But he is also a show-off… see Tesla Autopilot.
2 Likes
The longer I spend in corporate the more I see that “fake it 'till you make it” seems to work, despite how infuriating it is…
4 Likes
And not only… he is primarily a capital allocator and promoter who has taken credit for others’ inventions, overpromises chronically, and has a strange relationship with the truth. He took Tesla from other two creators that he fired afterwards, he is not a Tesla founder, but a very early investor. Self driving cars is an old idea, see DARPA competition. The tunel is a joke, the demo was just a hole in which you drive your own car, no self driving capability. He has a presentation at Solar City, where he said the houses behind him where covered with solar tiles on the roof, there were not, and he got sued for that. PayPal was never his idea, it was established by Peter Thiel, Luke Nosek and Levchin. There are dozens of fantastic promises, and dozens of failed delivery terms, most of them never on time. He gets sued a lot. He is an investor, but taking credit for the creations of others.
8 Likes
I am very well used to most people really suck in physics, so I am not surprized that such arguments work.
4 Likes
By the way seems like SpaceX didn’t pass the bar for Msci ESG ratings and got a triple C (got disastrous score, esp on governance).
Since SpaceX filed for its IPO, concerns have been raised over its share structure and limiting of shareholder rights, the concentration of control among insiders, potential conflicts of interest and a lack of board independence and remuneration oversight
https://www.ft.com/content/a0dd4ea7-ef3d-4460-a96c-8c6975a053e3?syn-25a6b1a6=1
6 Likes
A triple X in your original post was much funnier. I actually believed that it was correct.
1 Like
Unintential typo 
maybe we should suggest it to MSCI 
1 Like
Oops, I just remembered a more well-known meaning of triple X 
.
It should now be in VTI. QQQ and family will probably be the big ones but inclusion in the indexes may not cause major lasting tailwind.
The index inclusion could also have been priced in beforehand.
Aren’t the index funds required to buy the stock only after inclusion though?
I mean… since index inclusion itself triggers mandatory purchases (purchase orders), there’s only so much (is there, really?) it can be „priced in" beforehand?
Looks like a memecoin “launch”.
I am 8 shares short for fun. Currently +200$
I’ve placed more sell order at 199 and 269$
Maybe we’ll see it at 60$ next year?
Yes, but I meant i.e. hedgefunds pricing that inlcusion and its effect on the price beforehand. That’s what happens for example with stocks getting into the s&p.
This is of course a special case and has a ton if retail pressure with little float, so usual rules likely dont apply. But maybe some smart hedgefunds have it figured out.
-
SpaceX is expected to be added to Russell indexes as part of FTSE Russell’s regular index reconstitution on Friday. That could result in $2.68 billion in inflows from passive investors.
-
July 6: Expected addition to the Nasdaq 100 index.
https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/spacexs-wild-ride-is-just-getting-started-2026-06-23/
2 Likes