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

151–160 of 404 posts

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#151

Post by jetru »

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…

It's like, you could upload videos to YouTube all you wanted all the time, but TikTok made it more accessible.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#152

Post by nscalf »

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…

Robinhood is the example I use for showing that good design can be a company making differentiator. In many ways Robinhood is much worse as a trading platform, but the usability and simplicity of getting started is orders of magnitude above all other competition.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#153

Post by paxys »

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…

Yeah, whatever you say about Robinhood, the fact that they came in from nothing and massively disrupted a trillion+ dollar industry is undeniable. Mainstream brokers used to charge $10+ for a single trade, and the fees today are all down to 0. They are also starting to build half-decent apps.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#154

Post by paxys »

mrkramer wrote: post #137
nemothekid wrote: post #126

They went from 170MM in revenue in 2019 to 720MM in revenue in 2020. Wow will that be a temporary spike or sustained?

Temporary; meme stocks and meme cryptocoins can not last forever.

Sure but something else will come and replace them. Selling shovels is always a smart business move.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#155

Post by FinanceAnon »

swarnie_ wrote: post #69

I imagine a large portion of the internet newly flushed with GME/AMC/WISH cash are lining up to short this in to the ground. I'll personably be buying everything i can get my hands on three months after launch

Would be hilarious if they ended up on the other end of a short squeeze.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#156

Post by NegativeLatency »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #73
yreg wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I went for this positive spin, I'd talk about democratising investing, not democratising trading. Democratising trading is not inherently good, similar to democratising gambling.

If people want to gamble (or do drugs), why should we be nannies and stop them? I get the desire to stop commercial banks from gambling YOUR savings. But why shouldn't you be able to gamble your own savings if you want to?

There’s a difference between stopping them and stopping exploitative companies who want to profit off of them.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#157

Post by alliao »

raziel2701 wrote: post #114
granzymes wrote: post #47

Headline financials: FY Ended December 31, in millions except percentage and assets per user | 2019 | 2020 | YoY ---------------|--------|--------|------- revenue | $278 | $959 | 245% op ex | $384 | $945 | 146% net income | $(107) | $7 | (107)% assets held | 14,136 | 62,979 | 346% monthly users | 4.3 | 11.7 | 172% assets per user| 3,287 | 5,382 | 64%

Also the cash - liabilities calculus not looking good. $8.8B in cash - $7.7B in liabilties = - $1.1 billion I'll pass.

it is slightly worrying that society allows something so big that's so... fragile? it's like a disaster waiting to happen and bound to cause massive amounts of damage...

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#158

Post by an_opabinia »

lame-robot-hoax wrote: post #17

“ A substantial portion of the recent growth in our net revenues earned from cryptocurrency transactions is attributable to transactions in Dogecoin. If demand for transactions in Dogecoin declines and is not replaced by new demand for other cryptocurrencies available for trading on our platform, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. For the three months ended March…

If you make the easiest to use Ponzi consuming tool, it doesn’t matter. There will always be more ponzis.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#159

Post by WYepQ4dNnG »

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…

> Index funds democratized investing. Robinhood “democratized” the worst part of investing and exposed unsophisticated investors

On the spot! Robinhood has made it so easy to trade that I have seen many people trading from their mobile while having a coffee or commuting! I would really like to see all these "traders" in 5/10 years ... if it is true that 80% of day traders loose money .. I bet tons of improvised traders will learn a very expensive lesson.

I don't do trading, I simply don't have time to fully look into companies balance sheets etc. I buy index/mutual funds , I might have missed the meme stocks but I am happy with my steady growing investments, compounding effect works great!

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#160

Post by elliekelly »

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…

> Even myself, who used to only trade a couple of times a year, started with $300 in my Robinhood account a few years back. Now I have at least ~60k that I rotate around in my Robinhood account on a daily/weekly basis.

I don’t think trading more stocks and trading them more frequently is a “better” or even “democratized” outcome. For the vast majority of people trading more shares more often is an objectively terrible investment strategy.

Post reply on HN