Live data from Hacker News

Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

nytimes.com

381–390 of 479 posts

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#381
post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on my very limited knowledge, it is my understanding that banks/brokers don't actually consider the deposit to be valid until several days after the transaction. Even if you deposited cash they would probably find some way to delay letting you use the funds pending some 'internal checking'. So in Robinhood's case if there are many people depositing dollars to buy stock then that could be their reason or excuse…

Yeah I forgot about a credit card payment that was due a number of years ago, before I had online banking. I went in 2 days before it was due and paid it cash. I still got a late penalty added brcause cash takes three days to clear. A bill under £2 and got hit with a fee of £20

In the UK, cash paid at the institution in question clears the same day. If bundled with a cheque (rather than as two separate transactions) it will clear at the same time as the cheque.

I had something similar happen to me many years ago. I took ATM cash from another account, plus what I had in my house and wallet, to make up the amount that an auto-paid credit card bill due on that same day would have sent me overdrawn.

I avoided the overdraft penalties.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#382
post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to look a bit closer at Monzo, there was an entire episode of BBC's Watchdog [0] about them closing accounts and keeping people's money. Mine was frozen for well over a year with about three grand in it, no explanation, no apology. I only got it back in the end by involving the financial ombudsman via a website [1] specifically set up to help people who Monzo have scammed, because there are literally t…

I (US citizen, freshman at a UK university) tried to set up a Monzo account a few months ago. They refused to give me an account, and refused (both in their app and over email) to tell me why. Left a bad taste in my mouth. Ended up going with Nationwide, who are a bit behind tech-wise (they do this weird thing where they ask for 3 digits of a 6-digit PIN I'm supposed to memorize, which seems far less secure than a lo…

Nationwide aren't a bank, they are a Building Society, (similar to your "Savings & Loans").

I "bank" with them. Sensible. Reliable. Well run. That's preferable to the latest flashy technology when you are talking about people's hard-earned and long-saved money.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#383
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i've used: 1. revolut - these guys are complete jokers. closed after being asked to provide the proof of funding 3 times in 3 months. 2. hsbc/first direct - somewhat decent. but i only use it to top up my other accounts. i try to avoid them, as they're just too big. 3. starling - simple, no-nonsense banking from a startup. 4. revolut business - had my account closed down by the "bank" because they didn't want my busi…

I can second the problems with Revolut. Weird and dodgy, and they spend every second of your use of their app trying to sell you shitty addon services like mobile phone insurance. Starling, however, has been magic. I swapped my primary banking over to them and the only issue I've had is their dislike of rooted phones. That's only a minor inconvenience every few months when I forget to upgrade Magisk before the Starli…

My daughters have Starling accounts as their "day-to-day" accounts. They are very happy with them, as is a friend in my local Go Club.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#384
post #242

I don’t understand how all of a sudden the shift was made onto the insolvency of RH and that the discussion is less about the original conditions that led up to this. I just finished watching a video from Louis Rossmann [1] as well as one from Bruce Fenton [2]. In his video, Rossmann covers the technicalities and systems behind actually __making__ a trade with an app like RH. The videos were very informative and I le…

>Isn’t RH just trying to play within the realities of the current system?

If RH had been upfront about it to begin with I think most would understand. The Webull CEO made similar interviews, and explained why they stopped trading; if the RH CEO had done similarly I wouldn't be so suspicious.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#385
post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an SEC rule to guard against brokers going insolvent. Trades are not instant transactions so there’s a lot of credit being floated for days. Good thread explaining this, though still complex: https://mobile.twitter.com/KralcTrebor/status/13549526861652...

It feels like slow movement of money in our financial system causes a lot of these problems. Customer deposits take several days to settle (during which time Robinhood has to front the funds). Settlement of the stock trades / transfer of collateral to the DCC likely takes several days, etc.

This sounds like a problem that might actually be solved best by blockchain.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real reason is as follows: You cannot use customer funds to cover dtcc collateral terms. Your milk example does not work, because you are not settling up the milk buy 2 days after. You settle your milk purchase on the spot.

So you’re saying the issue is “what if the grocery goes insolvent before it can hand you the milk, but after you’ve paid”? I’m still not understanding how robinhood lost money in the first place.

That's an accurate enough analogy.

When you sell a stock on Robinhood, it takes ~2 days to "clear" the transaction. So, Robinhood credits your account, but Robinhood doesn't see that money for 2 days. They don't allow you to withdraw the money from Robinhood until its cleared, but you can purchase other stocks with the money, and if you do that, Robinhood now needs to send something to the seller. All brokerages, and the clearing houses they work with if they don't self-clear (RH, IB, WeBull, etc do not self-clear; bigger banks do), maintain a level of "float" to handle these payments; its like grease which allows the system to move faster, and the bigger these pools of money, the less risk there is.

