonomous operation with very minimal requirements to maintenance and part replacements, they're not sending anything into orbit...
    - eigenspace 4mo ago
      I also sounds amazing until you remember how hard it is to cool something when your only option is radiative cooling.
dbg31415 4mo ago
Good move. Elon is rigging the stock market and getting index funds to invest in companies that are over-valued and thus not stable. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sYA-z0Y8WRQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sYA-z0Y8WRQ
throw672 4mo ago
American gov is gonna invade Greenland for sure for not cooperating with american conmen
zdc1 4mo ago
With schemes like SpaceX, and the general number of large-cap-but-negative-earnings companies trading on the market, I feel like the conventional wisdom of DCA and chill / just passively buy the index will turn into an underperforming strategy vs a slightly more active or opinionated approach.
- dools 4mo ago
  Just buy ETFs of index funds that only include dividend paying stocks
- Npovview 4mo ago
  Another factor. TINA. There is no alternative.
- sega_sai 4mo ago
  In my understanding some index funds i.e. FTSE Russel ones will include spacex with the weight based on the floated stocks, so in practice the weight in the index will be small enough in All Cap etc indices. So I decided for myself it is not a cause for concern. But I think now it is the time to look for index providers who do not decide to bend the rules for short term gain (i.e. S&P and Nasdaq).
  - HWR_14 4mo ago
    SpaceX is responded to the float issues by having a continuous increase in the unlocked stock available on the market. And NASDAQ was the first index to promise a quick inclusion of spacex.
- alex_suzuki 4mo ago
  But isn’t “passively buying the index” still exposed to this, at least if you’re not buying “equal weight” version? Dividend stocks sounds even more appealing to me, I read that as “companies that are generating stable profits now”.
devlovstad 4mo ago
I have AkademikerPension as my pension fund through work and this move suits me quite well. They've already excluded Tesla as well as a variety of companies that profit of weapon production, fossil fuel production or are suspected for human rights violations. https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selskaber/ https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selsk...
- petterroea 4mo ago
  In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals" Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.
  - petesergeant 4mo ago
    That’s exactly what you would want your money manager to say. It’s their job to turn a profit. In turn you also want democratically elected politicians above that saying “yes, but the people want their money made ethically, so you can’t do that”.
    - petterroea 4mo ago
      Of course, some back-and-forwards is healthy. In a good system both sides fight for their interests, and the outcome is some middle road compromise that optimizes for everyone's benefit.
    - Natfan 4mo ago
      sorry, but i wouldn't want my money manager to attempt to engage in unethical or illegal practices in order to turn a profit...
      - chabska 4mo ago
        The point is that it's the job of the democratic legislature to codify what you just stated here into law, so that all money managers have to abide by this standard, not just those that have a personal conviction for it. That's the essence of rule of law.
andyjohnson0 4mo ago
For those commenting that this decision may have a political element: Greenland is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Musk is a prominent Trump/MAGA supporter, and Trump has threatened to annex Greenland by force. SpaceX is part of Trump's Golden Dome project, and one of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems.
- johneth 4mo ago
  All good points, but I think their main point of poor governance is still the pure motivation.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - detourdog 4mo ago
    The governance issues seem much worse than the other issues with pricing and inclusion.
- amelius 4mo ago
  Then why not hedge? If they take Greenland at least they have their pensions.
- myk9001 4mo ago
  > ... part of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems. Nothing is stopping the US from deploying those in Greenland right now. The only reason Trump wants Greenland is he's not all there -- Greenland looks big on the map so he's fixated on it.
  - andyjohnson0 4mo ago
    > Nothing is stopping the US from deploying those in Greenland That would require the (politically unlikely) agreement of the Danish government. See article 2 of the relevant treaty [1]: "...establishing and/or operating such defense areas as the two Governments, on the basis of NATO defense plans, may from time to time agree to be necessary..." > The only reason Trump wants Greenland is he's not all there -- Greenland looks big on the map so he's fixated on it. I agree that that is part of it, but there is more to it than that. [1] https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp
neonstatic 4mo ago
I am waiting to see if the same outrage will be in place when Anthropic and OpenAI go public. This surely isn't just a dislike of a certain individual, is it?
paulbjensen 4mo ago
The Financial Times' Unhedged Podcast covered the SpaceX IPO recently and highlighted the same issues that the Danish pension fund raised concerns about. https://www.ft.com/content/a401b0c0-fcc0-4bae-9f57-e8d5c0957a70 https://www.ft.com/content/a401b0c0-fcc0-4bae-9f57-e8d5c0957...
- windexh8er 4mo ago
  I enjoyed this piece the most [0]. [0] https://www.profgmedia.com/p/spacex-stasy https://www.profgmedia.com/p/spacex-stasy
Alifatisk 4mo ago
I am thinking of moving over my investments from S&P 500 to S&P 500 ESG, as they have excluded SpaceX and Tesla.
- jcoyne 4mo ago
  $XVV (iShares ESG Select Screened S&P 500 ETF) holds $TSLA
  - stkdump 4mo ago
    SRI and ESG advanced funds exclude Tesla.
  - Alifatisk 4mo ago
    Damn you're right.
noodlesUK 4mo ago
I think European countries need to get serious about investing money locally. The UK is a particularly egregious example but it’s taking begging and pleading with the mansion house accord to even convince pensions to try to invest in the UK economy. Every country should make a portion of local (at least within Europe) investment a prerequisite for whatever favourable tax treatment pensions and similar products get. So much wealth is tied up in pensions and it’s folly to let it all go to supporting the U.S. and eschew local investment altogether.
- petra 4mo ago
  Does the EU has an index that is competitive with the SP500 over the long term?
- OtherShrezzing 4mo ago
  I partially agree, but if my private pension needed to invest into the underperforming FTSE250 by law, I’d just opt out of that system and put my savings into a US/Emerging-markets index myself. I’m not patriotic enough to spaff my compound interest opportunity on a bunch of dying tobacco, oil, & mineral extraction companies to put any of it to work in the FTSE250.
  - dijit 4mo ago
    A lot of those investments are self-fulfilling though.
  - xyzsparetimexyz 4mo ago
    I don't think regular people should have a say where their pensions are invested. It should automatically be in what's best long term for the country they live in.
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
    - endymi0n 4mo ago
      Kids and their wellbeing and education might be a good start…
bluecalm 4mo ago
The issue is raised a lot but there is less and less time and I don't think it will hit mainstream before IPO is done and pension funds/passive investors will be forced to buy it. It really does look bad: low float multiplier rule (that will overweight SpaceX) introduced very recently, fast inclusion mechanism, insiders being allowed to sell faster than usual etc. It all looks like an orchestrated dump into passive investors/pension funds/other ETF holders. Investing in IPOs is a terrible strategy historically. Here we have several mega IPOs incoming with rules being re-designed just for them to be included faster in your "passive" portfolio.
- HWR_14 4mo ago
  It will overweight SpaceX less than the old rule which was binary and weighed at 100% as soon as the float passed 10%. Which based on rolling lockout periods will probably be in the fall.
whodidntante 4mo ago
If you do not like Elon, you can simply move your assets to a direct indexing fund, there are plenty of them at reasonable cost, including from the large brokerages. If you believe SpaceX is overvalued or do not like the way it is being handled by the big index funds, again, use direct indexing. akademikerpension is pretty decent fund, it is about 50/50 asset allocation, losing out by only .9% per year compare to a US equity/bond portfolio. Better than many active funds: https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensionsselskabers-afkast-2009-21.png https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensions... https://testfol.io/?s=h8azNZvMICk https://testfol.io/?s=h8azNZvMICk You do not like the valuation ? What should a company that launches 98% of the world's non government tonnage to space (80% if you include the Chinese government) be valued at ? The only company that has figured out how to very reliably launch at a sustained and rapid pace ? Pioneered and is perfecting rocket reuseability ? The only thing we can can say with a degree of certainty is that $2T is either very overvalued or very undervalued. If you believe that space will become a huge part of our economy in the future, and believe that SpaceX will play a significant role, $2T is cheap. Dirt cheap. The only way to prosper is to be bold. For all those who come here to say that they do not like Elon or that the valuation is ridiculous, or that SpaceX will not succeed, that is perfectly fine - you are just a few clicks away from making it happen. Sell your assets and buy a direct indexing product, simply buy the stocks you want, buy ex-US, or any other number of options you can do on your phone with a few clicks. Less clicks than it takes to virtue signal on this forum.
- wewtyflakes 4mo ago
  That strategy would be a taxable event.
  - whodidntante 4mo ago
    There is a high correlation between wealth and taxable accounts. For those that are not well off to have large taxable accounts and have most of their assets in retirement funds, this should not be an issue.
    - wewtyflakes 4mo ago
outside1234 4mo ago
We need Calpers (California pension fund) and others to do this as well.
ornornor 4mo ago
I wish they didn’t manage to change the nasdaq rules, forcing a lot of index ETFs to buy spacex at IPO, whatever the price. Edit: glad to see vanguard VT tracks FTSE which isn’t impacted. The amount of overvalued spacex stock in VT will be minimal down the line as they use the amount of publicly available shares to calculate the weight in the index, which is the more sensible way to do it, Musk’s scam not withstanding.
sgt101 4mo ago
Sgt101's pension fund has excluded SpaceX for similar reasons. But, if the index funds don't then there are going to be quite a few shares dumped to make room for the SpaceX share. This could be interesting.
pickleRick243 4mo ago
I'm just curious- how many of you changed your portfolio allocation last April because "obviously" the Trump tariffs would tank the market? If you had similar thoughts when TSLA joined the S&P 500, what are your thoughts on its performance since then? You are welcome to your investment opinions, but just know the level of sophistication here is more or less comparable to a wallstreetbets thread telling people to diamond hand Gamestop. At least there, what they accomplished was surprisingly clever- force liquidating short hedge funds via a bunch of shitposting.

