Live data from Hacker News

Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

bloomberg.com

321–326 of 326 posts

Re: Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

#321
post #313
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you're not actually investing in capacity, the way you would be if you bought an IPO or even just a piece of equipment you could use to make something. while you are not directly investing in capacity like you might in an IPO, purchasing stock does create the same outcome. It's just not _you_ who is doing the capacity investing directly, but someone else who does so, as a result of the chain of investments.

It doesn't necessarily though. When I buy an IPO, my dollars go straight (kind of) into a company's bank account. When I buy stock on the market, my dollars go to whoever I bought the stock from, who will probably use those dollars to buy more stock. The only time a company ever receives dollars it can use is when it sells stock to the public or gets a loan, and the vast, vast majority of transactions on the stock ma…

> vast majority of transactions on the stock market do not involve dollars going to anyone who will use them to invest in capacity.

If you could _only_ invest directly into capacity, the amount of dollars that people would be willing to put in would be much smaller than today's. That's because the risk profile is singular in direct capacity investment.

The reason the stock market can fund IPOs is because it allows the different stratas of risk to be separated, and taken on by different parties that want those risks. So without your dollar buying an existing stock, thus letting early investors for an IPO an exit, they would unlikely to want to invest in the IPO in the first place!

Re: Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

#322
post #305
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason walmart's prices are stable is _because_ of the gambling of the market! The financial engineering of modern day has managed to separate risk (which is what causes price fluctuations) from their underlying commodity/goods/etc, and sell that risk away to people who want to take it. This allows those who want to not have risk (and thus stable prices) to have it - albeit yes, they pay a small premium for that.…

Nonsense. We had stable prices before the gambling functions were possible. The gambling functions of the market add nothing of value, and produce no economic output.

it's only stable if you imagined it to be stable - it wasn't. And commodities futures and speculation is only gambling if you choose to call it gambling and compare it to casinos - it's not. Comparing it to a house-odds gambling game like casino is just personal bias on your part, and your lack of understanding of the machinations of commodities trade.

Re: Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

#323
post #321
post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't necessarily though. When I buy an IPO, my dollars go straight (kind of) into a company's bank account. When I buy stock on the market, my dollars go to whoever I bought the stock from, who will probably use those dollars to buy more stock. The only time a company ever receives dollars it can use is when it sells stock to the public or gets a loan, and the vast, vast majority of transactions on the stock ma…

> vast majority of transactions on the stock market do not involve dollars going to anyone who will use them to invest in capacity. If you could _only_ invest directly into capacity, the amount of dollars that people would be willing to put in would be much smaller than today's. That's because the risk profile is singular in direct capacity investment. The reason the stock market can fund IPOs is because it allows th…

Yeah, it's certainly true that the financialization of everything allows for a lot more of every type of investment to be made (including in productive capacity).

Re: Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

#324
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could use the same argument for snake oil, which I think is pretty universally not accepted as moral.

Nope. With snake oil, we would way that it is immoral for ANYONE to sell it. As a result, we (mostly) make it illegal too. With Hertz stock, nobody seems willing to say that all sales of such stock are immoral. And certainly they're not illegal; people have been buying and selling an enormous volume of Hertz stock.

But even if I say -- Hey this is snake oil don't buy it, I'm still not able to say Snake oil. See 'Radioactive weight loss pills! *contains to radioactive materials'

Re: Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

#325
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. With snake oil, we would way that it is immoral for ANYONE to sell it. As a result, we (mostly) make it illegal too. With Hertz stock, nobody seems willing to say that all sales of such stock are immoral. And certainly they're not illegal; people have been buying and selling an enormous volume of Hertz stock.

But even if I say -- Hey this is snake oil don't buy it, I'm still not able to say Snake oil. See 'Radioactive weight loss pills! *contains to radioactive materials'

Correct.

Snake oil is intrinsically bad. We all agree it's bad, and thus, nobody is allowed to sell it, even if they disclose that it is snake oil.

But Hertz shares are apparently not bad. We're clearly happy to see people buying and selling them. Before, during, and well after Hetz's abortive at the money offering, thousands and thousands of people were selling Hertz shares, and I haven't seen anyone suggest they should have been prevented from doing so.

In fact, it seems like the only entity we, as a society, seem to feel shouldn't be allowed to sell Hertz shares is Hertz. Which would be really strange if Herz shares were, metaphorically, radioactive, no?

Re: Hertz, the original meme stock, is turning out to be worthless

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it will go much, much higher. GME is a short squeeze of epic proportions. It's going to be interesting to see how it plays out.

if the wsb narrative is true - and that if they hold, the shorts must buy at any price - then why don't other knowledgeable traders and institutions recognize that and get in the game? In other words, if the wsb moon-theory is true, it would have already happened. Isn't it more likely that the price is, at this point, just getting pumped by memes and wsb throwing good money after bad?

Because it’s going to crush the markets and the institutions. If you watch the media, there’s a serious panic going on. There is a serious chance this will cause a sort of financial Armageddon.
Post reply on HN