Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

overcast.fm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 198 posts

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#81

Post by kevindeasis »

dang wrote: post #131
dang wrote: post #12

The stack on this story so far (newest ones at the bottom—if I've missed any, can you let me know at hn@ycombinator.com? this is sort of an experiment and we may eventually write software to support building lists like this collaboratively): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25932598 ("Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25904779 ("How WallStreetBets Pushed GameStop…

(This is a stub reply so I can collapse the various comments responding to this, so as not to distract too much from the topic at hand.)

Hey Dang, Thank you for this. How do you remember how to find the linkts to these posts real fast? Did you just had a bookmark on these?

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#82

Post by paulgb »

polka_haunts_us wrote: post #80
paulgb wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me put it this way, if someone bought GME over the last few days and sold it at 3x what they paid, what fraction of that gain (on average) came from a hedge fund covering a short vs. from another retail investor buying in? The assumption seems to be that it comes purely from a short cover but that’s not at all obvious to me.

I agree. The holding the bag metaphor comes from a gang of thieves robbing a place and then leaving a patsy behind with all the evidence of the crime and none of the loot. Right now, in my opinion, a lot of the Robinhood faction of the gang are funneling into the vault thinking Joe Wallstreet is that patsy, not realizing that the savvy senior members bailed out an hour ago and the cops are about 2 blocks over and clo…

Yep, we’re on the same page. Well put.

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#83

Post by paxys »

xadhominemx wrote: post #33
thunkshift1 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, its not. Have you forgotten the bailouts already?

Equity holders of defunct financial institutions were not bailed out in 2009. They suffered massive losses.

What about equity holders of hundreds of close-to-defunct financial institutions who were able to bounce back only due to government intervention?

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#84

Post by dang »

kevindeasis wrote: post #81
dang wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(This is a stub reply so I can collapse the various comments responding to this, so as not to distract too much from the topic at hand.)

Hey Dang, Thank you for this. How do you remember how to find the linkts to these posts real fast? Did you just had a bookmark on these?

I just used HN Search and wasn't particularly fast.

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#85

Post by baryphonic »

in3d wrote: post #16

He didn’t have any answer as to the fate of new bag holders he created with his tweet. That was irresponsible. His plan to make hedge funds disclose their positions daily as some kind of a solution to overleverage makes no sense whatsoever. And he’s delusional about research skills of WSB posters as compared to Wall Street analysts.

> He didn’t have any answer as to the fate of new bag holders he created with his tweet. That was irresponsible.

I have to say up front, I find this kind of attitude incredibly infantilizing and condescending.

Exactly how many "bag holders" did Chamath "create"? (Hint: Zero.) Obviously the "bag holders" are assuming the risks themselves, as is (absent any evidence to the contrary) Chamath. They're on a forum literally called "Wall Street BETS" (emphasis mine). If a millionaire announces he's playing the slots and subsequently wins the jackpot, is he "responsible" for everyone else who subsequently plays slots?

(He didn't make this argument as well as he could have, but Chamath himself points out that when Goldman or AIG played stupid games, everyone else was conscripted into being the "bag holders.")

Also, exactly how many people are we even saying Chamath influenced? How many people were undecided about making the GME trade and then said, "welp, Chamath is long so YOLOOOOO?" And how many of these people traded irresponsibly (e.g. overleveraged, invested their life savings)? I would bet the number is small, even negligible.

> His plan to make hedge funds disclose their positions daily as some kind of a solution to overleverage makes no sense whatsoever.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he ever proposed this as some sort of affirmative plan. What I heard was him pointing out the asymmetry of which entities are required/voluntarily publish their positions. If hedge funds had done that, the 136% thing would never have happened for obvious reasons. I interpreted it more as a response to the interviewer's pearl clutching about the market having no "integrity" because a stock price deviated from the "fundamentals" for a time under some bizarre circumstances.

> And he’s delusional about research skills of WSB posters as compared to Wall Street analysts.