286 points by leopoldj 4mo ago

kingleopold 4mo ago

[flagged]

leopoldj 4mo ago
New York City Comptrollers published similar concerns [1]. I suppose you could apply your point equally to NYC these days :-) 1. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/letter-to-spacex-re-ipo-from-nyc-comptroller-levine-nys-comptroller-dinapoli-and-calpers-ceo-frost/ https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/letter-to-spacex-re-ipo-...
- kingleopold 4mo ago
  YES, remember who they elected in NYC :)
  - malcolmgreaves 4mo ago
    A mayor who balanced the city’s budget.
    - leopoldj 4mo ago
      the balance heavily relies on a mix of state bailouts and new tax revenues
      - sehansen 4mo ago
        Increasing taxes is a textbook method of balancing government budgets.
  - BigTTYGothGF 4mo ago
    It's pretty surprising considering all the bums they've elected over the previous few decades.
- rayiner 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - malcolmgreaves 4mo ago
    With their balanced budget and no social services cut?
    - rayiner 4mo ago
      What "balanced budget?" Mamdani got a massive bailout from the state of New York, and deferred pension payments. It's classic third worldism, made possible by a low-information electorate that not only can't do the math, but lacks instinctual skepticism of the idea of a free lunch. Chicago went down the same path, and found that these gimmicks work until they don't.
parliament32 4mo ago
Why would you expect "future growth" from something that's literally making negative dollars? If you take a step back it makes zero sense.

