> The CRSP US Total Market Index, by contrast, adds all IPOs ranging from mega caps to small caps—accounting for 98% of the market—within the first five trading days of the stock’s listing.
So it sounds like SpaceX will show up in VTI sooner than in the Nasdaq100, even with their new "fast entry" rule.
The actual scheme described in the OP requires the multiplier to work, though. Otherwise it's just like any other company that's tightly held, in which case only the free float counts and the scheme unravels.
Yes. As long as the free float is at least 10%, it will get the fast track into VTI. According to their methodology guide, they use free float for weights and total shares for ranking. So this IPO would be a mega cap with a tiny weight. Totally the opposite of what a manipulator would want!
vti is free float adjusted, so not as susceptible. But:
Elon will naturally do everything in his power to pump his stock, as every CEO does, and VTI buys shares in proportion to how successful that is. That is the nature of passive, market cap weighted investing.
If you want to underweight Elon's companies, or, generally, weight companies based on something besides market cap, you have to get into active or factor investing.
It mostly doesn't matter though, because if and when one stock drops, those investible dollars will likely flow into another stock, so VTI doesn't really care.
When a stock drops in value, the dollars don't flow anywhere, they just disappear. Think about this: For every buyer ("putting money in a stock") there is a seller ("taking money out of a stock') at exactly the same price. So dollars aren't "in" a stock at all - the shares exist and are said to have some dollar value based on the recent trading price or open orders in the market. When the price drops, it's because the collective consensus on how much those shares are worth changed, and the dollars assumed to have exist prior are just gone.
Beautiful. I recently saw a youtube video [1] on radical neighboring that really inspired me. Led me to another book on the gift economy [2]. All which to say, I now always bake two loaves of bread. One I keep for the family, the other I give away.
I’m not sure where we go from here. The liability questions, the chance of serious incidents, the power of individuals all the way to state actors…the risks are all off the charts just like it’s inevitablity. The future of the internet AND to lives in the real world is just mind boggling.
A very powerful meditation practice is called self-inquiry. One version of it is after you calm your mind down (say with breath meditation) you look for where u think u r. Wherever that is, ask yourself if that’s where u r, what is looking at it? Keep going, don’t intellectualize it, and keep looking.
lol yeah at first I was annoyed that they seem to be applying pressure on people without the history feature cause they certainly kept recommending videos to me even though I had that feature off. But a few weeks ago, the screens are all blank imploring me to turn on the history, but I actually quite like it. No more youtube doom scrolling on my phone.
If you enter in a US city, another takeaway from the rendered table is that U.S. living standards (measured economically) continued to improve for some time after the 1970s despite weak wage growth largely because *more households relied on two earners instead of one*. While productivity kept rising, the gains were increasingly captured at the top and not shared with the workers. Of course that buffer is now long gone, but wages haven't kept up.
reply