Live data from Hacker News

Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

economist.com

171–180 of 250 posts

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#171
post #3

https://outline.com/hGfBNu to read the full article without GDPR, paywall, or other annoyances.

Have we ever learned who is behind Outline?

I hope we don't, I really love the idea of useful anonymous websites that grumpy digital rights idiots don't know who to send a court summons to.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#172
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need short selling for a stock's price to drop. Markets for everything else use the normal mechanism of "if no-one is going to buy this at this price, I need to drop my price if I want to sell it". For example: you can't go to the bakery, borrow a loaf of bread, sell it to a passing punter, and then pay the baker at 5pm when they drop the price to get rid of their stock before it goes stale. The rest of the…

You could absolutely do that bread trade (if you could convince a baker to lend you a loaf of bread), but then a smart baker wouldn't drop their prices at the end of day because they know a short seller needs to buy a bread to cover their position. The example is also wrong because stocks don't go off like bread does. For commodities that keep better like frozen orange juice or steel you can definitely borrow (for a…

But one of the GME points was (is?) that stock is sold without being borrowed first. Or being borrowed without permission and multiple times...

If you sell empty bags on the street, promising the buyers there is bread inside, only to collect those empty bags back when the buyers throw the (supposed) bread away because it became worthless, is not good business. You're the only one profiting, both the bakers and the buyers are loosing money.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#173

Because of my GameStop stock play, I am finally debt free for the first time in my life (after 35 years of paying). No car loan, no college loans, no mortgage. It actually felt good to pay over $10k in taxes for short term gains.

That’s a really interesting mix of questionable prudence with total responsibility. Obviously things didn’t work out so well for the people in the other side of your trades.

One can only hope that the counter-party was Melvin Capital.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#174

It was a weird, fun ride. My writing partner Lutz and I work in tech, but have a real passion for filmmaking. We lost some money on $GME, so we had to tell the story from our point of view. The result is STONKS, a comedy/drama feature screenplay [0], fictional but inspired by the GME events, and a love letter of sorts to WSB. We queried Hollywood producers but were ignored; we shared on WSB itself but we were insta-b…

Most discussion around $GME takes place on r/Superstonk these days anyways. Can't remember why it was banned from WSB. Something to do with the new mods I believe.

/r/superstonk used to show up in my feed on Reddit a lot, and it seemed like most of the highly-upvoted posts were elaborate explanations of how, any day now, there was going to be some sort of massive short squeeze that was going to cause $GME to hit a price of ten or twenty million dollars a share (at which point the outstanding shares of $GME would be worth more than everything else on earth combined), and everybody who bought in was going to be billionaires.

I was never clear if this was some sort of in-joke/meme, or some fringe idea that kept getting upvoted because it was hilarious, or if the people in there actually knew so little about stocks and economics that they thought something like that was possible.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#175
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did something change about the company itself in the dips and bumps you just described buying and selling Gamestop at above?

Both Gamestop and Tesla were just the market freaking out. The market often does that. Much of the stock market is more about what other investors will do than what the companies themselves will do. It's a bunch of noise on top of the actual value of the companies themselves. Of course sometimes it is the companies themselves, and then you need to pay attention. And because you rarely know in advance whether a dip is…

Right. So, you were taking a risk trying to buy in the dips and sell in the bumps, you were not following your own advice to "Always check if something changed about the company itself." Which is fine, it worked out for you.

Of course, the bigger picture challenge is that -- modulo market freakouts -- everyone else is also "checking if something changed about the company itself", and that's already built into the market price, that's kind of the model of how the market works. To make money by buying in dips only after checking if something is changed in the company itself, you have to think you are better at noticing or predicting changes in the company itself than everyone else, I guess?

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should check it out again. We recently restricted memes to Friday afternoon to Sunday morning and the context is almost all text now.

I can't figure out if this is sarcasm or an actual response.

It's a real response. And yea, memes only on weekends did actually improve the board.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#177
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could absolutely do that bread trade (if you could convince a baker to lend you a loaf of bread), but then a smart baker wouldn't drop their prices at the end of day because they know a short seller needs to buy a bread to cover their position. The example is also wrong because stocks don't go off like bread does. For commodities that keep better like frozen orange juice or steel you can definitely borrow (for a…

But one of the GME points was (is?) that stock is sold without being borrowed first. Or being borrowed without permission and multiple times... If you sell empty bags on the street, promising the buyers there is bread inside, only to collect those empty bags back when the buyers throw the (supposed) bread away because it became worthless, is not good business. You're the only one profiting, both the bakers and the bu…

I don't understand why you seem to be so sure that there is indeed "no bread inside"? If an investor buys a share of GME on the stock market, it does not matter at all if they buy it from a shorter, a retail investor or even from GME itself. A share is a share, there are no "empty bags" being sold. Shares also don't go off like bread, so if you get your share back at the end it is like nothing happened: you still own one share and it is of exactly the same quality as before. Unless you are a VERY large investor, having your broker lend out shares also has zero impact on being able to sell it at any time.

A short seller making a bet that a stock goes down by selling the stock is simply the same (but in reverse) as someone betting the stock will go up by buying a stock. The underlying business is not affected at all.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most discussion around $GME takes place on r/Superstonk these days anyways. Can't remember why it was banned from WSB. Something to do with the new mods I believe.

/r/superstonk used to show up in my feed on Reddit a lot, and it seemed like most of the highly-upvoted posts were elaborate explanations of how, any day now, there was going to be some sort of massive short squeeze that was going to cause $GME to hit a price of ten or twenty million dollars a share (at which point the outstanding shares of $GME would be worth more than everything else on earth combined), and everybo…

Superstonk has pretty much been a qanon-esque community since day 1. I still hold 10 shares of GME (bought at $220 oof) _just in case_. With that said, every now and then they come up with something that makes me do a double take. Right now they're obsessed with direct registering their shares. I'm guessing they think that if they can lock up the whole float they can force a short squeeze. Also if ryan cohen issues an NFT dividend.

But I can assure you that the members are 100% serious.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a really interesting mix of questionable prudence with total responsibility. Obviously things didn’t work out so well for the people in the other side of your trades.

One can only hope that the counter-party was Melvin Capital.

There were at least two counterparties (one selling the shares, one eventually buying them), one of which was exceedingly unlikely to be Melvin.
Post reply on HN