red-iron-pine 4mo ago

is anyone surprised? the IPO documents are a disaster, and the finance-tube talking heads are all tearing it to shreds

rvz 4mo ago

Good. Would love to buy SpaceX stock at a 90% discount after the IPO and the next tech / AI correction.

hparadiz 4mo ago
Imagine not wanting to own a piece of the first company to make a re-usable orbital class booster.
- 43fg 4mo ago
  [dead]
- horsawlarway 4mo ago
  Yeah, I also don't want to eat a tasty morsel if you roll it around in the dirt and serve it up covered in bugs and hair. And that's basically what SpaceX is right now after you account for xAI and twitter in the mix. So I'd love to own a piece of the SpaceX from a decade ago - but the current offering smells pretty bad. Combined with the fact that at this point, Musk clearly isn't opposed to running a business with dramatically inflated valuations based on vaporware, lies, & hype (cough - Tesla - cough) it just makes me far more skeptical than I might otherwise be. I think caution is warranted here. Essentially - I want to own the SpaceX that could have been if we didn't end up with the shoddy k-hole version of musk in charge of things.
  - hparadiz 4mo ago
    The current SpaceX is in a far better financial and operational position than 10 years ago. By an order of magnitude. 90% of all payload to orbit right now is SpaceX alone. Starlink is profitable all on it's own. Right now. And they are just now picking up steam. American Airlines just signed onto Starlink just last week. This company is most likely gonna be the Coca-Cola of transportation between celestial bodies in solar system for the next 500 years but people on here are arguing over peanuts. On HN of all places.
    - 4mo ago

SilverElfin 4mo ago

It’s obviously a scam. First xai acquires failing Twitter and then SpaceX acquires xai? At a made up valuation number that’s too high? The voting structure of SpaceX prevents Elon from ever being held accountable. Not to mention that the revenue and profits are simply not enough to justify the desired value.

nolok 4mo ago
Merging the failling companies into the other ones is the usual Elon thing, Solar City didn't get acqui-merged into Tesla for its great result. It's not a "scam" in the traditionnal sense, it's riding the bubble while it's there, stock value is "supposed" to be about the company performance and potential but technically it doesn't have to be, it's about what some people are willing to pay for it (the stock, not the product the company sells) and that's all. That's also why tesla has such a valuation. You can see it in the comments even here and other thread about this IPO, some people read the numbers, and some have just religious sounding comments about it being the biggest revolution ever or making the history book etc ... And that's also why they need to keep elon as CEO because in the scenario where they remove it and get the best car company CEO and become a great regular car company that works and ships lots of great car ... Their valuation would be reduced a factor of ten
- Danox 4mo ago
  It’s a scam and the party will be over when Tesla finally bites the dust, and it will. The worldwide trajectory is not in their favor.
  - eberkund 4mo ago
    What makes you say that? Chinese EVs?
    - nolok 4mo ago
      Not parent, but Tesla is currently worth more in the stock market than the ten biggest car seller combined That's with falling sales, with no new product in sight and their latest release a big dud (despite SpaceX ordering massive amount of it to prop it up), and with a pricing and thus margin that is going to be massively lowered or beaten by Chinese ev. Protectionism by the US can only go so far, the US alone doesn't have a trillion dollar worthy car market. They're also losing the race in self driving, and the biggest innovation in EV (semi instant charging) is coming from China not from them. They had a lead and a massively advantageous legal situation and they squandered it, now you add the association of Elon to the brand making it toxic in many places and it's not looking rosy, the brand can be fine but it's valuation at one point or another will have a wake up day.

thesimon 4mo ago

Matt Levine described it well (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-05-21/spacex-investors-can-t-complain https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-05-21/spa...) > The deal, with SpaceX, is that Elon Musk runs it however he wants, and he does weird stuff, and you have to trust him, and if you don’t like it you can’t complain. > When SpaceX acquired xAI a few months ago, did a special committee of independent directors approve the transaction? Did Musk recuse himself from negotiations? Was the price set by independent valuation experts using a rigorous process? Did outside shareholders sue to block the deal? Stop. Musk wanted SpaceX to buy xAI, so it did. > [...] Surely SpaceX has created all that shareholder value more because Musk does what he wants than in spite of Musk doing what he wants; it is hard to accidentally create $1.75 trillion of value. SpaceX’s shareholders signed up for this deal — letting Musk cook — and have been rewarded;

vondur 4mo ago
Isn't that how Facebook is ran too? Basically Zuckerberg's private company, that in theory is public?
- tonetheman 4mo ago
  [dead]
- grassfedgeek 4mo ago
  Right, if Meta had good governance Zuck wouldn't have been allowed to invest so much in Metaverse.
- jdgoesmarching 4mo ago
  Tech bros reinvent autocracy
- stefan_ 4mo ago
  Facebook is still a Delaware company, with lots of established case law for what Zuckerberg can and can not do, voting majority or not. SpaceX is now some Texas corporation with a state legislature ready to enable whatever Musk wants.

