Honestly, I have not looked too deeply into how SpaceX got all of these waivers. I am guessing there are enough people holding equity in SpaceX with influence that can pull strings to get their exit liquidity. And they can try to justify it to rubes as SpaceX being the super future company that should be treated specially (It bought xAI, and is trying to sell itself as the future of internet through starlink and having control of all space travel when we all start moving to space and Mars bases any day now)

[–] RNAi@hexbear.net 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So it's the funds' managers bankrupting their own funds? Just openly stealing from the company you manage by using all the company funds to buy magic beans from your cousin?

[–] radio_free_asgarthr@hexbear.net 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

My understanding is that it is the index managers not the fund managers. Indicies started just as nice ways to track the market or sectors in one number (which is why in reporting and checking on the market you will see those numbers quoted). When an index fund decides to track an index and define and market themselves as doing it, the fund is legally obligated to follow the index. Several analysts at the FT has been complaining about how much power this gives the people in charge of the indicies and that most people haven't really caught on to.

Edit: to make it clear guys at something like Standards and Poor (S&P) decide on what to include in the index and the rules around it and then someone at a company like Blackrock or Vanguard markets an index fund that will track that index to investors. So in this hypothetical, it is S&P screwing over Vanguard investors.