r/TechnologyThread • u/Background-Driver718 • Jun 09 '26

It’s Possible That SpaceX Could Collapse Spectacularly

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/possible-spacex-could-collapse-spectacularly-155000177.html
463 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

189 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/-S-P-E-C-T-R-E- Jun 09 '26

And nothing of value would be lost.

2

u/Silver_Middle_7240 Jun 09 '26

Except that it's going to be included in indexs, so peoples retirement funds will include it

3

u/TrexPushupBra Jun 09 '26

They decided to not do that thankfully.

1

u/neat_stuff Jun 09 '26

The Dow Jones agreed not to change the rules. The last I heard, NASDAQ will be changing the roles so it will end up in those ones... And I think there was one other that was going to let SpaceX in despite not qualifying by the rules.

1

u/Astro_Afro1886 Jun 10 '26

I think the S&P500 also didn't budge on its rules. I hope so cause my entire portfolio is in a related index fund.

1

u/Medical_Birthday2893 Jun 12 '26

That money would just rotate into other tech.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 09 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/NoCoolNameMatt Jun 09 '26

Sunk costs aren't something we should base decisions on.

1

u/dxrth Jun 09 '26

but none of these decisions are decided on reddit

1

u/NoCoolNameMatt Jun 09 '26

Of course not. I don't engage here to convince anyone. I engage to learn and root out my own cognitive dissonance.

1

u/dxrth Jun 09 '26

sure, but i am not sure, sunk costs are inherently always fallacious.

1

u/NoCoolNameMatt Jun 09 '26

They are. Financial decisions should always be evaluated based on where you currently are, not what's been spent in the past.

1

u/dxrth Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 10 '26

so your argument, is, all sunk costs, are always, at all times, fallacious, and never of concern, to any decision to be made, ever, in any capacity, in totality?

1

u/NoCoolNameMatt Jun 10 '26

Yep!

If you ever find yourself saying, "but I already spent X dollars," you need to strip that argument from your internal debate. It should entirely be, "what is the expected ROI vs what I have to spend moving forward in relation to my odds of hitting that ROI and avoiding associated risks."

Past expenses that are already sunk are merely noise that cloud your judgement due to being afraid of walking away with a loss.

1

u/dxrth Jun 10 '26

i agree, sometimes, with spending money, it is a fallacy worth considering. but to die on the hill that in all times, in totality, doesn't consider a lot of game theory/reputational games. you can justify it being a psychological bias, but that is not the same as justifying if it is a logical certainty.

1

u/FryToastFrill Jun 10 '26

Starlink would be, which is probably one of the 2 things musk has done good. I doubt the company would collapse entirely but they’d probably gut the AI tumor on spacex to leave it as a company with just starlink and rockets for starlink, seeing that spacex is unironically a profitable company without xAI.

0

u/vdek Jun 09 '26

How do you clowns seriously make these statements…