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

WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

thinkingthrough.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 475 posts

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#281

Post by fairity »

mancerayder wrote: post #239
fairity wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are blocking buying, and only allowing selling GME, BB and others. How is this not evidence of a corrupted free market system? I can almost guarantee you that this decision was made to protect retail clients -- not as part of some conspiracy against them. It's very clear that retail is going to lose their shirts in the end of all of this, and by blocking new buy orders, the brokerage is effectively protecting…

You don't think the shorts are getting a chance out of their positions here?

Slight miscommunication -- what's happening is they're preventing any new positions from being opened. You can close positions, whether short or long.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#282

Post by serjester »

willis936 wrote: post #70
ghaff wrote: post #58

Earlier 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.

One of the most popular posts on WSB right now is somebody bragging they're putting their entire life savings in GameStop. I personally know people buying Gamestop that shouldn't be. It's pretty scary.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#283

Post by ignoramous »

nabla9 wrote: post #255
ignoramous wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Peasants suspected their king was getting away with raping villagers. Peasants came together and decided to show the king. They started to rape each other in the broad daylight. When the town sheriff intervened, they cried out foul, "Why is the notion of rape such a 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 dis…

> What made it worse was that King's son was involved in raping during the rape fest but somehow avoided getting raped himself.

Let's see if that's how this plays out.

Also, ignoring the fact that whilst the peasants are merely slapping each other on their wrists, they're really in fact looking to take the King who doesn't jive like them, to the guillotines.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#284

Post by kgwgk »

clarkevans wrote: post #193
DougN7 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

As repeated Reddit, the shorts are still oversubscribed and the short squeeze has yet to start. Retail investors are around 15% -- there are many index funds that are invested, perhaps they might be the last ones holding? Even so, I'll be damned if I understand anything about this. I think it's interesting that "accredited investors" (e.g. 1MM in assets) can unionize to play in the stock market (e.g. hedge funds) but…

It can't go tits up!

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#285

Post by emteycz »

afavour wrote: post #248
dalbasal wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The line is blurry. There was an immediate and emphatic appeal to the regulators, and the way the SEC works is often by encouraging self regulation. The CEO of the NASDAQ even went on air to ask for more SEC regulation. This isn't unusual, it's pretty much how "government intervention" via the SEC, and a lot of other regulatory bodies, actually works.

So, the SEC is hands off and encourages self regulation, so any instance of self regulation is considered government intervention?

Yes, when SEC asks for something it's considered governmental intervention even though they technically don't force it.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#286

Post by chaganated »

Tenoke wrote: post #237
chaganated wrote: post #37

Premature gloating. The government can always come in at the last minute with bailouts for wall street and overblown charges against the redditors. I see that you've been HODLing some GME. Sorry bro, have to charge you with economic terrorism. Nothing personal.

When have hedge funds been bailed out by the government? Especially over a single stock? Even if a small hedge fund or two go bankrupt this doesnt affect the economy much and there is no chance the government will bail them out. This isn't all of wallstreet on the line at all.

It's all connected. Any little hiccup can trigger a chain reaction of margin calls, or worse. Remember the CDO debacle from 2008.

When Goldman, JP Morgan, et al finally take the hit, we all know that DC will rush to their aid. It has happened before, and it will happen again.

Nobody is buying these worn-out wall street apologetics.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#287

Post by fock »

And in the shadows, Blackrock and the other institutional investors lending the stock in the first place probably just roll in money from the current situation.

And imho they have to initiate the "real squeeze" by wanting their stocks back. But I think they like the current situation, high enough to make the short sellers bleed, but not high enough to knock them over fully, so they can still merrily sell to them (OTC) and Jane Doe, while happily pocketing some sociopaths money for extending the lease on their remaining shares... They don't profit at all from the WSB-proposed rockt-squeeze, where the stock goes up, then trading is stopped for everyone and they can not liquidate everything and they also won't get everything back, when their borrowers default. But this is heaven for them: who could have expected that investing in a company slowly sliding to bankruptcy could be so profitable!

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#288

Post by Invictus0 »

It's funny watching the know it alls here on HN bang their heads against the wall trying to explain WSB. In the last couple days I've seen I've seen everything from "lack of sex" to class warfare. It's really not that complicated: it's a short squeeze that became something of a single-minded flash mob to discourage weak-hands from selling before the squeeze is complete. That's it. The politics and everything else is nonsense.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#289

Post by OscarCunningham »

nlitened wrote: post #202
dreamcompiler wrote: post #163

The endgame here is fascinating to me. The people who got in early will suffer least when GSE finally crashes and burns. But the poor suckers who bought it at $150 are going to be in big trouble. They're all trying to stay strong and hold long because that's the way to make the hedge funds suffer, but the smarter ones will figure out that their only chance to not lose their shirts is to be in the earliest 5% of scabs…

> Meanwhile a couple of hedge funds go under Which means that the money the hedge funds lost is redistributed among all who held the stock. It's not that the money vanishes. That's why people hold until the hedge funds go under.

> Which means that the money the hedge funds lost is redistributed among all who held the stock.

No, the hedge funds are being forced to buy, so their money will be redistributed to whoever sells them the stock. That won't be WSB if they keep buying,

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#290

Post by pjc50 »

Clubber wrote: post #100
willis936 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Occupy Wall Street was just 10 years ago. It was the longest demonstration in a lifetime. Nothing changed. How did nothing change? What message does this send?

The only way things will change, I'm convinced, is for everybody to vote out the incumbent every time. Occupy Wall Street didn't work, riots and looting wealthy areas didn't work, raiding the capitol building didn't work. The corruption is dug in. Voting out the incumbent breaks all these decades long (multi-generational?) relationships with the elites. They will probably reform the relationships to a degree the firs…

The lesson from Trump is that blindly going against the incumbent may simply replace them with somebody less competent and more corrupt.
Post reply on HN