Fair. There's no universe in which those three companies should be foisted on passive investors at this stages.
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2026
1138 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
85245 readers
4407 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I can't stop laughing
based S&P
It's not based it's just that every investor can see that AI has no actual profitable future. Also no one wants to have anything to do with the company run by Elon Musk, he has nothing to contribute and tends to spend his entire time generating bad PR.
These are what we call financially sound decisions.
I don't think the refusal has anything to do with those real reasons but more the arrogance of spacex in not following the rules for ipo's.
' S&P said "exceptions to the financial viability, seasoning, and IWF (investable weight factor) requirements should not be granted solely based on market capitalization". To be included in the S&P 500, a company must be profitable under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in its most recent quarter as well as for the sum of its most recent four quarters, according to one of the rules S&P left unchanged. SpaceX posted a net loss of $4.94 billion in 2025, even as revenue rose 33% to $18.67 billion.'
Lol, they got told to fuck off for not being profitable.
ngl if AI dies i hope we get more ethical models, open-weight models (mostly) solve this, but it would be cool if it was trained only on public domain.
Unless the AI is going to give us a cure for cancer or something I'm not really bothered. Seriously the environmental cost is ridiculous I don't care how open weight they are they still practically need a fusion reactor in order to operate and increase the temperature of the local environment by 12°
That's not AI dying. That's just ethical AI... Which should absolutely happen. Same for GMOs
IMHO I'm kinda glad it was trained on all the forum posts I made during what turned out to be the golden age of training data. Now the LLMs sound a little bit like me.
Except you can be sure they downranked the influence of the left.
And I for one don't want some clanker pretending to be me online.
While I love the sentiment; I'm reading this decision by S&P as just about not bending their rules. AI is not thriving fast/convincingly enough to break tradition of big finance; I don't think that makes S&P an ally. And I suspect this means they'll just be joining a bit later.
'A bit later' is really all the is required to meet the standard. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/21/tesla-isnt-a-gurantee-for-the-sp-500-even-with-year-of-profits.html
S&P Dow Jones has a history of making companies earn it, including previous Elmo ventures.
I'm not bullish on any of it, and I'm desperately trying to exit AI holdings as swiftly as I'm able, but I am deeply comforted by major indexes requiring companies demonstrate profitability or at least meaningful actual revenue beyond the self-dealing that we've seen between the IPO hopefuls.
This stock is more fitted to nasdaq anyway, and I think they said they would bend overbackwards for them and change their rules.
load more comments
(9 replies)
For those that didn't see the article from yesterday, the relevant rule that they refused to waive was the one that said a company must be profitable.
lol
Lololololol the president of my company went full AI shithead recently and he posted how it was a big deal that they were going public and he was talking about how he see it as a great investment to purchase shares and I asked how it was a great investment to get shares of a company severely in the red and my comment got deleted in a few minutes
Edit: we also got claude code for everyone in the company and they are monitoring token use (as in we need to use a lot) and I asked if they were concerned that the token price would rise if the board of directors of anthropic suddenly wanted to make a profit and that comment also got deleted (this was in a virtual townhall so we can ask stuff, usually they just ignore the ones they don't want to answer but they were actually deleting them this time)
You know this already but your company management are morons.
My last company they didn't delete messages. That would be to obvious.
"I am sorry we didn't get around to answering all the questions live. We will respond to the remaining by email"
No more questions were answered.
is...your company publically traded itself? looking for an easy short
Sounds like they don't want to go along with these sham corporations and their smoke & mirrors accounting. It's like they want the companies in their index to be on sound financial footing or something.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Good. Those clowns will trash the index funds that so many depend on for retirement funding if they tank. And AI certainly will, and SpaceX is dependent on the whims of a drug addicted wingnut.
load more comments
(20 replies)
Excellent! Fuck Musk.
And while I'm not an AI hater, that is 100% the investors trying to cash out before the industry runs into trouble.
Yeah, it really is painfully obvious that the fatcats are trying to cash out on the bubble before it blows.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I didn't know that the SNP500 had such rules, but I'm so happy they didn't cave.
I hope people sue the indexes for changing the rules. Im not sure its possible but it really makes an index meaningless if its not consistent.
load more comments
(14 replies)
I've already withdrawn money I had invested in US.
You can't convince me this isn't bubble:
Here's an even more interesting one:
It's the P/E ratio (the ration between the stock Price of a company and it's Earnings) of the Nasdaq vs the Price.
Notice how the Nasdaq price has tracked the P/E, with since at least 2020 the stock prices not increasing because company earnings are going up but rather just from increased speculation hence the rise in the ratio of stock Prices to Earnings.
The P/E (in other words, the company stock prices relative to the actual money a company makes) is now about twice as much as back in 2020.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(43 replies)
view more: next ›