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

$70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

data-and-politics.ghost.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 480 posts

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#371

Post by rufus_foreman »

kulahan wrote: post #61
LeafItAlone wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How many physicians have been able to get rich from learning a CEO will be out of commission? Do you actually have an answer to that? Or are you just throwing out an unanswerable question as some form of “gotcha”? Now I’m actually curious. There aren’t _that_ many publicly traded companies; only about 4,000 according to Google. A little over 9,000 IPOs since 1980 [0]. The number of companies where the CEO being “out…

Never in a million years would I have guessed that there have only been 9000 IPOs in the last nearly half-century. Really drives home how many US businesses are privately owned.

It looks like they were only looking at the NYSE and Nasdaq. Smaller companies would not qualify to trade on those exchanges, they would trade over-the-counter. There are more OTC stocks than there are that trade on NYSE/Nasdaq.

"The sample is composed of the IPOs of U.S.-based companies with an offer price of at least $5.00 and listed on the NYSE (excluding NYSE American and NYSE MKT issues after the merger in 2008) or Nasdaq (excluding Nasdaq small cap issues before October 2005 and, after Sept. 2005, Nasdaq capital market issues), excluding ADRs, unit offers, SPACs, closed-end funds, REITs, partnerships, banks and S&Ls, and stocks not listed on CRSP (CRSP includes Amex, NYSE, and NASDAQ stocks)"

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#372

Post by roflyear »

edweis wrote: post #102

Who lost money during this deal? Or generally who indirectly paid these lucky gamblers?

Long term this also really hurts the faith in the market, so it's going to hurt a lot of people who have exposure to anything on US exchanges.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#373

Post by jwilber »

dtquad wrote: post #73
jwilber wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's a friend of Trump. Maybe it's a friend of Pelosi. Might even be a member of Congress! "Rules for thee not for me."

How would a "friend of Pelosi" know when Trump would post his "THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!" and "90 days pause" posts?

The implication is they're all in the same club. And if you know any family members of members of Congress, you know this to be true!

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#374

Post by impossiblefork »

enraged_camel wrote: post #293
impossiblefork wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't think we do. France and Britain alone used to be able to defend trade routes. I don't think it's a huge expense. It really is good for essentially everyone aside from the US itself, once the disruption is over. Obviously we'll have some kind of crash though, but I think that was inevitable with or without this.

>> France and Britain alone used to be able to defend trade routes. I don't think it's a huge expense. That was a different world. France and Britain today have nowhere the kind of force projection the USA does, via its military bases and aircraft carriers.

Yes, but the US basically had to intervene and tell them to stop using it. If that hadn't happened they wouldn't have.

The US probably wasn't in preventing an invasion of Egypt, but if not restrained I'm sure that Britain and France could have realised their objectives, and if they had had a continuous need to realise different changing objectives they would have retained more capability.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#375

Post by dragonwriter »

impossiblefork wrote: post #273
StormChaser_5 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure that's true. America's military keeps peace for trade to happen in a lot of the world... Not always successfully but it's there. That works because they have the reserve currency and can therefore print money for free. Which benefits the US greatly in all sorts of ways. But everyone else also sees some good. If that goes away its going to have impacts on everyone else as well as America. Maybe not as much of…

I really don't think we do. France and Britain alone used to be able to defend trade routes. I don't think it's a huge expense. It really is good for essentially everyone aside from the US itself, once the disruption is over. Obviously we'll have some kind of crash though, but I think that was inevitable with or without this.

> France and Britain alone used to be able to defend trade routes. I don't think it's a huge expense

France and Britain used to be two of the world's largest imperial powers, and at any time you could plausibly claim France and Britain alone could defend global trade routes, Britain, at least, still was.

You really aren't making a case for it being an easy, cheap job.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#376

Post by rvz »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #353
rvz wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you instead ask why they might have traded Visa at the time they did, you will see that there were many valid reasons that they (and many, many others) decided it was a good time to sell. All said in hindsight today, but never for those who benefitted from the insider information. Investors will always buy the stock after it plummets, whilst those who didn't sell had to wait or buy lower to break even. This does…

>This does not excuse the fact that the Pelosis' benefitted from insider (political) information and traded on that, like this blatant example. You, nor others, have not actually proven that. >Defending politicians trading on insider info (political or economic) isn't the hill one should die on. Right, and that’s not what I’m doing. I think politicians in top levels of government should be banned from trading their o…

> You, nor others, have not actually proven that.

