<p><pre><code> Like many quantum computing companies they didn't meet private investors' expectations due to an enormous hype cloud and no concrete progress in terms of industrial applications. Rounds and rounds of funding promoted by the ideals of "quantum supremacy" to then go public and lose incredible chunks of those funds due to total inapplicability of quantum computing to real life problems in its current state. If you have stocks in dwave, rigetti, etc just sell them before they plummet to 0.
</code></pre>
No idea how common this sentiment is. It matches my observations, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the market (in particular the short term focused VC market) become impatient with vague promises of theoretical future performance, and mostly drop the whole field.<p>Quantum computing, as an investment, is sort of a compressed version of AI - it's got lots of potential, but got misunderstood and overhyped by investors that will flee when short term results don't match whatever they imagined the tech could do without understanding it.
"Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter."<p><<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html</a>><p>That would be:<p><<a href="https://investors.rigetti.com/news-releases/news-release-details/rigetti-computing-announces-update-ceo-leadership-transition" rel="nofollow">https://investors.rigetti.com/news-releases/news-release-det...</a>>
Geez look at that RGTI chart. The conference calls alone must have been brutal.<p>I wonder how different this story would have been with better macros this year though.<p>If I worked in the field I'd seriously lean hard on governmental-institution support since markets are so focused on brass tacks rn. From a global-government POV this tech is unmistakably valuable even in theoretical (or maybe what some would call vapor) form.