Robinhood is the #1 app on the App Store right now. EVERYONE is getting in on this. Many of these users likely joined with an invite code, and Robinhood will give out two random shares of stocks for each of these users ($$). After they're in the app, they're probably using the Instant Deposits feature to trade on up-to $1000 they've started transferring but which hasn't cleared yet (pressure on the float). Many of these users are, in WSB terminology, paper hands; they bought GME @ 250, its at 320 now, they want their gains, so they sell immediately; more pressure on the float.

If that float hits zero, that's basically like, imagine your company's bank account hitting zero, its payday (because every single hour of every day is payday for a brokerage), and you have 50 million employees. People would sell stocks, and the number in their account wouldn't go up. In fact, people couldn't even buy or sell stocks, because that float is used to pay fees on every transaction to their clearing house. Now, people are scared; their faith in robinhood has been shook, and they want out. So, they try to sell stocks; they can't. They're angry. If they have settled funds, they pull those out, which just compounds the problem because now their balance sheets start looking weaker and weaker, which makes access to emergency credit lines harder. Basically, they would implode irrevocably. Even the hint of a liquidity crisis is enough to tarnish a firm's reputation.

IMO, I think the biggest driver of this issue for Robinhood is their instant deposits functionality. That feature is insane, and in market runs like this, deadly. Robinhood hasn't actually "lost" money (well, not enough to cause a liquidity crisis); its just the problem of not having enough money right right now to pay people who need to be paid.

But, the deeper issue is the US financial system and its molasses speed of moving money around. The Fed is making strides to improve this, but it will take a decade or more before we see real change.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#387
post #24

"To continue operating, it drew on a line of credit from six banks amounting to between $500 million and $600 million to meet higher margin, or lending, requirements from its central clearing facility for stock trades, known as the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation." Non-zero chance had they not haulted trading on those symbols they would've been insolvent by close of trading today, depending on the size of the…

Robinhood is a joke. Not just because of these shenanigans, but because their lack of technical stability and customer service is unacceptable. They reliably crash on every major trading day. And there's no US based support. Never ever use a broker where you can't pick up the phone and talk to a real human being. They all have zero commissions now so there's no excuse.

They're also a joke because they are, as far as I'm concerned, not a "brokerage". They are an app designed to convince people that they understand how to trade stocks, in order to sell them stocks.

A real brokerage should, in my opinion, and some sort of duty to act in the best interest of its clients.

A brokerage should not have huge backlash because its users got margin called, and those users didn't even know what a margin call was.

They should not have huge backlash because its users stop-loss orders were triggered, and then executed at a lower price.

This is just confusion that shouldn't exist, because a reasonable brokerage shouldn't be luring people into these risky positions just to make a buck on the sale.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#388
post #98

Is it just me, or did that article end... weird? Like, scrolling more, expecting it to continue. I'm sure we've been conditioned to such articles having a typical arc, that this one... didn't?

Honestly the pacing and structure of NYT articles is so weird. Sometimes I read an article and after a few well structured paragraphs it seems that they just add random additional info, go down rabbit holes and just end abruptly. As if your grandmother wants to tell you a story and weaves in random info of every participant’s relation to your family.

NYT writes for the Newspaper - and that means column inches. Articles get a space on the paper and are written so that they can be cut at different places to fit that space without major edits.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#389
post #388
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly the pacing and structure of NYT articles is so weird. Sometimes I read an article and after a few well structured paragraphs it seems that they just add random additional info, go down rabbit holes and just end abruptly. As if your grandmother wants to tell you a story and weaves in random info of every participant’s relation to your family.

NYT writes for the Newspaper - and that means column inches. Articles get a space on the paper and are written so that they can be cut at different places to fit that space without major edits.

Interesting point. But I have never experienced this with other newspapers who publish the traditional articles online. And the NYT should have a higher quality than most.

Re: Robinhood, in Need of Cash, Raises $1B from Its Investors

#390
post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like slow movement of money in our financial system causes a lot of these problems. Customer deposits take several days to settle (during which time Robinhood has to front the funds). Settlement of the stock trades / transfer of collateral to the DCC likely takes several days, etc.

This sounds like a problem that might actually be solved best by blockchain.

Honestly, just the utilization of stablecoins for interbank transfers would help with a ton. I acknowledge that it's technically possible to update the existing system to just support faster settlement, but given how long we've been waiting, I find it unlikely.

As a user, I'd love to be able to deposit and withdraw stablecoins at banks - this would enable essentially instantaneous transfers, and provide an interface that anyone (including non-banks) could interface with.

Post reply on HN