lokar 4mo ago

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

tgv 4mo ago
BY getting a job in Denmark in the sector that this pension fund covers. It's a "member-owned pension fund for academics."
stouset 4mo ago
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 included in the index which should give time for the SpaceX valuation to stabilize on something notionally realistic. Thankfully, Vanguard and its member funds are investor-owned so are likely more resilient against someone like Elon trying to change the rules.
- lokar 4mo ago
  The index they use is altering the rules. I complained to my account rep, he agreed it was not great and is asking the fund mgmt what the plan is. I doubt there is a lot they can do.
  - ambicapter 4mo ago
    VTI > Seeks to track the performance of the CRSP US Total Market Index. The index that is changing its rules is the NASDAQ100, commonly referred to as the NASDAQ, although NASDAQ is also the name of the exchange.
    - lokar 4mo ago
      https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/morningstar-considers-revamping-index-construction-ahead-spacex-ipo-2026-04-20/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/morningstar-conside... Morningstar said its CRSP Market Indexes will "undergo enhancements to introduce an alternative liquidity screen", making it possible to add SpaceX and other giant IPOs to these benchmarks more rapidly. The funds that use the CRSP indexes as a portfolio benchmark include Vanguard's $607 billion Total Stock Market ETF.

DivingForGold 4mo ago

[flagged]

gmerc 4mo ago
Calm down Grok

hparadiz 4mo ago

[flagged]

NuclearPM 4mo ago
???
wizzwizz4 4mo ago
Can you provide an example of a history book that lists minor shareholders of companies?
- hparadiz 4mo ago
  https://old.reddit.com/r/EconomicHistory/comments/zynvvq/who_invested_in_the_dutch_east_india_company_an/ https://old.reddit.com/r/EconomicHistory/comments/zynvvq/who... Their names are known and are part of history now. Maybe not famous but certainly better than being a forgotten weathered tomb stone after 5 centuries.
  - wizzwizz4 4mo ago
    Those appear to be major shareholders.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]

fluidcruft 4mo ago

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.

aNoob7000 4mo ago
Add Anthropic and OpenAI to the list. Companies that are bleeding money. Personally, a company should be making money before adding it to the index.
- hparadiz 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - alpha_squared 4mo ago
    > Because from where I'm sitting it seems like you're just operating on hopes and feels. I hate these flippant comments. Similarly, from where I'm sitting it seems you're struggling to disentangle revenue from profit.
    - hparadiz 4mo ago
      I buy 50 billion of hardware. Make 45 billion back in year 1. My losses are 5 billion. I Pay of all my creditors by year two. Then spend another 55 billion on hardware in the second half of year two. My profit is at this point zero. <you are here> By year three I am printing money. It's not a flippant comment. It's basic math.
      - zzleeper 4mo ago
        Sorry that's confusing cash flow with profits, where things get amortized
      - rchaud 4mo ago
        It's not basic math when the numbers are this big. There's not going to be $50 billion coming in Year 3 if there's a market correction and lenders scale back financing. Borrowed money is how companies are paying for AI, and that's the first thing that disappears in a recession.

zerotolerance 4mo ago

Should have renamed the company xGoodwill.

pu_pe 4mo ago

Wouldn't the same argument apply against Tesla?

fuglede_ 4mo ago
https://akademikerpension.dk/nyheder/vi-ekskluderer-tesla/ https://akademikerpension.dk/nyheder/vi-ekskluderer-tesla/

ArchieScrivener 4mo ago

[dead]

kome 4mo ago

again, i’ve been posting this a lot recently, but i still think it’s worth sharing: it’s a summary of an academic paper i wrote, “it’s not finance, it’s your pensions” https://theloop.ecpr.eu/its-not-finance-its-your-pensions/ https://theloop.ecpr.eu/its-not-finance-its-your-pensions/ the piece explains how modern finance is de facto built on the shoulders of the privatization of the welfare state. i find it particularly relevant here: the finance class - in this case musk - wants pensioners money via mutual funds, even modifying the rules of indexing... it’s not a great sight tbh.

formvoltron 4mo ago

prediction: SpaceX will not escape Earth's gravity. Meaning... what goes up will come down.

jmyeet 4mo ago

The part that gets me is that changing of the rules by exchanges and financial regulators to essentially force mass purchases on a small float. That's disgusting and in a just world, those people would go to jail. The funny part of all this is that SpaceX has achieved a lot but what might break them, or at least weigh them down heavily, is the impulsive and forced purchase of Twitter. Before anyone claims it was some kind of master plan, Elon went to court to get out of it but was forced into it [1]. What happened? Mass firings, pushing his own tweets because his fragile ego couldn't handle Joe Biden getting more likes [2] and Twitter opened the floodgates for hate speech [3] and worse [4]. Advertisers fled. Fidelity (who foolishly was part of the acquisition) massively wrote down the value [5]. Elon had used Tesla shares as collateral and was possibly facing a margin call. How did he get out of it? Well, in 2023 Elon founded xAI to challenge OpenAI. People invested in this for some reason. And by 2025, Elon merged Twitter with xAI, overvaluing Twitter at $33 billion (which is still down 25% from the purchase) [6]. Now, I imagine the xAI investors were unhappy with Elon using xAI to bail out himself so what did he do? Easy. Make SpaceX acquire xAI of course [7]. Thing is, xAI and Twitter/Grok are a massive drain on SpaceX's finances, losing more than $10 billion annually allegedly [8]. Twitter did not have to end up as part of SpaceX. SpaceX would've been a better company without it. SpaceX already faces headwinds from the incredibly expensive and behind-schedule Starship program. Part of all of this regulatory fixing is to make sure the insiders (and Elon himself) get bailed out. It's also not the first time [9]. [1]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/elon-musk-offers-to-end-legal-fight-pay-44-billion-to-buy-twitter https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/elon-musk-offers-to-end... [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/15/elon-musk-changes-twitter-algorithm-super-bowl-slump-report https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/15/elon-musk... [3]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/technology/twitter-hate-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/technology/twitter-hate-s... [4]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/27/twitter-csam-dom-lucre-elon-musk/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/27/twitter... [5]: https://www.axios.com/2023/10/29/fidelity-twitter-x-value-elon-musk https://www.axios.com/2023/10/29/fidelity-twitter-x-value-el... [6]: https://www.fintechweekly.com/magazine/articles/xai-acquires-x-twitter-merger-elon-musk-ai https://www.fintechweekly.com/magazine/articles/xai-acquires... [7]: https://www.reuters.com/business/musks-spacex-merge-with-xai-combined-valuation-125-trillion-bloomberg-news-2026-02-02/ https://www.reuters.com/business/musks-spacex-merge-with-xai... [8]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-17/musk-s-xai-burning-through-1-billion-a-month-as-costs-pile-up https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-06-17/musk-s-xa... [9]: https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/21/13698314/tesla-completes-acquisition-solarcity-elon-musk https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/21/13698314/tesla-completes...

