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

291–300 of 475 posts

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

#291

Post by function_seven »

risyachka wrote: post #222
obmelvin wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It’s not my fault their business model is failing for a particular ticker on a particular day. As I see it, regardless of how it should be, one needs to accept that trading with RH has limitations/trade-offs compared to a "proper" brokerage. I get your statement, but like you said, their track record already speaks for itself.

It's not just RH. I am paying for Interactive Brokers, they also stopped buy transactions.

Oh wow. I've always thought IB to be the most "bare metal" trading platform available to regular people. If they're denying buy orders, then where does a plebe go to get direct access to the market?

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

#292

Post by dumbfounder »

lifeslogit wrote: post #154
dcolkitt wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> high frequency traders are probably making a bundle. I've heard from a former colleague at a major HFT firm, that they hit their entire revenue target for the year, just in the past week.

That is very interesting to hear! I imagined that this was the perfect storm for HFT. Lots of retail investors using default exchange routing settings via brokers like Robinhood and ETrade that sell their order flow. Meanwhile these retail investors are buying small amounts of very volatile equities! Lots of opportunity to rack up lots of pennies.

So RobinHood is stealing information from the poor to give to the rich? To make them richer? Surely I am not the first to notice this irony.

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

#293

Post by aynyc »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #179
aynyc wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should broker allow margin trading at all? If it's about risk, then who's the decider/calculator of the risk? I think this is the reason why there is a distrust from the next generation.

> who's the decider/calculator of the risk? The lender. As in all loans. As is in every detail described in one’s margin contract.

I looked at my margin document, other than Federal Reserve requirements and account restriction, there is no provision stating they can block a specific eligible stock as long as I meet their margin requirement.

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

#294

Post by ryandward »

ziftface wrote: post #276
ghaff wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I can see all the pressure being applied to me to sell. Clearly some very rich and influential people want me to sell. This alone is enough to convince me not to. I don't care if it's dumb or it will go down to $0. I'm not budging.

Yeah, before today I'd have likely dismissed such comments as "conspiracy theory" but, RobinHood literally disabled the ability to buy, or even search for these stocks on their platform.

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

#295

Post by bilekas »

bvirb wrote: post #225
bidirectional wrote: post #19

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.…

https://www.powercycletrading.com/what-is-a-high-short-inter... . > Short interest as a percentage of float above 20% is extremely high > A high NYSE short interest ratio means that the stock market as a whole is vulnerable to a “short-squeeze.” It could rise quickly if new economic data, political news, or other types of information are released that make investors more optimistic. GME was shorted 140%. No idea if 2…

I'm pretty stupid on this, but how does one short for +100% is that not naked shoring ?

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

#296

Post by fairity »

dx87 wrote: post #128
duxup wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we talking about cutting your own nose off to spite someone else's face?

Is that any different to taking a day off work to go to a protest? Both situations have you losing money in order to bring issues to light. Same with union workers going on strike.

Yes, it's different insofar as the money you're losing in this protest is going directly into the pockets of the group of people you're protesting against. Very illogical way to protest.

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

#297

Post by zwkrt »

duxup wrote: post #216
function_seven wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They should be forced to provide the service they promised. It’s not my fault their business model is failing for a particular ticker on a particular day. If they can’t, then some advance notice is needed. Making this decision instantly without giving customers time to move their holdings elsewhere is not okay. That being said, I’m surprised people are still using them for day trading. They don’t have a great tr…

> It’s not my fault their business model is failing "You" (well not you but you get what i'm saying) picked the service... If folks are capable of investing directly in stocks they should be expected to understand the ramifications of picking a free service like Robinhood. They ESPECIALLY should with all this populist banter going around...

The majority of all e-brokers have made the same choice. This isn’t about Robinhood being for dummies or selling your data or any of that.

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

#298

Post by hawk_ »

dcolkitt wrote: post #79
mancerayder wrote: post #55

They are blocking buying, and only allowing selling GME, BB and others. How is this not evidence of a corrupted free market system? A CEO of one company can call up his connections in retail trading platform firms, CNBC, and Nasdaq and protect his profits? Why is Reddit the scandal and not that? Reddit is full of rocket emojis and YOLO jokes. But what we see here, especially with the moralizing about gambling, is an…

Robinhood is a free service. The customers don’t pay anything. If the order internalizers decide to stop paying them for their order flow, then they have to route to the exchanges. which charge fees. Trading is still ongoing at the exchanges. It’s just the free platforms, where it’s shut down. If someone wanted guaranteed access to the exchange, then they shouldn’t have used a free broker. Are you saying that Robinho…

interactive brokers is a paid service and they actually pretend they are different by not sharing their flow with Citadel etc... even they blocked trades on options on these symbols.

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

#299

Post by FabHK »

jimbob21 wrote: post #241
totalZero wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of self-respecting HFT firm has revenue targets? Surely you're talking about P&L.

They're nearly the same thing in the hedge fund's case. Most of them take some variant of 2&20 still, so 20% of fund profits is their revenue.

HFT shops are not hedge funds.

They don't need much capital, and I'd say that many have no outside investors. So, their trading PnL minus cost of running the operation is the net profit.

On the other hand, the trading PnL will typically be a tiny part of their total trading volume (maybe a few bp).

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

#300

Post by bluecalm »

Ozzie_osman wrote: post #153

Here's a question. How much of the investors in funds like Melvin are actually wealthy family offices and high-net worth folk, and how much are pension funds, endowments, etc? Because if it's the latter, then the losers here aren't billionaires and Wall Street.

I sure hope pension funds are not investing in hedge funds focused on shorting stocks.
Post reply on HN