It’s not just Nasdaq-100 it’s Russell indices too, which are way bigger by the way (not that it matters).

Regarding misplaced corruption allegations. Virtually everywhere it is illegal to both give a bribe as to receive a bribe. It’s not just Musk et al who should be called out.

As for the unnamed sources doing the scaremongering, it seems you should be calling those specific people out instead of downplaying this whole issue. You’re dismissing the argument not on its merits but because some people argue for it badly.

▲

JumpCrisscross an hour ago | parent [-]

> It’s not just Nasdaq-100 it’s Russell indices too, which are way bigger by the way (not that it matters)

Russell does total-market indices. S&P also changed its rules for total market because it pretty clearly makes zero sense for total market to ignore a few trillion dollars of the market.

The NASDAQ 100 change has some capability of being sketchy due to Nasdaq wanting to win the listing. Russell, eh, not seeing it. They're just being Russell.

> it seems you should be calling those specific people out. Instead you’re downplaying this whole issue because some people overreacted

It's a couple YouTubers. No crime of the century. But from what I've heard from the RIA community, a not-inconsequential amount of fees are being generated in the Bay Area from folks rotating out of low-fee index funds into bespoke nonsense because they are scared about a 0.3% change they think happened that didn't ever occur.

▲

frikskit an hour ago | parent [-]

So what that it’s total market? We must be talking about different issues. The main issue for me is that the seasoning window was reduced. Of course eventually spcx should be included, I’m not arguing against that (and I haven’t heard anyone else argue that convincingly or at all either).

If everyone expected the price of the stock to remain the same or higher after the seasoning windows then why were those with the most to lose if it did not, lobby so hard to change the rules?

Also, what do you mean the 0.3% thing never happened? The ipo hasn’t happened yet, so obviously the index rebalance hasn’t happened.

	▲	JumpCrisscross 43 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> So what that it’s total market? Total market is meant to be total market. It isn't slicing out large caps, like the S&P 500. The assumption was new issues would be too small to matter. That's clearly changed. > main issue for me is that the seasoning window was reduced Seasoning really only matters nowadays in respect of lockups. Private markets provide a lot more price signal than we had previously. > what do you mean the 0.3% thing never happened? S&P 500 won't include SpaceX. The magnitude of the effect of including SpaceX would have been on the other of about 0.3% for the S&P 500. (The other indices collectively matter less than individual allocators at e.g. BlackRock and Fidelity.)
	▲	39 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	frikskit 40 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If you think seasoning windows don’t matter and pre ipo price signal is already great, true and fair, explain Cerebras price after IPO in the midst of one of the biggest sectoral bull runs in history.