amarant 4mo ago

Any chance of bypassing the paywall? Does someone have a archive link perhaps?

iso1631 4mo ago
Pay perhaps? Or do you work for free?
- explodes 4mo ago
  You don't subscribe to twenty five news outlets, what are you, a freeloader? /s
mikeodds 4mo ago
Just prepend url with archive.is/ if you want to check
deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
frm88 4mo ago
Here you go: https://archive.ph/dsVfR https://archive.ph/dsVfR
- amarant 4mo ago
  Thanks! Looks like they have a rather reasonable take. I agree that spaceX has some very impressive capabilities and there is no doubt that their engineering talent is the best in the world in their field, but 1.8T is indeed a ridiculously high number! I interpret their management risk analysis as being more about the buss factor of 1 than it being about not liking musk, which I also think is a reasonable take.

LightBug1 4mo ago

Good for Denmark. Yeah, for all the technical excellence by Shotwell and the team ... I don't want my ETF's and pensions buying into that piece of shit CEO and his corrupt 'at a whim' entity manipulation. Sorry, fuck SpaceX

wg0 4mo ago
Now are we going to bomb Denmark? Or Venezuela style? Greenland of course is part of Miami anyway so that needs to be regaineed ASAP which is another top priority.

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

mikewarot 4mo ago

That's a great start, now they need to add pretty much anything swept up in the AI Ponzi scheme that NVidia and others are running. The circular money flows are astounding once on see them. LLMs and "AI" is great, until you actually have to pay for it an an un-subsidized price. I'm working to do that locally, on a machine I control, for my own personal uses. (I'm old, and retired) The whole market is running on fumes, most of the actual value of the physical economy has been extracted by the Epstein class. It will not be pretty when it implodes, and people have to actually make things for a living again. (I've worked in a job shop, making gears, I know what its like).

throwfaraway135 4mo ago

The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.

gbil 4mo ago
>Akademikerpension also said the governance structure of SpaceX was "extremely deficient", adding that Elon Musk is expected to control more than 80% of the voting rights while simultaneously serving as chief executive officer, chief technology officer and chair of the board. Their skepticism seems pretty valid to me
- adamiscool8 4mo ago
  Zuck was in roughly the same position and they didn’t put out a statement skipping that IPO. The valuation criticism is more valid but this line belies political motivation.
  - close04 4mo ago
    Musk appears far less predictibile, more volatile than Zuck. Musk also got directly involved in US politics aligned with of a man who singlehandedly butchered US relations with almost everyone in the world. A man who threatened Denmark with taking their territory by force. You’re calling it “political motivation” as some sort of blind hate or vendetta out of principle, cutting off the nose to spite the face. But you can no longer separate Musk from politics and aggression towards Denmark. The pension fund’s assessment looks entirely valid, objective and justifiable to me. But for anyone who personally favors Musk and his political views any dismissal will look politically motivated. It’s easy to cry foul. In this light your shallow dismissal might be just as politically motivated.
  - spacebanana7 4mo ago
    Google too, and this was in the long term best interests of shareholders. Imagine in 2010 if investors had real transparency into how much money YouTube or Maps was losing, along with the governance structures to enforce their concerns.

Hamuko 4mo ago

I've recently been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have. I really don't want my investments to be in SpaceX, OpenAI or Anthropic.

andsoitis 4mo ago
> been thinking about pulling my money from all of the US funds that I currently have What’s holding you back? And what alternative investments are you considering? I recently did homework to decide whether to double down on VOO (S&P 500 index) or to diversify via VXUS (ex-US index), and concluded VOO is better for my risk-adjusted ROI outlook and time horizon.
- Hamuko 4mo ago
  Momentum, really. I usually just buy more of a given fund and don't really take any out. My small portfolio is split across different funds, so I'd probably just split around the money I'd withdraw from the US-based ones into the other ones.
- gigatexal 4mo ago
  Same. Though I’m 85%+ VOOG
spacebanana7 4mo ago
Why not Anthropic? They’re a very rare company capable of charging $200 per month per seat level fee across the corporate workforce. Yes their compute costs are astronomical, but that can be managed down over time by more efficiency or mild enshittification that doesn’t create too much churn.
- Hamuko 4mo ago
  Because I don't really trust any of them, and I don't believe that the business is self-sustainable. At the moment we're in a phase where CTOs are able to withdraw money from the corporate bank accounts to be "on the cutting edge", but I don't think that's going to last. I'd rather have my money in something else.

