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

Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 906 posts

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#371

Post by xbmcuser »

dleslie wrote: post #116
dkrich wrote: post #75

There’s a long history of similar occurrences that follow along a common line: whatever appears to support individual investors will be the path taken by politicians and regulatory bodies. Right now it appears that the public wants to be able to trade on their terms because there is this narrative that the little guy is finally sticking it to the big bad hedge funds. In reality there is probably very little truth to…

The FOMO is palpable. There's a hurried rush of small investors hoping to turn their meagre savings into a big win, backed by the anxiety that if they don't try then they'll forever regret missing their one and only chance at a comfortable life. This sort of event would be less likely if America's wealth disparity weren't so grotesquely skewed.

We are going to find out what will happen soon. As looking at the trade volumes people seem to have stopped selling or buying looking at the stock prices and the trades it looks like hf traders rather than retail

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#372

Post by TameAntelope »

Miner49er wrote: post #288
TameAntelope wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot stress this strongly enough -- the fact that buying was limited yesterday is not evidence that the little guy is actually winning. As has been explained in multiple other places, the limitations were as a result of Robinhood et. al. being unable to cover the risks involved in providing instant trading capabilities for a stock as volatile as the ones that got restricted. That has nothing to do with "the littl…

> limitations were as a result of Robinhood et. al. being unable to cover the risks involved in providing instant trading capabilities for a stock as volatile as the ones that got restricted. Yes RH had to cover more, because the clearinghouse was also starting to be stretched by the risk from the violatility. If the hedge funds go down, the clearinghouse wouldn't have been able to front their cash, and they would've…

> short (hedge fund) side.

The claim that "the hedge funds" operate in unison and/or are all short is probably the largest misconception about this whole situation. Very "us vs. them" and also very wrong.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#373

Post by twadfas »

The problem with experts is that they often accept things and normal that the general public finds unacceptable. The SEC experts probably see a lot of "Normal" level of manipulation and improper activity that folks outside the industry would find wholly unacceptable and would like reformed. This happens to a lot industries where bad behavior is normalized and ignored by both players and regulators.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#374

Post by FabHK »

acegopher wrote: post #14
sneak wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It specifies trading activity . I read this as a warning to WSB, not their brokerages.

No. WSB is not "a regulated entit[y]" that "disadvantage[d] investors or otherwise unduly inhibit[ed] their ability to trade certain securities". Robinhood is and did.

I'd say you might be wrong on both counts:

1. preventing people from buying GME at, whatever, $300 might not have been disadvantaging them, and

2. it might not have been unduly inhibiting their ability to trade, but duly so.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#375

Post by reggieband »

markbnj wrote: post #193
ycombigator wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many just want to screw the hedge funds, finally it's their blood in the water.

I don't get this. I can't imagine the professional investor class is still blindly following their shorts. They're all out by now, aren't they? If the "little guys" are making money I tend to think it's coming from other little guys.

Believe it or not there is strong evidence that more shorts are being added.

Consider a potential attitude that Citadel is going to get away with this blocking. I mean, maybe ... just maybe ... they'll get an SEC fine of a few hundred million (while protecting many hedge funds from billions in losses). In a worst case scenario a sacrificial scapegoat or two goes to a minimum security country club or house arrest for 6 months/1 year. But that will take a few months/years to come to pass and public sentiment will be much less hot. So they're probably gonna force the price down to unwind existing shorts.

So, since there is a potential that the price will be pushed down due to the above ... doesn't it make sense to open a new short position?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#376

Post by e_tm_ »

SirSavary wrote: post #287
jancsika wrote: post #121

A Moment in the Life of an HN Genius: 1. Reads a technical document outside their domain. 2. Feels dumb because they don't have a grasp on any of the concepts. 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. 4. Sees the word "manipulation" 5. Substitutes the laymen's definition of "manipulation"…

Seems like you struck a nerve. I'm impressed by how many people are replying to this, quoting your points, and then talking about those points as if they were addressed directly at them. When did HN become overrun by narcissists?

day 1

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#377

Post by duckfang »

koheripbal wrote: post #261
iso1631 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can tell almost no professional investers beat the market, almost nobody wins the lottery. Why should I listen to lottery players or professional wall street gamers?

Almost no doctors beat terminal cancer. Im going to try this crystal healing method...

I'll take it you've never gotten a bad diagnosis from a doctor. Those too are disastrous, gets put in your medical record, and local doctors will agree for the sole sake of not refuting another local doctor.

But jumping to crystals? Seriously?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#378

Post by young_unixer »

jancsika wrote: post #121

A Moment in the Life of an HN Genius: 1. Reads a technical document outside their domain. 2. Feels dumb because they don't have a grasp on any of the concepts. 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. 4. Sees the word "manipulation" 5. Substitutes the laymen's definition of "manipulation"…

> Builds a fantasy World of Wall Street from first principles around that definition

Haven't politicians and regulators been doing the same thing for ever?

Can't a normal person challenge that?

Why should we blindly follow the narrative of the politicians and regulators?

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#379

Post by sanderjd »

oramit wrote: post #298
dleslie wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FOMO is palpable. There's a hurried rush of small investors hoping to turn their meagre savings into a big win, backed by the anxiety that if they don't try then they'll forever regret missing their one and only chance at a comfortable life. This sort of event would be less likely if America's wealth disparity weren't so grotesquely skewed.

My Facebook feed is filled with people talking about this. These are friends I have know for years who have never mentioned stocks before but now are talking about "holding the line". It is FOMO for sure, but the real emotions I get from talking with people are outrage and revenge. Everyone feels like the system (economic and political) is rigged against the public. The dopamine hit from sticking it to the man is pal…

That would be useful if they were actually sticking it to the man. But that isn't what's happening here. What's happening is a big bubble where most of these regular people are gonna lose lots of money while the hedge funds end up closing out their position for a manageable loss and come out just fine.

Re: Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility

#380

Post by klodolph »

ryandrake wrote: post #323
klodolph wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. I will say that I’m not too busy for this at the moment, and getting to my very basic level of understanding has required me to sort through, at the very least, a fairly decent chunk of reference material and reading interpretations and explanatio…

Whenever I read about a topic that I don't know much about, part of me is always wondering if the writer is throwing all these exotic words and greek letters in there because they are really an essential to understanding the topic, or because they just want to over-complicate it to sound smart and blow their own horn. On one hand we have Occam's Razor: "the simplest solution is almost always the best." On the other w…

I don’t know how you could possibly reason about options without understanding delta, and gamma makes sense to me too since it’s just the derivative of delta as the underlying value changes.
Post reply on HN