Live data from Hacker News

Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

reddit.com

81–90 of 91 posts

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#81
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I propose changing the description slightly to frame how big of an issue it is: I downloaded the app to buy shares. It is the weekend. The markets are closed, so I can't buy shares. Delete app, 1* rating, false advertising. There is always fine print. The challenge is that the fine print here is really complicated. In extreme situations there are rules to consider.

This is the sort of nose-upturned view many of us are guilty of, regardless of whether that was your intent. Ive seen those "users are stupid" anecdata floating around these parts with impunity. People aren't stupid and 100K plus people making a complaint can't be seen as a mere "users are stupid" scenario. This condescent of people who use our products will catch up with us someday and I hope it does. People arent h…

The original parent is 'This is worrying indeed because the negative reviews are clearly justified.'. I don't agree with this and the thread explains why.

There are two issues to your comment:

1. Trading (including risk management) is really complicated. It isn't something that you can pick up in 30 seconds after downloading an app. This exact scenario (where broker stops taking orders on a stock likely due to internal risk limits) is a great example of an unusual scenario that has to be risk managed. This isn't some nose-upturned view but a fact.

2. Many of the comments here are made in good faith but it is pure speculation. 500K reviews were apparently posted and automatically removed. In any usual day we'd assume this was the usual spam. Again there's speculation about why there were removed. My point here is that there needs to be time to actually find out what happened.

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#82
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the sort of nose-upturned view many of us are guilty of, regardless of whether that was your intent. Ive seen those "users are stupid" anecdata floating around these parts with impunity. People aren't stupid and 100K plus people making a complaint can't be seen as a mere "users are stupid" scenario. This condescent of people who use our products will catch up with us someday and I hope it does. People arent h…

The original parent is 'This is worrying indeed because the negative reviews are clearly justified.'. I don't agree with this and the thread explains why. There are two issues to your comment: 1. Trading (including risk management) is really complicated. It isn't something that you can pick up in 30 seconds after downloading an app. This exact scenario (where broker stops taking orders on a stock likely due to intern…

There's also an article supporting my points that sometimes there are restrictions (fine print) that stop trading.

From: https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/28/22255031/robinhood-gamest...

Quote: As a brokerage firm, we have many financial requirements, including SEC net capital obligations and clearinghouse deposits. Some of these requirements fluctuate based on volatility in the markets and can be substantial in the current environment,” the post argues. “To be clear, this was a risk-management decision, and was not made on the direction of the market makers we route to.”

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#83
post #61

This is bad. I can absolutely understand it for a political pile-on, or an unrelated protest, but this is a fundamental complaint with the service not following operating procedure. If I were king, the app would be pulled until financial amends were made.

This attitude is a big problem, because once you allow it for political pile-on, it's suddenly available for other issues, like this one. It's what every free speech advocate has been saying for years, or decades, or hundreds of years, yet people generally cheer on censorship when its for their own political side.

The thing I was attempting to describe is a vote against an app because (eg) its parent company donated to Republicans, something which isn't about the app or service.

The Robinhood review bomb isn't that, it's a proper and serious complaint against the service.

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#84

I feel naive; what's the incentive for Google to do this?

It seems to be in Google's vein. When they removed call recording API from Android, it was a sign they side with all sort of scammers. Call recording is an ultimate tool for fighting any scummy salesmen, especially from insurance companies. Probably they were starting to lose money and asked Google too remove call recording so customers can't defend themselves from predatory practices.

Seems more likely that they saw legal liability in states and countries that have a 2 party consent requirement for recording.

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#85
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a stock trading app manipulates the market by preventing purchases, while allowing selling, of certain stocks that are popular with a democratized hedge fund community, they deserve all the 1 star reviews they get. It's not just an useless app now, it's an actively dangerous scam app.

> If a stock trading app manipulates the market by preventing purchases They're likely close to hitting their collateral limits with the clearing house[0]. During yesterday's 5-minute interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo, RH's CEO mentioned their collateral obligations (plus unnamed regulatory requirements) as the reason for preventing new positions in GME. Every trade creates a collateral obligation with the clearing ho…

IF they are already requiring people to have the cash in their account to cover buys, how can they not have the collateral to cover them. They could have disabled options trading right? But why buying with cash?

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#86
post #29

I'm not sure how I feel about this to be honest. I appreciate they were following their guidelines and wouldn't like anyone to troll an app like this but I don't think google should have removed bad reviews. Unless court ordered maybe, based on FCC findings of market manipulation or something like that. Robinhood sells their client's data to financial institutions. These institutions then can use that to skim off Rob…

There's a real danger here that there are high level summaries upon summaries from those who don't really understand the details of the markets. Every broker will have various liquidity pools and those pools will be pinged to execute your order. The order has to get best execution (there are legal requirements on it). Without knowing the internal details of RH all of this is speculation. I think that what folk are sa…

RH doesn't guarantee best execution, unlike a regular broker.

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#88
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the sort of nose-upturned view many of us are guilty of, regardless of whether that was your intent. Ive seen those "users are stupid" anecdata floating around these parts with impunity. People aren't stupid and 100K plus people making a complaint can't be seen as a mere "users are stupid" scenario. This condescent of people who use our products will catch up with us someday and I hope it does. People arent h…

The original parent is 'This is worrying indeed because the negative reviews are clearly justified.'. I don't agree with this and the thread explains why. There are two issues to your comment: 1. Trading (including risk management) is really complicated. It isn't something that you can pick up in 30 seconds after downloading an app. This exact scenario (where broker stops taking orders on a stock likely due to intern…

Trading may be complicated, but when SV releases an app to make it simple, you can’t use that as an excuse.

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#89
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the sort of nose-upturned view many of us are guilty of, regardless of whether that was your intent. Ive seen those "users are stupid" anecdata floating around these parts with impunity. People aren't stupid and 100K plus people making a complaint can't be seen as a mere "users are stupid" scenario. This condescent of people who use our products will catch up with us someday and I hope it does. People arent h…

The original parent is 'This is worrying indeed because the negative reviews are clearly justified.'. I don't agree with this and the thread explains why. There are two issues to your comment: 1. Trading (including risk management) is really complicated. It isn't something that you can pick up in 30 seconds after downloading an app. This exact scenario (where broker stops taking orders on a stock likely due to intern…

The supposed complicated part of trading has nothing to do with this particular trade, from the perpective of the trader unless you can demonstrate it to be so. It might be complicated for brokers but certainly not the trader.

Re: Google Deleted over 100k Negative Robinhood Reviews

#90
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a stock trading app manipulates the market by preventing purchases They're likely close to hitting their collateral limits with the clearing house[0]. During yesterday's 5-minute interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo, RH's CEO mentioned their collateral obligations (plus unnamed regulatory requirements) as the reason for preventing new positions in GME. Every trade creates a collateral obligation with the clearing ho…

IF they are already requiring people to have the cash in their account to cover buys, how can they not have the collateral to cover them. They could have disabled options trading right? But why buying with cash?

I think the issue is that they're allowing people to use cash right away when they sell, rather than waiting until T+2, and they can't instantly unilaterally change their ToS. They could block people from selling, but not block them from buying, but that would cause all kinds of problems.

As I remember, eTrade also used to not require you to wait until T+2 to reinvest the proceeds from stock sales.

Post reply on HN