SpaceX IPO Scandal

SpaceX going in the index is fine but I think changing the rule to make it different from other stocks is iffy and was at the request of Musk. There's a Patrick Boyle vid talking about it ▶ this video

At this moment, there is so so much, publicly available information [1] on the fact the SpaceX IPO is the biggest scandal in the long history of Wallstreet insiders fleecing the "Johns". A scandal orchestrated and cheered on by the NASDAQ, as well as Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan the underwriters, that if you spend any money on it, you deserve to be parted with your money. And if you have a 401k...you are forced to buy no questions asked. This will become such a disaster for retail, that hopefully Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan and the NASDAQ too, will spend their next 10 years in court defending action group lawsuits. [1] - link "SpaceX IPO retail offering is worrying" - link "SpaceX IPO: Nice Try Though" - link "SpaceX IPO Scandal" - ▶ this video "Anthopic, OpenAI Should Not Be Allowed to IPO, Says Ed Zitron" - link

link "SpaceX IPO retail offering is worrying" - link ( This guy will never be invited back to CNBC...interview is hysterically funny...and accurate... ) "SpaceX IPO: Nice Try Though" - link "SpaceX IPO Scandal" - ▶ this video "Anthopic, OpenAI Should Not Be Allowed to IPO, Says Ed Zitron" - link

link "SpaceX IPO retail offering is worrying" - link ( This guy will never be invited back to CNBC...interview is hysterically funny...and accurate... ) "SpaceX IPO: Nice Try Though" - link "SpaceX IPO Scandal" - ▶ this video

Also his video "Investing in Initial Public Offerings (IPOs)": > If you can get in on the ground floor of an IPO, that is getting an allocation in the initial share offering before the stock starts trading, there is evidence that you are likely to make a profit; IPOs tend to be underpriced. While this might seem like an obvious way to easy profits, there are a few crucially important things for you to consider. * link And perhaps the episode of the podcast he co-hosts on IPOs: > We’ve previously compared IPOs to lotteries that are prone to inflated valuations and low returns. Today we welcome “Mr. IPO,” Professor Jay Ritter onto the show for a deeper dive into IPO performance, for his insights into SPACs, and to hear his research into why economic growth doesn’t correlate with stock returns. Early in the episode, Jay unpacks how long-term IPO returns perform against first-day trading. While exploring the role that venture capital plays in tech IPOs, Jay talks about why negative earnings don’t affect tech IPOs in the short-term before sharing how skewness factors tend to impact young companies. Reflecting on how IPOs are usually underpriced, Jay discusses how the interests of companies are not aligned with the interests of IPO underwriters. After looking into IPO allocation, Jay compares the 2020 ‘hot IPO market’ with the internet bubble of the late 90s. Later, we ask Jay about what special-purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) are and why they’ve exploded in recent years. H

The S&P500 will make an exception, too. Patrick Boyle made a video analysing this and pointing to consequences ▶ this video

Patrick Boyle (fund manager, professor, youtuber) recently discussed this IPO on his channel. Informative and entertaining. ▶ this video

Obligatory video from Patrick Boyle ▶ this video Edit: someone posted it on HN, there's already a thread for it : link

At 25:48 you have the explanation for the (multiple) tricks: ▶ this video This Musk guy makes Ponzi look like the Pope.You almost have to admire it the way you admire a raccoon breaking into a triple locked trash can at 2 AM. You are furious. You know you should be furious. But part of you is at the window wondering "how did he do that?". As you will see below, this raccoon is getting the trash can manufacturer to remove the lock for him first. This is how retail investors are about to get played by the SpaceX IPO: First they only release 5% to 10% to create an artificially inflated price. Its called the low float strategy... Also...the Nasdaq 100 inclusion is supposed to be earned. You list, trade for up to a year at least, prove you are stable and then maybe you might be selected for inclusion. That rule protects the millions of people whose retirement money is in index funds. But Musk told Nasdaq "fast-track me or I list on NYSE... so the Nasdaq invented a "Fast Entry" rule out of thin air....15 trading days and you are in. They openly admitted it was designed for SpaceX. S&P is now considering the same thing for the S&P 500, which has around $24 trillion in assets tracking it. Why does this matter? The second SpaceX hits these indexes, every passive fund is forced to buy, your 401k, your Vanguard fund, your target date fund. All buying SpaceX at whatever inflated price it opens at, with zero public track record. Nobody asks you. With the index inclusion and the implication of