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

Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 216 posts

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#61

Post by lrem »

jimminy wrote: post #40
katbyte wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've only been sorta paying attention so i could be wrong but trades were not suspended or halted? only buying was prevented, and only for some brokerages?

> Only buying was prevented, and only for some brokerages? The first part of that has been a common bit of misinformation. Opening new positions (either by attempting to buy shares of the stock, or entering into a new short position) is what was prevented. Closing positions (selling for owners of shares, or in the case of short obligations buying shares) was still allowed as closing reduces credit risk for the broker…

Hasn't the largest brokerage also restricted?

Edit: OK, I think the list I looked at is wrong. I meant Charles Schwab, but I don't know which one is _actually_ the largest.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#62

Post by jimminy »

lrem wrote: post #61
jimminy wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only buying was prevented, and only for some brokerages? The first part of that has been a common bit of misinformation. Opening new positions (either by attempting to buy shares of the stock, or entering into a new short position) is what was prevented. Closing positions (selling for owners of shares, or in the case of short obligations buying shares) was still allowed as closing reduces credit risk for the broker…

Hasn't the largest brokerage also restricted? Edit: OK, I think the list I looked at is wrong. I meant Charles Schwab, but I don't know which one is _actually_ the largest.

It's a fair question. A bunch of the larger guys like Charles Schwab and TD did implement restrictions as well.

In their case, it may not have been a necessity to maintain liquidity for other assets, but capping the exposure to how much capital they were putting down for it probably still made sense.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#63

Post by ivalm »

emteycz wrote: post #60
TameAntelope wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, that's a lot of work you're asking a stranger to do for you...

There's no work to be done, the answer is no.

Can you point to a GME like price action of a non-penny stock ticker? Of course we both know the answer is no. Things shot up, things shot down, of course people who bought the hype lost money. There is nothing surprising here.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#64

Post by estaseuropano »

puranjay wrote: post #45

Really disappointed at HN's recent stance on both crypto and GME. Far too many calls for regulation and control. This is not the free market proponents platform I used to know.

HN is about hacker news, there are various viewpoints. Not everyone has to believe in the long-disproven invisible hand.

I think crypto is a dangerous destabilising factor. If not reigned in, it will come crashing down on all of us when it begins to destroy the public finances of (first) smaller countries and enables he usual suspects to evade all taxes, store value in non-localisable assets, etc.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#65

Post by hntrader »

5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #38

What about Musk making tweets about bitcoin whilst his company has a large investment. Isn't that market manipulation or maybe does not apply to rogue billionaires.

Promoting something that you own isn't illegal. Jack Dorsey and thousands of others are promoting BTC while simultaneously owning it on social media. Musk also promotes TSLA and SpaceX to his benefit (since he holds equity).

It may be a bit of a grey area ethically since he didn't disclose his ownership until later, but if he was doing it because he really believes in crypto and it's not just a cynical attempt to pump something he's holding and then close the position into the buying frenzy a day later, then I have no problem with it. Of course, though, it's not possible to read this intention from a distance.

One interpretation is that this is in the same ethical category as Instagram influencers who get paid to flash products in front of their users without disclosing that they're being paid.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#66

Post by stereolambda »

Older RoaringKitty YT spreadsheet videos (before he became all about GME and before much of anyone watched his streams) are interesting to watch for a person casually interested in finance. They are very nerdy in discussing his approach to investing, tools etc. and don't present any clear recipes. He had/probably still has a biggish public portfolio of stocks and seemed to base it on financial analysis applying the value investing style. I thought this style is pretty much dead, because market efficiency has increased compared to the times when Benjamin Graham analysed securities by hand. (Unless you have the name recognition and capital of Buffett.)

I don't know if all this was completely sincere on RoaringKitty's part. Personally I believe that he mostly was at that time. Possibly he got carried away by money and fame later. But I 1) don't have to decide it for any official body 2) was never long GME, it was already too expensive (risky) compared to fundamentals when I learned of the story. What I'm trying to say is: fraudsters tend to want to sell you something, and at least it seemed that you weren't sold anything by RK.

I can get recommendations on in-depth (practical), interesting, non-pushy financial content for casual viewer. Please don't say Matt Levine, he's a (great) commentator not a practitioner.

Also, I think everyone interested is aware that no one should expect money from active investing, you should use something like index funds first while already having a comfortable amount of money in safer assets etc. That's why I say casually.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#67

Post by kjksf »

tptacek wrote: post #16
sillysaurusx wrote: post #10

It's interesting watching /r/wallstreetbets oscillate between "We did nothing wrong!" to "Well okay, some people were doing some things that were wrong, but hopefully no one will notice." https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/lj8djx/day_... (I don't personally believe that anyone did anything that should be prosecuted here, but what I believe is irrelevant to courts.) There is one thing that (in my un-humb…

NSCC collateral rules are widely believed to follow directly from Dodd-Frank requirements. It's also hard to understand the supposed conspiracy you'd be prosecuting NSCC for. Is the idea here that NSCC was somehow corrupted by agents of hedge funds short on GME?

"widely believed"? Believed by whom and why? Dodd-Frank is not a secret. There either is a requirement in Dodd-Frank act or not. If there is, you or the persons believing it could just quote the relevant text.

According to Vlad from Robinhood, as said in Clubhouse interview with E. Musk, there is discretionary (i.e. arbitrary) part of the collateral requirement set by NSCC.

Initially NSCC asked RH for $3 billion in collateral which RH didn't have and they managed to negotiate it down to $700 million, which they did have.

Which begs the question: if $3 billion was required by Dodd-Frank, then did NSCC commit securities fraud by agreeing to lower it to $700 million?

And if $700 million was enough to satisfy Dodd-Frank, then why did they ask for $3 billion initially?

And what if $500 would be enough? Or $200 million?

Or maybe Dodd-Frank doesn't dictate collateral requirements on an individual stock at all?

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#68

Post by Ekaros »

KDJohnBrown wrote: post #54

Nice to know that the US legislature has deemed this a more important use of their time than the pandemic and the economy.

I would call this action to be directly related to the economy... Albeit GMC was small stock. There could be some open questions of market stability that were clearly under-covered. It is reasonable to look into this and if similar situation could lead to larger market impact.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#69

Post by qaq »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #10

It's interesting watching /r/wallstreetbets oscillate between "We did nothing wrong!" to "Well okay, some people were doing some things that were wrong, but hopefully no one will notice." https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/lj8djx/day_... (I don't personally believe that anyone did anything that should be prosecuted here, but what I believe is irrelevant to courts.) There is one thing that (in my un-humb…

"Therefore that's why all the exchanges had to suspend GME training" thats not accurate very few did. it's just that those few had oversized exposure on GME. They were also not part of some huge entity that could post extra money without even noticing like say Etrade (Morgan Stanley) etc.

Re: Roaring Kitty to testify on GameStop alongside hedge fund managers

#70

Post by heidar »

estaseuropano wrote: post #64
puranjay wrote: post #45

Really disappointed at HN's recent stance on both crypto and GME. Far too many calls for regulation and control. This is not the free market proponents platform I used to know.

HN is about hacker news, there are various viewpoints. Not everyone has to believe in the long-disproven invisible hand. I think crypto is a dangerous destabilising factor. If not reigned in, it will come crashing down on all of us when it begins to destroy the public finances of (first) smaller countries and enables he usual suspects to evade all taxes, store value in non-localisable assets, etc.

I’m not sure I follow. People/governments can use crypto and continue paying taxes, I don’t see the connection here.
Post reply on HN