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

201–210 of 404 posts

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#201

Post by [deleted] »

tofuahdude wrote: post #37
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…

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.

[deleted]

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#202

Post by jackson1442 »

WYepQ4dNnG wrote: post #159
ditonal wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 trade…

I definitely fell into this trap, but fortunately came out ahead. After switching to Vanguard I feel more comfortable in my investments since I don't feel the time-pressure to check performance etc. RH feels too much like a social network where it's trying to push you to buy and sell every single day while more traditional brokerages follow a "set it and forget it" path.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#203

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #196
8note wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean when you say "democratized investing" ? That people can get benefits from the stock markets? Or that investment/economic decisions van be made democratically? Index funds rely on the the folks making the index to determine which stocks get bought -- who's on the s&P 500 is not a democratic process

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#204

Post by s1artibartfast »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #16

The share count and price are redacted, though likely to be somewhere in the $30 billion range. Regardless, that helps put the $70 million fine from yesterday [1] in context. It was the largest fine in FINRA history, but will it have been worth it? The $65 million fine in December suggests they weren't sufficiently deterred to change. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27690543

>The $65 million fine in December suggests they weren't sufficiently deterred to change

People keep saying this, but the FINRA fine was for actions that took place before the 2020 SEC fine, and the SEC fine was for actions in 2015-18.

It's not like they have a time machine.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#205

Post by Judgmentality »

adabyron wrote: post #113
ditonal wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

M1, E-Trade, Trading 212, Interactive Brokers, TD Ameritrade/Schwab and WeBull halted options as well.[1] There are a few more I'm missing. I wasn't happy about it but I don't blame them. As much as people were talking about over 100% of GME shorted, I can't imagine how much margin on top of margin people were trading while there options had yet to be settled. If anything the issue should be how long it takes a trade…

> I wasn't happy about it but I don't blame them.

What they did was illegal, so why not blame them? Robinhood is being investigated for it. Why not blame everyone that's guilty?

https://www.vice.com/en/article/wx5p8z/feds-seized-robinhood...

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#206

Post by nightski »

WYepQ4dNnG wrote: post #159
ditonal wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 trade…

I trade at the risk of lower overall returns for the chance of very high returns.

Index funds are for my retirement account, it's fun to have a brokerage account and trade with it as a hobby. It's been very profitable so far but I don't expect that to continue.

I'd imagine day trading has a much higher return than buying lottery tickets or gambling at a casino for example.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#207

Post by bern4444 »

DSingularity wrote: post #92
gberger wrote: post #75

The Chief Legal Officer, Daniel Gallagher, made $30M this year. It breaks down into $257k cash, $4.2M bonus and $25.5M in stocks and options. This is a far larger amount than any other executive. In 2011-2015, Daniel Gallagher was 1 of 5 Commissioners of the SEC (Securities and Exchange _Commission_), the highest role of the SEC, appointed by the US President. He was hired by Robinhood in May 2020, and his previous j…

How do you value the stock options of a company that hasn’t had its IPO?

Lots of ways to value a company. Once you have the value of the entire company, the price per share just depends on the number of shares. Options are then calculated based on a formula using the price per share as one input.

You can value a company by comparing it to its peers (this is like company Y which has similar users, growth potential etc)

You can value a company by only caring about its assets and liabilities.

Private shares of a company can exist and be traded, another market based valuation just with fewer data points that are private and not publicly shared.

And plenty more ways. Finance is really all about answering this question, how much is something worth and then creating mechanisms to trade that value in different ways.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#208

Post by carstenhag »

timdorr wrote: post #12

I wonder if they will list themselves on their IPO access offering: https://robinhood.com/us/en/support/articles/ipo-access/ It's going to be interesting to buy Robinhood with Robinhood...

Interesting, is that allowed in the US? In Germany, you can't buy Lang&Schwarz shares via the Lang&Schwarz trading platform (akin to an exchange) - doesn't matter what broker you are using. You always have to use Xetra or some other exchange.

Re: Robinhood S-1 IPO

#210

Post by elliekelly »

waych wrote: post #188
wolverine876 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a market of 1,000 people. If we add 5,000 who significantly under- or overvalue, or make other errors, the good being traded, is that more efficient? In terms of economic efficiency, if that's what we mean, I would guess not: It causes the misallocation of capital to worse investments. Was the Gamestop market economically efficient?

You are making the assumption that the first 1000 people somehow had a better way to value the assets being trading than the next group that joins the trade. This is a fallacy as the market sets the prices on its own. No by efficiency I mean the spread and incorporation of more information relating to the underlying asset, making it more closely match their fair value, and the resulting tightening of the spread and r…

Are the new traders introducing more information to the market? Or are they introducing noise?
Post reply on HN