seydor 4mo ago

I mean it isn't like it was automatically included.

jonasf1337 4mo ago

hope my Danish pension fund PFA doesn't do the same

brikym 4mo ago

I really want a QQQ/VOO replacement that excludes these new rushed IPOs that are just exit liquidity. There are ETFs that exclude harmful industries like gambling, weapons and tobacco. How about an ETF that doesn't include IPOs for six months or until insider lock ups periods are over.

lain98 4mo ago
VTI avoids these issues. It's float adjusted market cap weighted. More float allows better price discovery. So a company like spacex has negligible weight.
- u1hcw9nx 4mo ago
  So are other major index funds. That's not the problem. The problem is that the NASDAQ 100 and most likely also S&P 500, change their rules to permit SpaceX to be added early without traditional time for price discovery. It happens jsut five trading days before the major index rebalance. After float adjustment SpaceX could be 1% of NASDAQ and 0.7% of SP500, but after full tranche escalation that takes over 130 days, SpaceX weight can be over 3% of NASDAQ and almost 2% of SP500 if the market cap stays near $1.5T. (I think the price will decrease, so the weight will be smaller) This is just a ploy to get exit liqudity as brikym, said. SpaceX collects enough capital to pay Twitter acquisition loans and then some, but the IPO not major boost for SpaceX finances. The coming merger with Tesla is clearly in the plans (C stocks).
  - brikym 4mo ago
    > five trading days before the major index rebalance. I didn't realize this. That's really scammy.
    - vkou 4mo ago
      Musk in a nutshell, but as long as the stock price goes up everyone looks the other way.

beardyw 4mo ago

[flagged]

tomaskafka 4mo ago
Or tell Trump to start a war with them.
- BYazfVCcq 4mo ago
  I'm pretty sure Trump threatening to invade Greenland/Denmark played a part in the decision to not invest in the company.

runeks 4mo ago

I wanted to see how well Akademikerpension has done wrt. returns. This graph shows average yearly return from the financial crisis 2009 until 2021 and they are actually the best performing among other Danish pension funds [1]. [1] https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensionsselskabers-afkast-2009-21.png https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensions...

adamtulinius 4mo ago
Ah, time to dump Velliv it seems.
- hosteur 4mo ago
  Well, often you don't get to "dump" your pension fund. In Denmark, it is your employer deciding what pension fund to use, and you will then have to use it. It is kinda ridiculous.
  - sehansen 4mo ago
    AFAIK only pension contributions mentioned in a collective bargaining agreement is mandatory. If you get offered a regular contract offering a salary plus 10% pension you can accept the job, write an email to HR stating that you opt out and get the extra 10% as take home pay. You can the make voluntary pension contributions to whatever pension fund you have a private agreement with. And all the private pension companies are very happy to make such an agreement, though the terms will be worse than an employer plan from the same company. Or you could do a completely self-administered one, e.g. through Nordnet.
NoahZuniga 4mo ago
Judging a pension fund by how it performs in a bull market seems wrong. Like their main job is to limit your downside from market crashes (if they're not doing that then they offer nothing compared to an index fund), so its strange to not include 2008 crisis (or .com bubble popping). Checking this shows that the top 2 performers in this graph lost more money (~8%) in 2008 than the bottom 2 (~2%)

ksimukka 4mo ago

(Apologies for the bad grammar, my son was born a little over 24 hours ago. I’m choosing not to use a LLM, so you are getting the real me) Even sovereign funds (example Norway) are invested in American tech, funds, and indexes. It is interesting to think about (from the perspective of an immigrant to Norway) how I moved my life’s savings from the US to Norway. I’m now fully invested into Norway (real estate, savings, and retirement). My understand is that Norwegians (and the nordics) have historically looked up to the US as a world leader. I think that is no longer true and maybe this decision by Denmark is a data point of how the Nordics are changing? It kind of feels like we all have been caught holding the bag (US reserve currency) and now we have to carefully unwind our position. I’ve lost my point. Maybe my goal here is to just contribute to this discussion to distract from the exhaustion.

l23k4 4mo ago
>I think that is no longer true and maybe this decision by Denmark is a data point of how the Nordics are changing? No, this is just standard pension fund governance.
- ksimukka 4mo ago
  Right, that makes sense. I assume it happens often as part of the governance process. my original statement could have be better phrased as a question. What are your thoughts on the general consensus of Nordics views and opinions about the US?
shivpat 4mo ago
Get off your phone and enjoy the time lol - journal instead if you must write something
- yokoprime 4mo ago
  Gatekeeping is never a good look.
pimeys 4mo ago
As a Nordic (Finland), I think this is true. In the history, US has been always admired and we've loved to travel there and cherish the culture. Damn, I was there when Conan O'Brien traveled to Helsinki, and greeting him with this massive crowd of people who really love him. I married an American, I've traveled through the country multiple times with my partner. Love the food, people, the nature, the cities. But this has definitely changed for me now. The idea of crossing the border and having to flip a coin is the border control guy a nice guy or not is not appealing as a diabetic who needs his phone to be with him untampered and who doesn't want to sit in a cell somewhere for days/weeks because they posted a funny meme of a person you can't joke about. Or who just witnesses this absolute inequality happening, and who witnesses the leaders of this country coming to my country and giving their support for parties who want me to not marry and who doesn't want to see me existing. I am just tired. And sad. I wish I could get our relationship back with the US but I don't know... Even if we backtrack from here, get back to the "olden times", it will take a moment until I can enjoy US again. P.S. Conan is still a treasure!

swingboy 4mo ago

Apologies for the naivety, but, why is SpaceX valued so high? Starlink? Are rockets really a lucrative business? Don’t get me wrong, being able to send objects up into orbit is cool, but is it $1.8T cool?

