281–290 of 906 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From what I can tell almost no professional investers beat the market, almost nobody wins the lottery. Why should I listen to lottery players or professional wall street gamers?
Reddit stock traders, some of whom are professional, have consistently beaten the market by using collective action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also believed that most of the shorts were naked, but the director of S3partner clearly explained how this was not the case. One stock can be shorted multiple times which is what causes the SI% to be over 100%. A lends to B, B sells to C, C lends to D and so forth. Two shorters (B,D) but only 1 original stock. And Robinhoods closure of the trade seems reasonable in retrospect as well. If the clearing house required…
You can get more the 100% without naked shorts, sure, but is that legal?, does SEC allow that?, nobody is concerned that if there is a short squeeze there is no chance in hell to close out? (like we are seeing here) The point I tried to make was - this short was done to drive price down to zero (it can do that with that large of a position) in collusion with negative media reports from friends... That is manipulation…
Yes. As someone lending out a share (for someone else to short), you can't know whether the person you bought it from had borrowed it to sell it to you.
Let's say you bought a share of stock. Can you lend it to someone for them to short sell? Of course. You own the share, regardless of how many people it passed through to get to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. It's clear that everyone should be lawyering up depending on what positions they had when they started pumping this idea to the masses. That said, I'm a big believer in "a fool and his money". If there are hedge funds or retail investors out there who, perhaps, didn't understand all the risks of what they were doing, protecting them from their folly only causes more problems in the future. As horrible as this s…
It's also not as if hedge funds are employing thousands of welders or craftsmen. These are high risk financial strategies by people who qualify as professional traders - "I didn't know" isn't an excuse anymore. If they lose the game, they get to eat their losses. We will probably see a few retail traders get burned, and I suspect anyone wanting to do trading in the future is going to have to fill out more disclaimers…
A Moment in the Life of an HN Genius: 1. Reads a technical document outside their domain. 2. Feels dumb because they don't have a grasp on any of the concepts. 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. 4. Sees the word "manipulation" 5. Substitutes the laymen's definition of "manipulation"…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also believed that most of the shorts were naked, but the director of S3partner clearly explained how this was not the case. One stock can be shorted multiple times which is what causes the SI% to be over 100%. A lends to B, B sells to C, C lends to D and so forth. Two shorters (B,D) but only 1 original stock. And Robinhoods closure of the trade seems reasonable in retrospect as well. If the clearing house required…
You can get more the 100% without naked shorts, sure, but is that legal?, does SEC allow that?, nobody is concerned that if there is a short squeeze there is no chance in hell to close out? (like we are seeing here) The point I tried to make was - this short was done to drive price down to zero (it can do that with that large of a position) in collusion with negative media reports from friends... That is manipulation…
Webull came out and clearly stated that their clearinghouse had issues with putting up collateral for the tickers and thus had to shut them down [0]. And while Robinhood has not come out directly and said it was due to liquidity, one can easily gather that from the statements they put out, the new funding they needed, and lastly the fact that DTCC required higher collateral for those tickers.
[0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/gamestop-trading-restrictions-b...
* It includes all tradeable share. So in the case of the example, normal SI% states 2:1, two shorters and one original share. Their way is 2:3 which is, 2 shorters (B,D) and 3 longs (A,C,E)
A few rants that i tried answering to someone before him removing post. Free speech is allowed. Prosecuting people for free speech is impossible. A bunch of imbeciles posting on forums is similar to a bunch of imbeciles on CNBC arguing that price is too high. A hedge fund with 12 billion dollars shorting 140% of a stock and then using media to drive price to 0 is illegal. Also more then idiotic since they caused the…
>Prosecuting people for free speech is impossible.
Are you suggesting that pump and dumps legal because "free speech"?
>A hedge fund with 12 billion dollars shorting 140% of a stock and then using media to drive price to 0 is illegal.
What is the relevant legislation preventing someone from shorting "too much"? Furthermore, prior to this debacle I certainly haven't heard of GME in the media aside from some passing references. Therefore I'm skeptical of your narrative that the hedge funds were somehow using the media to crash GME prices.
A Moment in the Life of an HN Genius: 1. Reads a technical document outside their domain. 2. Feels dumb because they don't have a grasp on any of the concepts. 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. 4. Sees the word "manipulation" 5. Substitutes the laymen's definition of "manipulation"…
When did HN become overrun by narcissists?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Right now it appears that the public wants to be able to trade on their terms because there is this narrative that the little guy is finally sticking it to the big bad hedge funds. In reality there is probably very little truth to this. The fact that buying was limited yesterday is evidence that the little guy is actually winning here. Trading was stopped to save the hedge funds, because if they go under or lose to…
I cannot stress this strongly enough -- the fact that buying was limited yesterday is not evidence that the little guy is actually winning. As has been explained in multiple other places, the limitations were as a result of Robinhood et. al. being unable to cover the risks involved in providing instant trading capabilities for a stock as volatile as the ones that got restricted. That has nothing to do with "the littl…
Yes RH had to cover more, because the clearinghouse was also starting to be stretched by the risk from the violatility. If the hedge funds go down, the clearinghouse wouldn't have been able to front their cash, and they would've gone down as well.
You're also missing the point that the clearinghouse firms didn't just ask for more money from brokers. In many cases they told brokers to step selling these securities.
There's increased risk on both sides, but the long side is at least finite (and probably there's not much margin). The short side is not. The unknown risk the clearinghouse needs to worry about is the short (hedge fund) side.
There’s a long history of similar occurrences that follow along a common line: whatever appears to support individual investors will be the path taken by politicians and regulatory bodies. Right now it appears that the public wants to be able to trade on their terms because there is this narrative that the little guy is finally sticking it to the big bad hedge funds. In reality there is probably very little truth to…
> there is this narrative that the little guy is finally sticking it to the big bad hedge funds. In reality there is probably very little truth to this. Which part has little truth to it? The big hedge funds are apparently losing money (billions!) on Gamestop, unless that's being mis-reported. Some of the "little guys" (reddit people) definitely were a part of the reason for that.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/l...
A Korean fund made a billion dollars on a 12 million dollar GmE investment and they were only the 7th largest holder of GME shares. The wsb narrative of this sticking it to Wall Street is just false.
I personally think it’s a narrative propped up intentionally by wsb insiders for their own gain. This is just a modern distributed boiler room. Retail traders always pay in those scenarios.
A Moment in the Life of an HN Genius: 1. Reads a technical document outside their domain. 2. Feels dumb because they don't have a grasp on any of the concepts. 3. Too busy to use the very internet which some of them probably helped build to magically render learning materials to the screen in front of them at zero marginal cost. 4. Sees the word "manipulation" 5. Substitutes the laymen's definition of "manipulation"…
Yeah. Common sense no longer makes sense. Let me write a technical document stating how killing half of population is justified, but it is not for laymen to understand.
Which is exactly the parent's point. Don't assume words mean the exact same thing from one field to another.