In the Pelosis' circumstance, clearly their repeated actions of such trades and their connection to the timing of key legislation or lawsuits requires no further proof, given their long history of this front-running such that other congressmen and women are doing the same thing believing they can get away with the insider trading loophole.

By inspection, it is quite obvious to see how one can repeatedly front-run legislation ahead of everyone else and outperform the market.

> Right, and that’s not what I’m doing. I think politicians in top levels of government should be banned from trading their own stocks (and family, etc.).

Why not ban them from trading all stocks instead of just their own and why only those just from "top levels" of government?

They are serving the people as well and there shouldn't be exceptions for those that have access to that level of legislation before it is made public and then trade against it no?

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#377

Post by nramanand »

huijzer wrote: post #236
nramanand wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that mean he was long volatility? Taleb's point seems more to be that he saw a mispricing and traded on it one day, rather than anything profound regarding option pricing, unless I am missing something. Anyway, it has little to do with what's being said in the article.

> Doesn't that mean he was long volatility? Now that you say it could be that he misspoke indeed. > Taleb's point seems more to be that he saw a mispricing and traded on it one day Okay so Taleb was literally an "option trader" as in he traded one option on one day in his life? > Anyway, it has little to do with what's being said in the article. How is Taleb, who is an option trader and who has written about options…

I guess because the article is talking about insider trading through the use of options and your point on Taleb is how he traded options like any option trader would.

I should be clear that what you seem to think ties these together, i.e:

> given the volatility, at least one would be a hit in this month.

I don't actually believe to be true. It's not like these options aren't being priced somewhat accurately. There could be insanely high volatility and all that needs to happen is for the price to go up instead of down for none of your options to "hit."

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#378

Post by DoctorOW »

otterley wrote: post #369
DoctorOW wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean critics of the Trump administration are still thrown in a max security prison and subjected to forced labor. I get that there isn't a sign on the front calling it a gulag but that distinction isn't particularly important to the people being brutally punished for using their first amendment rights.

Can you provide a single example of someone getting thrown into a maximum-security prison and subjected to forced labor solely for criticizing the Trump administration?

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/11/nx-s1-5361208/mahmoud-khalil-...

> "If Mahmoud can be targeted in this way, simply for speaking out for Palestinians and exercising his constitutionally protected right to free speech, this can happen to anyone over any issue the Trump administration dislikes," said Marc Van Der Hout, one of Khalil's attorneys.

He's currently in Louisiana prison it says which means yes, he's subject to forced prison labor.

https://www.laaclu.org/en/press-releases/aclu-report-finds-i...

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#379

Post by thrance »

roflyear wrote: post #368
jxjnskkzxxhx wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media is largely at fault here, pretending that both sides are equal.

There is some kind of weird issue here, not sure what it is called, that where if the media were to blow this up everyone would say they are overreacting. So it becomes a "seat at the table is better than no seat" thing where they won't ask Trump these questions.

It's a standard fear of repercussions, no ones wants to speak up today so it all gets progressively worse and harder to speak up tomorrow.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#380

Post by klipt »

tmcb wrote: post #367
klipt wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's look at a concrete example: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3175099/#S12title About 40% of male domestic violence victims who seek help are accused of being the abuser. Completely coincidentally I'm sure, the federal law on domestic violence is called the "Violence Against Women Act", which furthers the bias that men can't be victims. How would you improve the situation for male victims without making…

Well, certainly not by threatening to cut funding of humanities research grants. Otherwise they won't be able to conduct research such as this one... But I digress. The "Violence Against Women Act" is from 1994. Most statistics of that time pointed to a disproportionate amount of women being victims of domestic violence in comparison to men. I tried to find more recent statistics, but this is a very serious topic, so…

Well most serious work injuries happen to men, but if we had a "Work Safety For Men" act I bet you'd call that sexist. A law that fails to protect male victims of violence is equally sexist.

The double standard is very visible. Maybe you should just admit that the left is blatantly the "party of women's interests" and give up on gaining men's votes.

Post reply on HN