Hendrikto 4mo ago
Because of the Musk reality distortion field. The claim is that all data centers will move into space, and that SpaceX will completely own that market.
- UltraSane 4mo ago
  I truly do not understand why anyone believes anything Musk says anymore.
  - bar000n 4mo ago
    could it be that those people don't actually believe him and just appreciate the genuine shit-show he puts up enabling them to laugh at people who get sad about what he says, and their eagerness to believe
    - Forgeties79 4mo ago
      “Pretending” to be a fan of a troll because he tries to troll people who think he’s a troll is a good thing…?
- Izmaki 4mo ago
  This sounds amazing until something needs replacement. Until data centers on earth has a 99.99% (or higher) level of autonomous operation with very minimal requirements to maintenance and part replacements, they're not sending anything into orbit...
  - eigenspace 4mo ago
    I also sounds amazing until you remember how hard it is to cool something when your only option is radiative cooling.

dbg31415 4mo ago

Good move. Elon is rigging the stock market and getting index funds to invest in companies that are over-valued and thus not stable. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sYA-z0Y8WRQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sYA-z0Y8WRQ

throw672 4mo ago

American gov is gonna invade Greenland for sure for not cooperating with american conmen

zdc1 4mo ago

With schemes like SpaceX, and the general number of large-cap-but-negative-earnings companies trading on the market, I feel like the conventional wisdom of DCA and chill / just passively buy the index will turn into an underperforming strategy vs a slightly more active or opinionated approach.

dools 4mo ago
Just buy ETFs of index funds that only include dividend paying stocks
Npovview 4mo ago
Another factor. TINA. There is no alternative.
sega_sai 4mo ago
In my understanding some index funds i.e. FTSE Russel ones will include spacex with the weight based on the floated stocks, so in practice the weight in the index will be small enough in All Cap etc indices. So I decided for myself it is not a cause for concern. But I think now it is the time to look for index providers who do not decide to bend the rules for short term gain (i.e. S&P and Nasdaq).
- HWR_14 4mo ago
  SpaceX is responded to the float issues by having a continuous increase in the unlocked stock available on the market. And NASDAQ was the first index to promise a quick inclusion of spacex.
alex_suzuki 4mo ago
But isn’t “passively buying the index” still exposed to this, at least if you’re not buying “equal weight” version? Dividend stocks sounds even more appealing to me, I read that as “companies that are generating stable profits now”.

devlovstad 4mo ago

I have AkademikerPension as my pension fund through work and this move suits me quite well. They've already excluded Tesla as well as a variety of companies that profit of weapon production, fossil fuel production or are suspected for human rights violations. https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selskaber/ https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selsk...

petterroea 4mo ago
In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals" Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.
- petesergeant 4mo ago
  That’s exactly what you would want your money manager to say. It’s their job to turn a profit. In turn you also want democratically elected politicians above that saying “yes, but the people want their money made ethically, so you can’t do that”.
  - petterroea 4mo ago
    Of course, some back-and-forwards is healthy. In a good system both sides fight for their interests, and the outcome is some middle road compromise that optimizes for everyone's benefit.
  - Natfan 4mo ago
    sorry, but i wouldn't want my money manager to attempt to engage in unethical or illegal practices in order to turn a profit...
    - chabska 4mo ago
      The point is that it's the job of the democratic legislature to codify what you just stated here into law, so that all money managers have to abide by this standard, not just those that have a personal conviction for it. That's the essence of rule of law.

andyjohnson0 4mo ago

For those commenting that this decision may have a political element: Greenland is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Musk is a prominent Trump/MAGA supporter, and Trump has threatened to annex Greenland by force. SpaceX is part of Trump's Golden Dome project, and one of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems.

johneth 4mo ago
All good points, but I think their main point of poor governance is still the pure motivation.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
- detourdog 4mo ago
  The governance issues seem much worse than the other issues with pricing and inclusion.
amelius 4mo ago
Then why not hedge? If they take Greenland at least they have their pensions.
myk9001 4mo ago
> ... part of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems. Nothing is stopping the US from deploying those in Greenland right now. The only reason Trump wants Greenland is he's not all there -- Greenland looks big on the map so he's fixated on it.
- andyjohnson0 4mo ago
  > Nothing is stopping the US from deploying those in Greenland That would require the (politically unlikely) agreement of the Danish government. See article 2 of the relevant treaty [1]: "...establishing and/or operating such defense areas as the two Governments, on the basis of NATO defense plans, may from time to time agree to be necessary..." > The only reason Trump wants Greenland is he's not all there -- Greenland looks big on the map so he's fixated on it. I agree that that is part of it, but there is more to it than that. [1] https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/den001.asp

neonstatic 4mo ago

I am waiting to see if the same outrage will be in place when Anthropic and OpenAI go public. This surely isn't just a dislike of a certain individual, is it?

paulbjensen 4mo ago

The Financial Times' Unhedged Podcast covered the SpaceX IPO recently and highlighted the same issues that the Danish pension fund raised concerns about. https://www.ft.com/content/a401b0c0-fcc0-4bae-9f57-e8d5c0957a70 https://www.ft.com/content/a401b0c0-fcc0-4bae-9f57-e8d5c0957...

