NYSE President Lynn Martin says some of the rules used to attract SpaceX to go public on the Nasdaq are "questionable." She says "market integrity" is not a "competitive dynamic." Martin says it's been a good year for IPOs across all industries and they're working to bring more companies public. She speaks on "Bloomberg Surveillance."
--------
More on Bloomberg Television and Markets
Like this video? Subscribe and turn on notifications so you don't miss any videos from Bloomberg Markets & Finance: https://tinyurl.com/ysu5b8a9
Visit http://www.bloomberg.com for business news & analysis,...
What Lynn Martin said
Written from the verified transcript and checked against it. Every figure links to the moment it was said.
Lynn Martin, President of NYSE Group, questioned the rule changes Nasdaq made to attract SpaceX, calling them 'questionable' and a threat to market integrity and retail investor protection. She noted the fast-track seasoning period for the Nasdaq 100 (15 days vs. S&P 500's 12 months) merits discussion but rushing it for a listing is a question mark, and highlighted the three times float multiplier Nasdaq applied to SpaceX as a bigger concern. Martin welcomed the year's IPO diversification across energy, consumer, and industrials, and said NYSE is working with other companies to go public. On China, she said governance and transparency are non-negotiable for listings. She defended market integrity, praised regulators' surveillance, and said AI will enhance monitoring. She dismissed fears of lost faith in markets, citing their 234-year resilience, and saw AI enthusiasm broadening to grid modernization and industrial IPOs.
Key takeaways
Martin called Nasdaq's rule changes to attract SpaceX 'questionable' and a threat to market integrity and retail investor protection.
She flagged Nasdaq's three times float multiplier on SpaceX as a bigger concern than the 15-day fast-track seasoning period.
She welcomed IPO diversification across energy, consumer, and industrials, not just AI-focused names.
0:46What kind of complications does that introduce for individual investors?
2:02The actual float, just how low is the actual float going to be?
2:29How much do you see that as a potential liability, especially without a longer seasoning period to really protect retail investors?
3:07How much do you welcome all of the IPOs this year versus get a little bit concerned that it could overflow a market that hasn't been used to this type of supply?
5:07Do you see Chinese companies at one point being able, more of them, coming on to American stock exchanges?
5:38How important is it to get to the bottom of what's been taking place in just the last two months alone?
6:30Are there conversations happening now to get to the bottom of some of the price action through March into April?
8:06Are you concerned that if there is some sort of deflation of the enthusiasm around AI that that could undermine people's confidence in markets akin to what happened in the aftermath of 2008?
Talk about all the success of your institution in just a moment, but one particular name that jumps out, SpaceX, and it's gonna be on the Nasdaq. And they changed a couple of rules to maybe encourage them to go over there and not over here. What did you make of those rule changes?
Well, from our perspective, market integrity is not something that is a competitive dynamic, and some of the rules that have been changed to woo some of the large companies you referenced, SpaceX, are questionable. And from our perspective, what is most important to us is protecting investors, particularly the mom and pops in the market. And when you think about the ETFs that they invest in and the rules that have been changed, it's a question mark.
Let's talk about the so-called seasoning period. So for the S&P 500 to enter that, I believe the seasoning period's about twelve months. For the Nasdaq 100, for these particular names, it'll be fifteen days. What kind of complications does that introduce for individual investors?
So I actually think that the fast-track aspect does merit a discussion. And I know S&P, for example, has a consultation out to the market today whether it should be twelve months or it should be six months. I don't know what the right number is there. I know that the index providers, particularly those that don't have conflicts of interest, are gonna figure it out to the benefit of retail investors, allowing companies to be included in the flagship indices like the S&P 500 in a quicker form. So I think that is actually a good discussion to have. Rushing that type of rule change out, though, in order to accommodate a listing, is a question mark. I think the bigger thing, which you've heavily covered on Bloomberg, is the float multiplier that should be looked at more closely. And I guess we'll figure out what happens in the next couple of weeks.
Can I follow-up on that? So let's talk about it. I'll be talking about some of these names, and I'll say they've got a market cap of, like, 2 trillion, whatever the number might be. The actual float, just how low is the actual float going to be?
I mean, I think the S-1 is really what you should look at for the percentage of that will actually be floated. But what I'm referring to is the three times multiplier that Nasdaq in particular has put on SpaceX.
Just to give some context, people are worried that some of the new IPOs are gonna have a disproportionate impact in weighting in some of the indexes. How much do you see that as a potential liability, especially without a longer seasoning period to really protect retail investors?
Yeah. I mean, it comes back to what I was saying earlier. It's about market integrity and the protection of retail investors. To be honest, I just don't know what effect this is going to have on the market, and it's something that economists have covered heavily. Economists, you know, independently have covered heavily. So it'll be interesting to watch.
In the meantime, this is a real sea change when it comes to market dynamics because we've talked about the shrinking IPO market and how the shrinking public equity space has really strained a lot of people's expectations of exactly how capital markets should progress. How much do you welcome all of the IPOs this year versus get a little bit concerned that it could overflow a market that hasn't been used to this type of supply?
You know, it's been a good year so far for IPOs. I know that the big three that you flashed earlier are the ones that are getting a tremendous amount of attention, but there have been a great amount of IPOs coming to market already across all industries. And we're working with a variety of other companies to bring them public too. I think that actually speaks to the diversification that is coming to market across all industry. You've got the energy markets. You've got the consumer names coming to market. Industrials are very much having a moment. So it's across multiple sectors. And I think that's actually welcomed by retail investors. They don't just want to invest in Elon Musk, despite the fact that he is, you know, one of the great innovators in history. They want to invest, they wanna have a balanced portfolio.
Martin, L. (2026, May 22). NYSE's Martin Questions Some Rules Used to Attract SpaceX to Nasdaq [Interview transcript]. Bloomberg Television. CEOInterviews.AI. https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/931923/
MLA
Lynn Martin. "NYSE's Martin Questions Some Rules Used to Attract SpaceX to Nasdaq." Bloomberg Television, 22 May. 2026. Transcript, CEOInterviews.AI, https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/931923/.
BibTeX
@misc{martin2026_931923,
author = {Lynn Martin},
title = {NYSE's Martin Questions Some Rules Used to Attract SpaceX to Nasdaq},
howpublished = {Interview transcript, Bloomberg Television. CEOInterviews.AI},
year = {2026},
month = {may},
url = {https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/931923/},
note = {Speaker-attributed transcript with timestamps}
}
