That's very cute.

I wonder how much more complicated and effective statistical predictors are.

They get much more complicated, but their effectiveness tops out where certain branches just can’t be predicted in advance.

Because the rules are clearly going to result in lots of buying pressure from passive indexes on a large stock with little time for price discovery.

Come on, let's be adults here. Is there a prior example of this on a comparable scale?

It's already well known that passive indexes bleed ~0.5% performance solely to front running and exploitation from the market. This is that writ large.

The real issue is that existing shareholders will all be eyeing each other wanting to exit at the highest price it'll ever be. That's a lot of selling pressure.

I can't imagine many people seriously believe SpaceX is a business worth 1.75T.

Satellite internet is not a new invention- Iridium already did it and they went under. Nice for war zones and remote areas but not much else.

Besides the Chinese are launching their own network which will mean a price war. And the Chinese tend to win those.

Well, let’s not pretend like Starlink is the same as previous satellite internet providers. No previous providers were anywhere near as fast or low latency. The use cases for Starlink are a lot wider than previous solutions and it can even compete directly for customers who have cable existing service.

I still agree that the company is disastrously overvalued. Even if we consider Starlink to be just as valuable as a telecom like Verizon, that’s only a $190 billion dollar company.

Starling is an entirely different beast. However, it's addressable market is not unlimited. More people live in urban and suburban areas with fixed line internet than ever - the only real customer base is rural, and it still needs to compete with conventional mobile internet.

Starling is indeed very good, but it alone doesn't get spacex to 1.75T

Iridium cost $3/minute for voice or 2400bps data. Starlink prices and speeds are comparable to terrestrial broadband.

0.8% of drag is a lot when you can do basically the same thing by not strictly following the index.

There are funds from Dimensional and Avantis that are basically just index funds but with a bit more leeway to avoid these obvious pitfalls, and from what I saw they do perform approximately 0.5% better per year.

0.8% is substantial indeed, but if i understand correctly, it’s 0.8% on that one stock, so much less on the index itself.

Those funds that perform better probably take a higher management fee that might cancel out the gain. May be worth it to have a smoother return though.

As in, current indexes perform that much worse. Frontrunners around index rebalancing etc. SpaceX is the same idea, just way more obvious. People knows what the index funds are going to do, and so they exploit that.

The alternative funds are a little pricier, but not so much so as to negate the inherent performance advantage. Typical cost ratio is 0.1-0.5% depending on the niche (wide indexes are cheaper, more niche things like small cap value cost more)

Yep, this.

A unit (multi-dwelling property, not necessarily an apartment) might cost 650k here, but only rent for 500$/w. 25kpa is a 4% return on that principle, before expenses (property management, maintenance, rates/taxes etc).

The only context in which it makes sense is if capital gains/land value goes up, which it has historically but that's no guarantee.

Houses make all these numbers even worse - higher upfront expense (land value) and lower rental yield (they rent for more, but tenants prefer a better house/dwelling more than they care about a back yard, so cost goes up more than rent does)

If you're upfront about the provenance and amount of effort that went into it, is there really a problem?

I feel like the issue is people contributing code they don't understand and presenting it as if they do.

Quite possibly never tested, of maybe only tested their problem and not if it broke anything else.

Not quite possibly. 99.99999% likely.

If he gets awarded a huge number of shares for hitting market cap goals, existing shareholders are diluted to his benefit.

How is the framing wrong?

Basically a merger.

When the numerical differences are that big I'd always be a little suspicious of something not operating correctly.

I haven't seen ARM outperform X86 by a margin that large anywhere else.

1988 would like a word.

This is a wild take.