[freetime2]

I don't like this either, but from the article:

> Although Nasdaq has already shortened the “seasoning” period before index inclusion to 15 trading days and FTSE Russell has slashed its waiting time to five days (and S&P Dow Jones is reportedly considering something similar), most share indices weight firms in proportion to the value only of shares they have released for public trading (the “free float”). For SpaceX, this means just the $75bn or so of stock it intends to issue in June—so its initial weight in the S&P 500 will be around 0.1%. The NASDAQ 100 is an exception, and has changed its rules to weight companies at up to three times their free float, in an apparent effort to woo Mr Musk. Even so, SpaceX’s probable initial weight in this $40trn index will still only be around 0.5%.

So people who hold ETFs that track the S&P 500 probably don't have too much to worry about. People invested in the NASDAQ 100 probably have more to be outraged about - but then again I suppose if you're invested in the NASDAQ 100, you may be consider more exposure to SpaceX to be a good thing.

[chii]

This needs to be higher for more visibility, because the weighting and the float's proportions are an important aspect that most news sources or comments fail to mention.

[hliyan]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 0.1% of S&P 500 seems exceedingly huge when you consider how much of the economy is represented in the S&P 500.

[matwood]

https://www.slickcharts.com/sp500

At .1% they'll have the same weight as something like DoorDash.

[mdnahas]

To be pedantic, the S&P 500 is a large portion of the stock market, not the economy. Its value is about 75% of the value in stocks. But stocks are only 25% of all stores value. Real estate is twice the size of the stock market. The rest is mostly corporate and govt bonds.

This is why the real estate crash of 2008 caused the Great Recession, while the Internet Bubble bursting was a small recession.

[deflator]

This really makes it clear. Thank you!

[john_strinlai]

>The NASDAQ 100 is an exception, and has changed its rules to weight companies at up to three times their free float, in an apparent effort to woo Mr Musk.

im not a finance guy, can someone explain to me why the nasdaq would want to "woo" someone specifically? what benefit would nasdaq get? or, alternatively, what harm would befall nasdaq for not woo-ing musk?

[freetime2]

Nasdaq earns money every time a stock is traded on their exchange (a very small amount per trade, but it adds up) in addition to other listing fees that the company pays. So it's definitely in their interest if Musk chooses to list SpaceX on Nasdaq instead of, say, NYSE.

[Rover222]

how dare you come in with rationality in the face of ELON BAD

[snapcaster]

It's still extremely corrupt, and done to benefit a very small group of people. Dismissing the criticism like this is directly against the rules and spirit of hackernews to assume good faith

[Rover222]

You're using the word corruption without any solid evidence. The decision for the rule change has been clearly explained.