251–260 of 475 posts
I’d just like to suggest the possibility that there’s nothing noble going on in /r/wallstreetbets and this is all being orchestrated by a small number of people taking advantage of useful idiots. I’m not attempting to proclaim this is the truth, just giving a stray thought of mine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just robinhood, platforms that charge commission such as IBRK [1] have halted the trade of options (which is different from not allowing buying) but it definitely suggests some behind the scenes coordination for all these online brokers to all decide this today. [1] https://www.axios.com/robinhood-gamestop-restrictions-370adf...
Options are different than equities. The possibility of losses far exceeding the initial position is easily possible. If the customer loses all their money, the broker is in the hook. IB clearly is concerned about the credit risk, when the stock could literally rise or fall by a factor of ten in a day. They’re still allowing trading in the underlying stock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don't think he's arguing FOR stopping the trades. I think he's worried about the folks participating financial well being. We worry about that (people's retirement savings and so on) anytime we see market corrections, a given company go under, and etc... it's not an unusual concern.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you buy stock with the purpose of pushing the price up so that other people will buy it, that’s market manipulation. What WSB crowd is doing is market manipulation. That's illegal. WSB is doing everything openly and even celebrating it. Getting mad when openly breaking the law is not rational response. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78i Brokers like Robinhood are reacting because they want too keep SEC…
> What WSB crowd is doing is market manipulation. Shorting GME more than number stocks exist is not market manipulation? HFT isn't? Bailing out greed isn't? Why is this notion of market manipulation such a narrow one-way street?
When the dust finally settled and anuses stopped bleeding, they discovered that they were coaxed to rape each other by Kings son who disguised himself as a commoner in the village subreddit. What made it worse was that King's son was involved in raping during the rape fest but somehow avoided getting raped himself.
I 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…
This is what I don't get either. I keep thinking of Danny DeVito's speech at the end "Other People's Money." "You know, at one time there must've been dozens of companies making buggy whips. And I'll bet the last company around was the one that made the best goddamn buggy whip you ever saw. Now how would you have liked to have been a stockholder in that company?" GameStop sells buggy whips. Why shouldn't people bet a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think he's arguing FOR stopping the trades. I think he's worried about the folks participating financial well being. We worry about that (people's retirement savings and so on) anytime we see market corrections, a given company go under, and etc... it's not an unusual concern.
It seems like concern trolling tbh.
When I see 'concern trolling' I usually think of it as just a term slapped on something to hand wave and ignore it.
Once 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.…
Individually, what they were doing (shorting that stock) might have been perfectly sensible. That they collectively overshorted made them vulnerable. I'm not convinced yet that it was stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The problem is bigger than originally conceived then.
Although there is definitely a David/Goliath fairness scandal in here, this piece doesn't seem to know the difference between market makers, brokers, and hedge funds.