SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1 trillion in value in a month
SpaceX stock hits new low since IPO after rocket launch called off
SpaceX's market cap has lost about $1 trillion in value since its June 16 peak and hit a new low since its record-breaking IPO.Georgia Hennessy (Business Insider)
like this

schmorp
in reply to Chris Remington • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
xylol
in reply to schmorp • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
Nicadimos
in reply to xylol • • •No_Eponym
in reply to Nicadimos • • •TranquilTurbulence
in reply to No_Eponym • • •Powderhorn
in reply to TranquilTurbulence • • •TranquilTurbulence
in reply to Powderhorn • • •Hairyfishnuts
in reply to Chris Remington • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness and yessikg like this.
floofloof
in reply to Hairyfishnuts • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness, frustrated_phagocytosis and yessikg like this.
Hairyfishnuts
in reply to floofloof • • •like this
yessikg likes this.
trainsrkool
in reply to Chris Remington • • •Che Banana
in reply to Chris Remington • • •like this
NoneOfUrBusiness, frustrated_phagocytosis and yessikg like this.
777
in reply to Che Banana • • •I was looking at this a while back, and I don't think insiders can sell for a while yet, but I think this really has been a gift to short sellers.
In the end, I didn't end up buying into the IPO because it seemed overpriced, and while I do like the idea of some of the business (Starlink) I don't understand why it's got to come with a fucking social network of all things.
fonix232
in reply to Chris Remington • • •Helix 🧬
in reply to fonix232 • • •fonix232 likes this.
DragonTypeWyvern
in reply to fonix232 • • •HubertManne
in reply to Chris Remington • • •like this
frustrated_phagocytosis likes this.
GregorGizeh
in reply to HubertManne • • •Pyr
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •That is literally the entire point of shares. You buy a percentage of the company and give them money so they can use that money to expand and develop.
Why would I give a company money if I don't get a percentage of that company? It's not a fuckin donation.
GregorGizeh
in reply to Pyr • • •One of, if not the biggest reason that for example steam continues to win is just they are being not overtly greedy and shortsighted. That is obviously a much healthier business model.
t3rmit3
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •Kazumara
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •No, by definition it is not, if you sell part of it to the public and make it a public company.
like this
yessikg likes this.
GregorGizeh
in reply to Kazumara • • •Kazumara
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •GregorGizeh
in reply to Kazumara • • •How so? Shareholders are the worst cancer on the economy, but at the same time hard to eliminate without a revolution.
The proper order should be that people invest in a company they believe will do well, not because they seek to exert control over it. If you do not believe the company is operating in a profitable manner you should not buy, or sell your, shares.
You state this is wrong. Why? In my opinion, if we must have institutionalized gambling, we should seek to keep it from exerting undue influence, even in the shareholders own long term interest. Of course this would not allow the leadership to just do whatever with the money, reporting and oversight should if anything be improved upon.
Apathy Tree
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •Companies aren't required to go public in the first place so it’s a rather moot point. They actively choose to be in the situation where they are beholden to shareholders.
If you owned a company you could just, like, not go asking rich people for money to grow or whatever (what IPO is, basically) and grow naturally on your own merits. Then you don’t even have to worry about what kind of votes people might have.
Personally I think the stock market should just be banned outright. Go back to pensions or some sort of UBI or even have companies pay into universal pensions or something, whatever, but tying retirement to gambling needs to stop, and the entire gambling on the economy thing is clearly not working well overall what with it being pretty easy to manipulate, to the destruction of all, and all..
Kazumara
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •Non-voting common stock is a scam pulled by these fucking billionaire founders to reduce public participation, and concentrate their power, even as they use other's money for their pet projects.
If a company just needs to take up money for an investment, it can issue bonds. Then it gives up no control, but enters into a fair agreement with someone loaning them capital at fixed rates, with no pretense of ownership.
If they sell shares, that is supposed to represent partial ownership and allow all the owners to collectively decide on strategy. It also brings with it the right to recall board members who go insane, like Musk or Zuckerberg. To prevent that these scumbags issue non-voting stock, or stock that has such reduced voting rights as to be essentially useless. Like SpaceX recently, all the IPO shares (class A) carry a tenth of the voting rights compared to the ones they kept (class B).
HubertManne
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •TehPers
in reply to GregorGizeh • • •If you're in a position to dictate what shareholders get, you have no real reason to go public. Just keep it privately owned.
You go public to raise funds. The least reasonable thing to do to someone is ask them for money with a pinky promise that they might make a profit. Usually, those people are going to want something in return, like a say in how their money is spent.
Dragging up again
in reply to HubertManne • • •HubertManne
in reply to Dragging up again • • •InevitableList
in reply to HubertManne • • •HubertManne
in reply to InevitableList • • •FukOui
in reply to Chris Remington • • •like this
yessikg likes this.
krisevol
in reply to FukOui • • •t3rmit3
in reply to krisevol • • •bless
in reply to krisevol • • •krisevol
in reply to bless • • •Helix 🧬
in reply to Chris Remington • • •sobchak
in reply to Helix 🧬 • • •k_rol
in reply to sobchak • • •apotheotic (she/her)
in reply to Helix 🧬 • • •supersquirrel
in reply to Helix 🧬 • • •belated_frog_pants
in reply to Chris Remington • • •AlexisFR
in reply to Chris Remington • • •Deyis
in reply to AlexisFR • • •lightnsfw
in reply to Chris Remington • • •like this
Drusas likes this.
Drusas
in reply to lightnsfw • • •PointyFluff
in reply to Chris Remington • • •ɔiƚoxɘup
in reply to Chris Remington • • •anachronist
in reply to Chris Remington • • •Lockups start expiring next month. They've still only floated less than 5% of the company! Buckle up buttercup.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=CCzD3ONQ…
- YouTube
m.youtube.com