windexh8er 4mo ago
I enjoyed this piece the most [0]. [0] https://www.profgmedia.com/p/spacex-stasy https://www.profgmedia.com/p/spacex-stasy

Alifatisk 4mo ago

I am thinking of moving over my investments from S&P 500 to S&P 500 ESG, as they have excluded SpaceX and Tesla.

jcoyne 4mo ago
$XVV (iShares ESG Select Screened S&P 500 ETF) holds $TSLA
- stkdump 4mo ago
  SRI and ESG advanced funds exclude Tesla.
- Alifatisk 4mo ago
  Damn you're right.

noodlesUK 4mo ago

I think European countries need to get serious about investing money locally. The UK is a particularly egregious example but it’s taking begging and pleading with the mansion house accord to even convince pensions to try to invest in the UK economy. Every country should make a portion of local (at least within Europe) investment a prerequisite for whatever favourable tax treatment pensions and similar products get. So much wealth is tied up in pensions and it’s folly to let it all go to supporting the U.S. and eschew local investment altogether.

petra 4mo ago
Does the EU has an index that is competitive with the SP500 over the long term?
OtherShrezzing 4mo ago
I partially agree, but if my private pension needed to invest into the underperforming FTSE250 by law, I’d just opt out of that system and put my savings into a US/Emerging-markets index myself. I’m not patriotic enough to spaff my compound interest opportunity on a bunch of dying tobacco, oil, & mineral extraction companies to put any of it to work in the FTSE250.
- dijit 4mo ago
  A lot of those investments are self-fulfilling though.
- xyzsparetimexyz 4mo ago
  I don't think regular people should have a say where their pensions are invested. It should automatically be in what's best long term for the country they live in.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - endymi0n 4mo ago
    Kids and their wellbeing and education might be a good start…

bluecalm 4mo ago

The issue is raised a lot but there is less and less time and I don't think it will hit mainstream before IPO is done and pension funds/passive investors will be forced to buy it. It really does look bad: low float multiplier rule (that will overweight SpaceX) introduced very recently, fast inclusion mechanism, insiders being allowed to sell faster than usual etc. It all looks like an orchestrated dump into passive investors/pension funds/other ETF holders. Investing in IPOs is a terrible strategy historically. Here we have several mega IPOs incoming with rules being re-designed just for them to be included faster in your "passive" portfolio.

HWR_14 4mo ago
It will overweight SpaceX less than the old rule which was binary and weighed at 100% as soon as the float passed 10%. Which based on rolling lockout periods will probably be in the fall.

whodidntante 4mo ago

If you do not like Elon, you can simply move your assets to a direct indexing fund, there are plenty of them at reasonable cost, including from the large brokerages. If you believe SpaceX is overvalued or do not like the way it is being handled by the big index funds, again, use direct indexing. akademikerpension is pretty decent fund, it is about 50/50 asset allocation, losing out by only .9% per year compare to a US equity/bond portfolio. Better than many active funds: https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensionsselskabers-afkast-2009-21.png https://www.finanshus.dk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Pensions... https://testfol.io/?s=h8azNZvMICk https://testfol.io/?s=h8azNZvMICk You do not like the valuation ? What should a company that launches 98% of the world's non government tonnage to space (80% if you include the Chinese government) be valued at ? The only company that has figured out how to very reliably launch at a sustained and rapid pace ? Pioneered and is perfecting rocket reuseability ? The only thing we can can say with a degree of certainty is that $2T is either very overvalued or very undervalued. If you believe that space will become a huge part of our economy in the future, and believe that SpaceX will play a significant role, $2T is cheap. Dirt cheap. The only way to prosper is to be bold. For all those who come here to say that they do not like Elon or that the valuation is ridiculous, or that SpaceX will not succeed, that is perfectly fine - you are just a few clicks away from making it happen. Sell your assets and buy a direct indexing product, simply buy the stocks you want, buy ex-US, or any other number of options you can do on your phone with a few clicks. Less clicks than it takes to virtue signal on this forum.

wewtyflakes 4mo ago
That strategy would be a taxable event.
- whodidntante 4mo ago
  There is a high correlation between wealth and taxable accounts. For those that are not well off to have large taxable accounts and have most of their assets in retirement funds, this should not be an issue.
  - wewtyflakes 4mo ago

outside1234 4mo ago

We need Calpers (California pension fund) and others to do this as well.

ornornor 4mo ago

I wish they didn’t manage to change the nasdaq rules, forcing a lot of index ETFs to buy spacex at IPO, whatever the price. Edit: glad to see vanguard VT tracks FTSE which isn’t impacted. The amount of overvalued spacex stock in VT will be minimal down the line as they use the amount of publicly available shares to calculate the weight in the index, which is the more sensible way to do it, Musk’s scam not withstanding.

sgt101 4mo ago

Sgt101's pension fund has excluded SpaceX for similar reasons. But, if the index funds don't then there are going to be quite a few shares dumped to make room for the SpaceX share. This could be interesting.

pickleRick243 4mo ago

I'm just curious- how many of you changed your portfolio allocation last April because "obviously" the Trump tariffs would tank the market? If you had similar thoughts when TSLA joined the S&P 500, what are your thoughts on its performance since then? You are welcome to your investment opinions, but just know the level of sophistication here is more or less comparable to a wallstreetbets thread telling people to diamond hand Gamestop. At least there, what they accomplished was surprisingly clever- force liquidating short hedge funds via a bunch of shitposting.