WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore • Hacker News Board

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#171

Post by arcturus17 » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

function_seven wrote: post #92

dcolkitt wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robinhood is a free service. The customers don’t pay anything. If the order internalizers decide to stop paying them for their order flow, then they have to route to the exchanges. which charge fees. Trading is still ongoing at the exchanges. It’s just the free platforms, where it’s shut down. If someone wanted guaranteed access to the exchange, then they shouldn’t have used a free broker. Are you saying that Robinho…

Yes. They should be forced to provide the service they promised. It’s not my fault their business model is failing for a particular ticker on a particular day. If they can’t, then some advance notice is needed. Making this decision instantly without giving customers time to move their holdings elsewhere is not okay. That being said, I’m surprised people are still using them for day trading. They don’t have a great tr…

Should, as in ethically? Surely not legally.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#172

Post by nikk1 » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #63

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #8

As someone who is not very educated in finance, I'm curious how to interpret today's events. Is nasdaq/robinhood/everyone else transparently manipulating the market on behalf of hedge funds? Or are these standard mechanisms in place for preventing the stock market from swinging wildly out of control? I don't know if it's standard to completely block trading on one or more stocks.

If you buy stock with the purpose of pushing the price up so that other people will buy it, that’s market manipulation. What WSB crowd is doing is market manipulation. That's illegal. WSB is doing everything openly and even celebrating it. Getting mad when openly breaking the law is not rational response. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78i Brokers like Robinhood are reacting because they want too keep SEC…

Sorry, but what WSB is doing is free speech. Any analyst can get on TV and announce a price target. What WSB is doing is no different. WSB is a transparent group and everything they say can be read by the public.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#173

Post by obmelvin » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:20 PM UTC

function_seven wrote: post #92

dcolkitt wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robinhood is a free service. The customers don’t pay anything. If the order internalizers decide to stop paying them for their order flow, then they have to route to the exchanges. which charge fees. Trading is still ongoing at the exchanges. It’s just the free platforms, where it’s shut down. If someone wanted guaranteed access to the exchange, then they shouldn’t have used a free broker. Are you saying that Robinho…

Yes. They should be forced to provide the service they promised. It’s not my fault their business model is failing for a particular ticker on a particular day. If they can’t, then some advance notice is needed. Making this decision instantly without giving customers time to move their holdings elsewhere is not okay. That being said, I’m surprised people are still using them for day trading. They don’t have a great tr…

>It’s not my fault their business model is failing for a particular ticker on a particular day.

As I see it, regardless of how it should be, one needs to accept that trading with RH has limitations/trade-offs compared to a "proper" brokerage. I get your statement, but like you said, their track record already speaks for itself.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#174

Post by NickM » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

gherittwhite wrote: post #42

ericmay wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retail traders are literally locked out of buying new shares... they were a scapegoat the whole time. $GME is up 11% as of the writing of this post. Who is buying it? This is actually making me angry to watch. -edit- I had like one share - Robinhood just sold my shares without me ordering it. Dunno what happened there.

It's annoying. The regular guy should be able to profit off this too. I was at the gym yesterday and heard like 5 people talking about stocks: gme, amc, bb. Everyone is trying to get in on this and they're trying to stop it. They bogged gme at open to scare people and now it's back up. If they didn't remove the option for users to buy they surely would have bought the dip.

Blocking people from buying a stock is not the same as blocking people from profiting off of a stock; nobody knows what the future valuation of the stock will be, so if you prevent people from buying, you may just as well be preventing them from losing money as from gaining.

Keep in mind that this is very likely a zero-sum game. At some point the bubble will pop, and as many people as gained money on the way up will lose money on the way down.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#175

Post by ghaff » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

llampx wrote: post #134

ghaff wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they're going to show Wall Street who's boss by gambling away their grocery money? (Some will make out but I suspect the vast majority will lose big--money at least some can't really afford to lose.) I have trouble conjuring up a lot of sympathy but that's almost certainly uncharitable as I'm sure there will be stories of serious individual loss.

Very paternalistic to assume that people are gambling away their grocery money and should be stopped now that the short squeeze has become much, much more likely. Meanwhile ANY other security also has the chance to go to 0, but RH doesn't stop you from buying.

I don't care if Robinhood bans trading or not. Don't have an account with them and likely never will. Aside from some fairly obvious things (states generally shouldn't advertise their lotteries for example), people should be able to do whatever they want with their money. And it's probably pretty fruitless to try to stop them from doing so in general.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#176

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

TheAlchemist wrote: post #103

bidirectional wrote: post #19

Once again, this insistence on viewing 'Wall Street' as a monolothic entity. The largest asset management firm on Earth holds over 9 million Gamestop stock, none of the big banks that received bailouts in 08 are affected by this, 99.9% of hedge funds are not affected by this, high frequency traders are probably making a bundle. Institutional money was long Gamestop before this story entered the public consciousness.…

Exactly. Just take a look at the shareholders and count how many shares those institutional have: https://money.cnn.com/quote/shareholders/shareholders.html?s... It's Wall Street vs Wall Street - redditors were just the catalyst, and will be left holding the bag.

[deleted]

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#177

Post by djbebs » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

willis936 wrote: post #87

luxuryballs wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sitting around playing drums and smoking doesn’t accomplish anything productive.

That’s called being civil. Would you prefer they instead break the law to have their voices heard? Do you want wall street suits to fear for their life?

And now you see the necessity of violence to advance political goals.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#178

Post by llampx » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

doytch wrote: post #157

kasey_junk wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I don’t. I think the market makers/internalizers who are normally on the other side of retail trades want no part of the irrationality around these symbols so they pulled their orders. There is no one on the other side of the book so Robinhood can’t execute. It’s standard market dynamics that anyone whose traded before understands. That a bunch of new retail traders are about to learn an expensive lesson on execut…

The market makers are making _bank_ right now off of the premiums. They're the last people to request a halt.

Umm, no. Every single call option in the chain is ITM. That's suicide for tomorrow, when shares must be delivered.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#179

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

aynyc wrote: post #158

swiley wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh well that's reasonable. If I were a brokerage you bet your ass I wouldn't lend you money to buy GME.

Why should broker allow margin trading at all? If it's about risk, then who's the decider/calculator of the risk? I think this is the reason why there is a distrust from the next generation.

> who's the decider/calculator of the risk?

The lender. As in all loans. As is in every detail described in one’s margin contract.

Re: WallStreetBets vs WallStreet: It's not about the money anymore

#180

Post by pontus » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

The irony of all this is that ultimately people will stop buying and prices will fall. Then all the regular people who participated in this will be stuck holding falling stock. Panicked selling will ensure, crashing the price.

At the end of the day then, both institutional and retail investors will get screwed.