Fuck congress, reddit, robinhood and others for trying to keep rich people rich.
Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
231–240 of 293 posts
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should sign up for PACER. It's easy (although the web interface is horrible) and costs basically nothing at the scale you'd be using it at. It's one of those things you won't use often but you'll be happy you set it up, like, a couple times a year.
Most of the cases I'm interested in, someone has already signed up for PACER and added them to courtlistener by the time I get to it. Or it's a SCOTUS case and the entire docket is accessible for free on supremecourt.gov :-)
It was the same for me, but I like it when I can grab something that hasn't hit Courtlistener yet for, like, 50 cents. :)
It's a good message board power-up, I guess.
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#233This thread is full of people who have no idea how the exchanges, brokers, clearing firms and clearing houses operate. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-29/reddit...
This happens in every thread about every subject. Most users don't know anything, any expert will tell you it's the case when their subject is discussed here. The onus is on the knowledgeable to educate and correct and help and be charitable, and we usually see this.
We shouldn't try to shame or label users without at least trying to help first. Try to improve a situation and not make things worse. That way HN gets better.
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just curious -- why not?
The search terms you want is “T+2 settlement”. TLDR all trades take 2 days to settle but brokerages abstract that via “loans” and collateral.
Tell me if I'm way off here:
The clearinghouse collateral requirements in part protect the clearinghouse from things that can go wrong at the brokerage, like if Robinhood had a vulnerability that let people place huge orders without paying for them, and they were, like, put out of business overnight.
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
Robinhood stopped allowing you to play new games of blackjack. You're suggesting that, as a casino customer, you could say "you can't shut this table down! I was going to make back my money on the next hand!" which is pretty funny. I don't think this is at all like a bank that won't let you withdraw your money. I think it's like a brokerage that has to post 100% collateral --- out of their money --- for every share o…
No, that analogy doesn't fit. Fully half of robinhood users owned GME stock. They were in the middle of a bet. RH created a situation where the stock could only go down. "I think it's like a brokerage that has to post 100% collateral --- out of their money" How is this not the customers money? You deposited 100% of the collateral with RH. Banks can take your money and make loans with it so the bank can make profit, b…
Again, this is pretty funny. It really does sound like you're saying the casino can't kick you out if you're in the middle of playing some blackjack strategy. "I'm not done yet!"
I'm pretty sure everyone retained their ability to get cash out of Robinhood, for whatever that's worth.
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
The argument that Reddit/WSB users manipulated the market is a more difficult one to make vs. the argument that RH manipulated the market when they restricted their users to only sell GME. If they stopped both buying and selling then GME would not have dropped the way it did. RH CEO’s denial said they made the move to protect the firm and their customers, but blocking buying and selling would’ve given them the protec…
That reddit/wsb didn't market manipulate is in no way an argument for robin hood having market manipulated. Again, it's fine to do things that cause stock prices to move. That robin hood could have reduced their functionality further in order to affect the stock price less is not relevant. If they have some duty to go out of their way to minimise their impact on stock prices, its above and beyond regular market manip…
So when they reopened limited trading and prevented people who already had positions from acquiring more, how did that help their case that it was done because of their obligations to their clearing house? If they said “ok, everyone can purchase 5 additional shares” it’d be one thing. But they said “nobody can acquire to own more than 5 shares”. Some of those shares people owned were already settled....
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#237Robinhood won’t go out of business because of lawsuits, it’ll be an exodus of users. Even if they just weren’t prepared and everything they did was legitimately the right thing to do, that ship has sailed. I know people I didn’t even know had a Robinhood account ask me if I was shutting my account down too. This will be fascinating to watch. Can the repair the brand damage? I’m skeptical. Is there any similar scenari…
freetrade in the UK might be worth looking at for an example of a business trying to repair their brand.
They basically said they were deeply sorry, didn't try to cover up and blamed their bank and clearinghouse.
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#238Robinhood won’t go out of business because of lawsuits, it’ll be an exodus of users. Even if they just weren’t prepared and everything they did was legitimately the right thing to do, that ship has sailed. I know people I didn’t even know had a Robinhood account ask me if I was shutting my account down too. This will be fascinating to watch. Can the repair the brand damage? I’m skeptical. Is there any similar scenari…
This is a very good point, the question is where to go? I am European, we don't even have Robinhood here, so I had a dead eToro account with 140 EUR on it and Interactive Brokers, which we all thought was synonymous with quality and respect. However, they folded first, along with Degiro, which was the other "well-reputed" option available to us. Everyone started running to XTB, which limited trading on Friday afterno…
I don't know but it seems like the more reliable businesses in Europe to use have higher fees or monthly charges...
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#239Robinhood won’t go out of business because of lawsuits, it’ll be an exodus of users. Even if they just weren’t prepared and everything they did was legitimately the right thing to do, that ship has sailed. I know people I didn’t even know had a Robinhood account ask me if I was shutting my account down too. This will be fascinating to watch. Can the repair the brand damage? I’m skeptical. Is there any similar scenari…
They did shoot up in the app store during this negative publicity. It could be that a vocal minority just don’t matter .
They shot up earlier in the week of the publicity because it wasn't negative right then and they were the business of choice for the user of wsb. All meme stocks were being bought using this.
On Thursday and Friday was when the publicity turned negative.
Re: Analysis: Robinhood protected from lawsuits by user agreement, Congress
#240"It will be hard to prove users suffered as a result of Robinhood’s measures because GameStop and other stocks covered by the curbs fell sharply on Thursday after the restrictions were announced, said James Cox, a professor at Duke Law School." Wait, what? Can anyone legitimately make the claim that the massive drop in value that cut off the price rise at the knees and allowed the worst short positions to cover their…
> Can anyone legitimately make the claim that the massive drop in value that cut off the price rise at the knees and allowed the worst short positions to cover their losses sub-$200 didn't materially harm the users? Very probably. The general principle of Article III jurisprudence is that you have to demonstrate concrete, particularized harm to bring a case, not generalized, theoretical harm. If your allegation is th…
In this case the concrete harm is easy to show as someone could just show the number of shares their account could have covered purchase at $200/share when buys were blocked. And multiply that by the gain they would have made selling Friday.
This is an easily quantifiable and concrete claim that might be brought up by every Robinhood user with cash in their account.
They would be safer if the stock had continued to drop.