logoalt Hacker News

zeroonetwothreetoday at 6:06 AM6 repliesview on HN

They weight by free float so it would been something like 0.3%. Hardly the end of the world


Replies

figmerttoday at 6:41 AM

Why is that relevant? The rules are in place for a reason, why does it matter what the percentage is? They're not profitable. When they prove they're worth the dollars, they can be included, per the rules.

Also, S&P500 has a current market cap of $67 trillion, 0.3% of that is some $200billion. That is essentially a wealth transfer to the rich. They don't need it.

show 3 replies
jjavtoday at 8:24 AM

> They weight by free float so it would been something like 0.3%. Hardly the end of the world

That's one way to look at it. At a personal level, it's a small sliver and if it were to drop, its influence on your balance isn't much. So that's true.

Another way to look at it is that with ~200 million people owning index funds, all their funds balances together, even a tiny fraction of a percent is a massive amount of money being force-fed into spacex, which is to say, mostly into Elon's pocket (since he owns vast majority of the shares).

So why is it fair to change the rules to give this massive wealth transfer to Musk, who certainly does not need the extra money?

show 1 reply
groundzeros2015today at 2:16 PM

Can I have 0.3% of your portfolio for a startup? It’s such a small percentage you won’t notice.

kmbfjrtoday at 1:42 PM

Me losing $500 to Musk’s clever idea is still me losing money. It isn’t like this is a normal market event.

If it is not the end of the world, cover my losses.

outside1234today at 2:24 PM

0.3% for SpaceX, 0.3% for Sam Altman’s OpenAI garbage, 0.3% for Anthropic, 0.3% for whatever Elon’s next scam is, and … pretty soon you are talking about big numbers.

ddalextoday at 6:36 AM

"they only be stealing a tiny amount so not worth doing anything"