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

Robinhood S-1 IPO

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 404 posts

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#121

Post by dilyevsky »

arcturus17 wrote: post #106
rburhum wrote: post #48

I understand that many give Robinhood crap because it is not "sophisticated enough" or because of the Gamestop fiasco. Although many startups like to claim that they are "democratizing [x]", I honestly believe they did it. I have many friends that never traded before, and after they got their Robinhood account they feel comfortable enough to do it often. Even myself, who used to only trade a couple of times a year, s…

I really don’t understand this “democratizing” thing. In Spain, banks have allowed to trade on all kinds of assets for ages. Some with low fees. If you wanted to buy a certain asset you could do so in like three clicks. In the US I know as a fact that some banks like Charles Schwab have also made retail investing accessible for ages… Robin Hood has “democratized” trading in the sense of aggressively expanding it thro…

CS had like $9 fee per trade before they felt the heat from RH. Which btw was fine by me since it was small potatoes if you just casually invest and hold for a year or longer. What they really democratized is incessant day-trading, otm calls on dogshit stocks etc. basically a casino pretending to be a brokerage

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#122

Post by gruez »

edoceo wrote: post #55
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>or they are making a killing on crypto fees. They don't charge commissions to trade crypto. Not sure where they're skimming the money but the terrible order fills you get there gives me an idea.

Front-running?

No need. It's just like those "commission free" currency exchange places you see at airports and tourist areas. There might not be a commission, but the spread is several percent, and they make all their profit off that.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#123

Post by sakekasi »

mulcahey wrote: post #18

I remember seeing their first public demo at LA Hacks in 2014. Seemed like a couple of kids right out of college. They had the iPhone's screen hooked up to the projector and one of their friends kept sending them silly text messages the whole time that they had to dismiss. This was before the Do Not Disturb feature came out. I remember wondering how it took so long for someone to make a half decent stock trading app…

I was at that LA Hacks as well! The first one right? That was the highlight of the hackathon! I remember everyone really tripping over themselves to try to sign up

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#124

Post by bee_rider »

reidjs wrote: post #41
tofuahdude wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal: My two under-18 cousins both described using their parent's credentials to buy Dogecoin on Robinhood. Great stuff driving Robinhood revenue right here.

Think of these meme stocks as baseball cards or pokemon for gen-z and everything starts to make sense.

Imagining an IPO for a company that enabled baseball card and pokemon transactions has not helped me make sense of this situation.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#125

Post by mym1990 »

rfd4sgmk8u wrote: post #109
hef19898 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it was a shoe shine boy on wall street. So, especially back tue day, he should have been quite well informed!

Yes, this apocryphal story sucks. Why wouldn't a shoe shine boy (or an uber driver -- for contemporary equivalence) not have insight from the many conversations he would have with informed people during their day? The casual throw away statement about business made during transit from a passenger might be important info. This story is just elitism, and exactly the argument Wall Street used against RH. "unsophisticate…

Because 2 reasons: 1. Insight is great, but I would hope that there is underlying understanding of the field based on actual study and experience(assuming the shoe shiner is not in finance). 2. The shoe shiner or Uber driver likely has no idea who they are talking to, past the initial impression. I would be open to a conversation about finance with an Uber driver, but I would probably not rush home to put money on it.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#127

Post by jiocrag »

CPLNTN wrote: post #78
abriosi wrote: post #32

That's what happens when you spend a decade printing a lot of money Value becomes diluted

Dude here thinking that inflation is just a product of the amount of money in an economy

It’s not just a product of money supply, but money supply is certainly a factor, and we won’t really know how big of a factor until we see if inflation persists past Covid related supply chain constriction.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#128

Post by gruez »

ditonal wrote: post #90
rburhum wrote: post #48

I understand that many give Robinhood crap because it is not "sophisticated enough" or because of the Gamestop fiasco. Although many startups like to claim that they are "democratizing [x]", I honestly believe they did it. I have many friends that never traded before, and after they got their Robinhood account they feel comfortable enough to do it often. Even myself, who used to only trade a couple of times a year, s…

Index funds democratized investing. Robinhood “democratized” the worst part of investing and exposed unsophisticated investors to the instruments they are most likely to underperform on. Individual stock picking is probably worse than indexes but fine, however the incentive to day trade or trade complex derivatives is almost certainly going to hurt people far more often than a Vanguard account. It’s not a coincidence…

>Source? Not a single investigation other than the word of Robinhood CEO

I'd welcome an investigation, but based on the rest of your comment ("apologists", "only a naive fool would accept the explanation given") my guess is that your mind is already made up.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#129

Post by rfd4sgmk8u »

hef19898 wrote: post #115
rfd4sgmk8u wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this apocryphal story sucks. Why wouldn't a shoe shine boy (or an uber driver -- for contemporary equivalence) not have insight from the many conversations he would have with informed people during their day? The casual throw away statement about business made during transit from a passenger might be important info. This story is just elitism, and exactly the argument Wall Street used against RH. "unsophisticate…

There are two aspects to the story. One, the shoe shine boy probably heard a lot of stuff. Two, he definitely had no business in trading stock. And two is the important one, once "dumb money" shows up in droves it is maybe time to get out.

If that shoe shine boy (or uber driver) was alive in the mid to late 2010s, they would probably do trading business with RH. And that is why I am bullish on RH.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#130

Post by lottin »

gruez wrote: post #112
paulpauper wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

speculative bubbles are independent of monetary and fiscal policy. if someone thinks they can make 100% returns on their investment,what difference does 0 vs 2% interest rate makes? Look at the housing market in the 2000s , which surged despite interest rates being high.

>speculative bubbles are independent of monetary and fiscal policy If the fed pumps a few trillion dollars into the market and causes everything to go up in price, and bystanders look at that and decide to buy in, then that seems like that the fed's action caused the speculative bubble.

Actually the Fed doesn't pump dollars into the market. The fed buys bonds in the open market with newly created deposits. This alters the composition of balance sheets of financial institutions but not the size.
Post reply on HN