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

71–80 of 216 posts

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

#71

Post by 3001 »

jimminy wrote: post #62
lrem wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Charles Schwab did not implement restrictions.They had a banner until last week saying that when you log in.Stop spreading misinformation

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

#72

Post by arafsheikh »

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.

As Matt Levine likes to say - everything is securities fraud.

> contributing to global warming is securities fraud, and sexual harassment by executives is securities fraud, and customer data breaches are securities fraud, and mistreating killer whales is securities fraud, and whatever else you’ve got.

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/everyt...

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

#73

Post by emteycz »

ivalm wrote: post #63
emteycz wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Evidently you don't know what you're talking about - of course I can. $VW 2008, $ACB 2019, $TLRY 2018 to name a few. There is much more, simply go through tickers on D1 chart and you'll see.

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

#74

Post by zappo2938 »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #44
voiper1 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they required 100% collateral, why did that mean Robinhood stopped trades? Why couldn't they allow trades with 100% settled funds?

I highly recommend https://youtu.be/4RS4JIEVyXM?t=60 -- I didn't understand any of this myself till watching that. (Still don't! But I'm less confused.) My understanding is that the clearing firm informs everyone "Hey, we no longer support opening positions in three stocks specifically: GameStop, AMC, and KOSS." Literally everyone, including Robinhood, was forced to only allow people to sell GME. Somehow Fidelity was…

Fidelity is largest stock holder of GME.

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

#75

Post by grandmczeb »

voiper1 wrote: post #36
csours wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't change the rules of the game. The volatility and risk changed, thus the collateral requirements changed. Note: I am not a financial professional. I'm not sure if anyone from wsb should be prosecuted; but I will say that if another hedge fund had tried to do what wsb did, it would have been clearly and unambiguously illegal market manipulation. I do think it is quite likely there were some financial profes…

If they required 100% collateral, why did that mean Robinhood stopped trades? Why couldn't they allow trades with 100% settled funds?

Brokerages can't guarantee trades with client money[1].

[1] https://archive.is/GFtf2

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

#76

Post by Shacklz »

hntrader wrote: post #65
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 pum…

> who get paid to flash products in front of their users without disclosing that they're being paid.

Which is why it's not just ethically wrong but also illegal in many countries. Why the US allowing such behavior is beyond me.

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

#77

Post by jimminy »

3001 wrote: post #71
jimminy wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Charles Schwab did not implement restrictions.They had a banner until last week saying that when you log in.Stop spreading misinformation

> “The bottom line is that clients are still able to trade in GME, but we’ve put some restrictions on certain types of transactions in the interest of helping mitigate risk for our clients,” Schwab said Wednesday in a statement.[0]

They very much did 3 weeks ago. Not to the same degree as the smaller brokerages, but they still put limitations on margin trading, and restrictions on options.

[0] https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2021/01/29/gamestop-lawsuits-hi...

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

#78

Post by loeg »

arafsheikh wrote: post #72
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.

As Matt Levine likes to say - everything is securities fraud. > contributing to global warming is securities fraud, and sexual harassment by executives is securities fraud, and customer data breaches are securities fraud, and mistreating killer whales is securities fraud, and whatever else you’ve got. Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/everyt...

Matt Levine would also say this probably isn't securities fraud.

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

#79

Post by hntrader »

Shacklz wrote: post #76
hntrader wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 pum…

> who get paid to flash products in front of their users without disclosing that they're being paid. Which is why it's not just ethically wrong but also illegal in many countries. Why the US allowing such behavior is beyond me.

There's also a more charitable interpretation though. It's not clear to me that the lack of disclosure benefited Musk.

Compare these two sequences of events:

1 - Initial purchase followed by disclosure followed by promotion

2 - Initial purchase followed by promotion followed by disclosure

In either case, Musk bought BTC at around 35k.

Do we have reason to think that the BTC price is higher now because Musk followed path (2) than (1)? It's not clear to me that that's the case here. And if it's not the case, then why on a first principles basis are we upset?

I agree though that "best practice" is to disclose upfront, if for little other reason than pump and dumpers (which Musk is not) have muddied the waters and this has become a generally good tradition to uphold as a result.

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

#80

Post by boublepop »

csours wrote: post #25
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…

They didn't change the rules of the game. The volatility and risk changed, thus the collateral requirements changed. Note: I am not a financial professional. I'm not sure if anyone from wsb should be prosecuted; but I will say that if another hedge fund had tried to do what wsb did, it would have been clearly and unambiguously illegal market manipulation. I do think it is quite likely there were some financial profes…

Institutional investors did do what people suspect wsb of doing. Retail investors where net sellers of GME during this event. The short squeeze happened because other institional investors went in hard under cover of the WSB memes.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/05/gamestop-mania-may-not-have-...

Post reply on HN