If you're correct, then you can easily show us your short positions contra WSB research/herd mentality/irrationality/ and we can track how well you end up compared to WSB.

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#86

Post by pnathan »

systemvoltage wrote: post #18

I disagree with Chamath’s take. Chamath sounds intelligent but it’s misplaced. It’s like analyzing Black Friday stampedes with the rationality of product quality assessment, better customer service, and overall better shopping experience. No. That’s not why these people are rushing in. Black Friday stampedes are a cascading phenomenon of FOMO + price trickery. It’s a giant mob with irrational behavior. Let’s not poli…

Yeah, periodically I've puttered over to WSB and looked around. It's not a shining jewel of analysis on a normal day. Right, now it's a pure stampeding herd of FOMO with metaphorical taxi drivers giving stock tips. Which is pretty canonical bubble material.

I think some of the fundamental analysis on WSB is sound, but doesn't support the existing valuation. The "short squeeze" play is interesting, but I don't have access to the ticker and book to read the details on what is actually going on. It's stampede material.

Sure, I've got a little in AMC/GME, but even if we, ahem, "go to the moon", because, eh, why not, it's a fraction of a fraction of my net, why not pick up a few bucks on the side. =)

The vast bulk of my investments are perking along in Vanguard index mutuals and will not even notice GME.

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#87

Post by xadhominemx »

paxys wrote: post #79
bidirectional wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which hedge funds received bailouts? This insistence on viewing Wall St as a monolithic entity is just asinine. I can assure you the investment bankers at Goldman are not losing any sleep over GameStop.

Hedge funds didn't receive bailouts because they had all shorted the housing market. They instead made large profits while a large chunk of the country lost their jobs and homes. Meanwhile hundreds of banks and other financial institutions did get public funds. The state did not take any ownership, and some of them still haven't paid back billions. The profits generated since then – all directly due to the bailouts –…

The state did take ownership of entities that received direct bailouts - eg AIG, GM, Chrysler

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#88

Post by lamp_book »

bidirectional wrote: post #63
thunkshift1 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, its not. Have you forgotten the bailouts already?

Which hedge funds received bailouts? This insistence on viewing Wall St as a monolithic entity is just asinine. I can assure you the investment bankers at Goldman are not losing any sleep over GameStop.

It's pretty incestuous though. Mortgage backed security market got started at the Salomon Brothers before fumbling it to Morgan Stanley before GS ultimately decided when to pull the rug on it all. Citadel might not be a bank but market making is one of it's core functions much like them. Names might change but I bet many of the same players move between these firms.

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#89

Post by cinntaile »

systemvoltage wrote: post #51
runawaybottle wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we can’t knock a community for throwing ideas out there. I’ve gotten ideas from WSB that have led me to other ideas. It’s an alright subreddit, but to disparage them as dumbasses is a little much (they do enough of that to themselves as is).

No doubt, there is some good stuff in there as well. A few DDs are very in-depth and surprisingly good. I don’t think the whole subreddit is like that.

Does DD stand for Deep Dive or what does it stand for?

Re: Chamath Palihapitiya on Wallstreetbets [audio]

#90

Post by bidirectional »

paxys wrote: post #79
bidirectional wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which hedge funds received bailouts? This insistence on viewing Wall St as a monolithic entity is just asinine. I can assure you the investment bankers at Goldman are not losing any sleep over GameStop.

Hedge funds didn't receive bailouts because they had all shorted the housing market. They instead made large profits while a large chunk of the country lost their jobs and homes. Meanwhile hundreds of banks and other financial institutions did get public funds. The state did not take any ownership, and some of them still haven't paid back billions. The profits generated since then – all directly due to the bailouts –…

2008 was the worst year by far in the history of hedge funds, almost all lost money and hundreds of funds closed. They certainly did not all short the housing market, in fact there's several books and a Hollywood film about the few outsiders who did.
Post reply on HN