Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility • Hacker News Board

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#51

Post by wslh » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #32

OscarCunningham wrote: post #25

There's been some speculation that what WSB are doing could be market manipulation or otherwise illegal. The fact that this statement only mention retail investors in the context of protecting them makes me suspect that the SEC's not going for it.

Could be? It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event. How can there be any question about it? You might decide that this kind of manipulation is OK due to it's stated goals, but that doesn't make it not manipulation.

> It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event.

I understand that if someone publicly give you a financial strategy that is sound and it is not based on a ponzi then it is a recommendation.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#52

Post by dls2016 » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

throwaway4good wrote: post #30

dls2016 wrote: post #11

What are the odds of a flash crash in the next week as a result of this activity? The system of banks and market makers and clearing houses is a always way more coupled than the the owners let on... history shows they don't know how to risk manage these sorts of situations.

In the mentioned stocks? Very high. However for the broader market; GME and friends are tiny. Ristricting trading is a way of managing risk.

> Ristricting trading is a way of managing risk.

So when the low probability event actually happens, should I be happy to have had my trading privileges revoked and my risk managed for me?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#53

Post by Dirlewanger » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #32

OscarCunningham wrote: post #25

There's been some speculation that what WSB are doing could be market manipulation or otherwise illegal. The fact that this statement only mention retail investors in the context of protecting them makes me suspect that the SEC's not going for it.

Could be? It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event. How can there be any question about it? You might decide that this kind of manipulation is OK due to it's stated goals, but that doesn't make it not manipulation.

Ever think that they just like the stock?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#54

Post by dj_mc_merlin » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

> The Commission will closely review actions taken by regulated entities that may disadvantage investors or otherwise unduly inhibit their ability to trade certain securities. In addition, we will act to protect retail investors when the facts demonstrate abusive or manipulative trading activity that is prohibited by the federal securities laws.

Hopeful sentences for the ones who long GME. How often does the initial statement SEC makes actually matter?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#55

Post by nrmitchi » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

OscarCunningham wrote: post #25

There's been some speculation that what WSB are doing could be market manipulation or otherwise illegal. The fact that this statement only mention retail investors in the context of protecting them makes me suspect that the SEC's not going for it.

I don't think it's fair here to assume that by "retail investors" the SEC means all retail investors. Retail is not one giant group.

It is possible for one group of retail (lets say the original WSBs crowd) to take illegal action that harms other retail investors.

Taking action to protect the mass of retail does not mean that all of retail is immediately in the clear.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#56

Post by klodolph » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

dageshi wrote: post #36

rich_sasha wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a distance, this is all a storm in a teacup. It's a small handful of stocks, and every single one in S&P500 is waaaay bigger, in terms of trading volumes and market cap. Anything can happen, but in finance terms, this is tiny so far.

If that's the case I'm kinda confused why trading platforms keep banning trades in these particular meme stocks?

Because they are forced to carry collateral to make the trades happen, and need more collateral for more volatile stocks.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#57

Post by gnfargbl » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #32

OscarCunningham wrote: post #25

There's been some speculation that what WSB are doing could be market manipulation or otherwise illegal. The fact that this statement only mention retail investors in the context of protecting them makes me suspect that the SEC's not going for it.

Could be? It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event. How can there be any question about it? You might decide that this kind of manipulation is OK due to it's stated goals, but that doesn't make it not manipulation.

Whether or not it is market manipulation, who do you think the SEC could realistically go after here?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#58

Post by moosey » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #32

OscarCunningham wrote: post #25

There's been some speculation that what WSB are doing could be market manipulation or otherwise illegal. The fact that this statement only mention retail investors in the context of protecting them makes me suspect that the SEC's not going for it.

Could be? It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event. How can there be any question about it? You might decide that this kind of manipulation is OK due to it's stated goals, but that doesn't make it not manipulation.

Applying this logic, perhaps we can get "professional" stock ... manipulators off the TV. CNBC can go away entirely. Marketing speak would be replaced with value charts. Ban all forums that discuss specific stock values.

Then prevent people from buying stocks in groups. Mutual funds, ETFs, etc... all of these abstractions on abstractions, we can throw them away. The more abstractions we throw away, the closer we get to what all this should actually be meant to serve; people.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#59

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:22 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #32

OscarCunningham wrote: post #25

There's been some speculation that what WSB are doing could be market manipulation or otherwise illegal. The fact that this statement only mention retail investors in the context of protecting them makes me suspect that the SEC's not going for it.

Could be? It's an open, publicly-documented market manipulation event. How can there be any question about it? You might decide that this kind of manipulation is OK due to it's stated goals, but that doesn't make it not manipulation.

[deleted]

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#60

Post by klodolph » Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 3:22 PM UTC

dls2016 wrote: post #52

throwaway4good wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the mentioned stocks? Very high. However for the broader market; GME and friends are tiny. Ristricting trading is a way of managing risk.

> Ristricting trading is a way of managing risk. So when the low probability event actually happens, should I be happy to have had my trading privileges revoked and my risk managed for me?

Robinhood managing its own risk, not yours.