[deleted]
WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
131–140 of 475 posts
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#132Once again, this insistence on viewing 'Wall Street' as a monolothic entity. The largest asset management firm on Earth holds over 9 million Gamestop stock, none of the big banks that received bailouts in 08 are affected by this, 99.9% of hedge funds are not affected by this, high frequency traders are probably making a bundle. Institutional money was long Gamestop before this story entered the public consciousness.…
How is disabling purchases and broker-wide outages not bolstering hedge funds? It's government intervention no matter how you look at it. Just because it's not a direct capital infusion does not make it any less bad
>It's government intervention no matter how you look at it.
Is it? Do we have some information on that yet?
Why does disabling purchases help?
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#133Once again, this insistence on viewing 'Wall Street' as a monolothic entity. The largest asset management firm on Earth holds over 9 million Gamestop stock, none of the big banks that received bailouts in 08 are affected by this, 99.9% of hedge funds are not affected by this, high frequency traders are probably making a bundle. Institutional money was long Gamestop before this story entered the public consciousness.…
Sure, but Gabe Plotkin is the uber-wallstreeter. All the rich-but-average Chosen Ones who get internships because of mommy and daddy look at what guys like him accomplish and think, "someday that too can be mine." This is like that scene in 300 where Leonidas makes Xerxes bleed. The point isn't that Wall Street has fallen. It's that, for once, Wall Street is fallible.
[deleted]
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#134People have had enough, it's not just WSB anymore. The community of retail investors in GME is far beyond WSB. It's people that are frustrated with the 1% getting bailed out time and time again and them not seeing a dime at their tax dollar expense.
So they're going to show Wall Street who's boss by gambling away their grocery money? (Some will make out but I suspect the vast majority will lose big--money at least some can't really afford to lose.) I have trouble conjuring up a lot of sympathy but that's almost certainly uncharitable as I'm sure there will be stories of serious individual loss.
Very paternalistic to assume that people are gambling away their grocery money and should be stopped now that the short squeeze has become much, much more likely. Meanwhile ANY other security also has the chance to go to 0, but RH doesn't stop you from buying.
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
All those institutions are interconnected. A large hit to one player can cascade to the wider market as they're forced to sell off other positions to put up additional capital. That could cause additional sell-offs for more leveraged players. And so on... The phrase " too big to fail " exists for a reason and it's smaller than you think.
Forcing big leveraged players to sell is fantastic for everyone else. There will be a lot of cheap stocks to pick up for everyone else.
Sell, what exactly? They won't buy after that?
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they're going to show Wall Street who's boss by gambling away their grocery money? (Some will make out but I suspect the vast majority will lose big--money at least some can't really afford to lose.) I have trouble conjuring up a lot of sympathy but that's almost certainly uncharitable as I'm sure there will be stories of serious individual loss.
I have seen very little evidence of people investing money in the stock market that is not budgeted as “gambling” (ie disposable income). WSB embraces the idea that memetrading is gambling. This is not a surprise to anyone but a few outsiders.
But it kind of goes against the story that this is “the people” against Wall Street. “The people”, by and large, do not have a ton of spare gambling money sitting around. “Upper middle class folks with spare disposable income vs Wall Street” isn’t quite as persuasive a hook, though.
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#137Once again, this insistence on viewing 'Wall Street' as a monolothic entity. The largest asset management firm on Earth holds over 9 million Gamestop stock, none of the big banks that received bailouts in 08 are affected by this, 99.9% of hedge funds are not affected by this, high frequency traders are probably making a bundle. Institutional money was long Gamestop before this story entered the public consciousness.…
Some retail investors made money. The rest that are still jumping in will lose a lot as the stock returns to it’s correct price over time.
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#138Once again, this insistence on viewing 'Wall Street' as a monolothic entity. The largest asset management firm on Earth holds over 9 million Gamestop stock, none of the big banks that received bailouts in 08 are affected by this, 99.9% of hedge funds are not affected by this, high frequency traders are probably making a bundle. Institutional money was long Gamestop before this story entered the public consciousness.…
Sure, but Gabe Plotkin is the uber-wallstreeter. All the rich-but-average Chosen Ones who get internships because of mommy and daddy look at what guys like him accomplish and think, "someday that too can be mine." This is like that scene in 300 where Leonidas makes Xerxes bleed. The point isn't that Wall Street has fallen. It's that, for once, Wall Street is fallible.
I can't see how that's the case. They aren't going to suffer for this, let alone personally.
Even if the fund tanks, they can set up a new one, probably with sympathetic money or just cruise off into the sunset with their millions.
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#139I would really appreciate it if somebody could explain to me how people who sell short a stock are somehow “suffocating it” or “killing jobs.” And I say this as someone who has about 18 years of investing experience. I continue to believe stock shorting is one of the most poorly understood parts of equity markets and the wrong parts are most commonly parroted by people with little to no experience with short selling themselves.
And this narrative that somehow the regular Joe is sticking it to the man and using proceeds to pay medical bills makes for good heartwarming stuff, but I take umbrage with the idea that one person’s cause is more worthy than another and so they deserve the profits not this greedy oz character behind the curtain that is likely other retail traders and HFT momentum funds (the same ones that are vilified in this movement) buying it up as it moves higher and becomes more popular. If you make money trading, great but let’s ease up a bit with the saving the world nonsense. It’s not as if gambling your savings on call options is saving the world. It’s a catchy storyline to make people feel more comfortable with the idea of gambling.
Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is gambling money away. The sentiment is that they are knowingly _throwing_ it away to send a message.
So you're saying they're even dumber than they appear at first glance? Sorry, but pissing money away (or actually likely giving it to some Wall Street institution) to send some ill-defined "message" really can't be called anything but dumb.
You just said anyone who has ever contributed to a presidential campaign in their life is a moron. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way, no one pisses away $100 to the Libertarian candidate expecting he's really going to save over $100 in income tax or reduced regulations the next year...