5 ms·

The harm is more particularized for those whose stock was auto-sold at the dip for a margin call because they had bought the stock in an instant account.

by ummonk 6y ago

gruez 6y ago
Is there proof of this? This gets repeated a lot and the best "proof" I've seen was a wsb post claiming they got sold "without [their] permission", but stopped short of saying whether they were using margin or not.
- nrmitchi 6y ago
  One piece of the "Robinhood Abstraction" that is popping up a lot right now is that the fact that a large majority would have been using margin, but not known it. Much of the nice and fast experience that Robinhood offers ("Just signed up? You can start trading!", "Initiated a transfer? Start trading now!", "Just sold something? Rebuy something else immediately!") are all powered by the fact that these are all technical using margin.
- Jommi 6y ago
  If you use the "instant deposit" feature (its ON by default) on Robinhood, you are using margin. Its one of the weird things people never really though about.
jcranmer 6y ago
There are definitely same claims for harm that are stronger than others. Whether any of the 6 (!) class action suits currently pending actually claim that harm is a different matter. Of the stuff I see on court listener: * 3 don't have documents available (and I'm not going to bother signing up for PACER just to find out) * 1 has a claim predicated on "I could have bought or shorted GME" (yeah, not gonna fly) * 1 has a claim predicated on "the value of GME stock fell, causing me loss" (doesn't mention if the stock was actually sold, so it's purely paper loss, so really not gonna fly) * 1 has a claim predicated on "I tried to buy, but couldn't" (best chance of succeeding, but I think they're still screwed anyways)
- tptacek 6y ago
  You should sign up for PACER. It's easy (although the web interface is horrible) and costs basically nothing at the scale you'd be using it at. It's one of those things you won't use often but you'll be happy you set it up, like, a couple times a year.
  - jcranmer 6y ago
    Most of the cases I'm interested in, someone has already signed up for PACER and added them to courtlistener by the time I get to it. Or it's a SCOTUS case and the entire docket is accessible for free on supremecourt.gov :-)
    - tptacek 6y ago
      It was the same for me, but I like it when I can grab something that hasn't hit Courtlistener yet for, like, 50 cents. :) It's a good message board power-up, I guess.
  - r00fus 6y ago
    And install/use RECAP so you can make PACER use more free. https://free.law/recap https://free.law/recap

The harm is more particularized for those whose stock was auto-sold at the dip for a margin call because they had bought the stock in an instant account.

by ummonk 6y ago

The harm is more particularized for those whose stock was auto-sold at the dip for a margin call because they had bought the stock in an instant account.

gruez 6y ago

Is there proof of this? This gets repeated a lot and the best "proof" I've seen was a wsb post claiming they got sold "without [their] permission", but stopped short of saying whether they were using margin or not.

nrmitchi 6y ago
One piece of the "Robinhood Abstraction" that is popping up a lot right now is that the fact that a large majority would have been using margin, but not known it. Much of the nice and fast experience that Robinhood offers ("Just signed up? You can start trading!", "Initiated a transfer? Start trading now!", "Just sold something? Rebuy something else immediately!") are all powered by the fact that these are all technical using margin.
Jommi 6y ago
If you use the "instant deposit" feature (its ON by default) on Robinhood, you are using margin. Its one of the weird things people never really though about.

jcranmer 6y ago

There are definitely same claims for harm that are stronger than others. Whether any of the 6 (!) class action suits currently pending actually claim that harm is a different matter. Of the stuff I see on court listener: * 3 don't have documents available (and I'm not going to bother signing up for PACER just to find out) * 1 has a claim predicated on "I could have bought or shorted GME" (yeah, not gonna fly) * 1 has a claim predicated on "the value of GME stock fell, causing me loss" (doesn't mention if the stock was actually sold, so it's purely paper loss, so really not gonna fly) * 1 has a claim predicated on "I tried to buy, but couldn't" (best chance of succeeding, but I think they're still screwed anyways)

tptacek 6y ago
You should sign up for PACER. It's easy (although the web interface is horrible) and costs basically nothing at the scale you'd be using it at. It's one of those things you won't use often but you'll be happy you set it up, like, a couple times a year.
- jcranmer 6y ago
  Most of the cases I'm interested in, someone has already signed up for PACER and added them to courtlistener by the time I get to it. Or it's a SCOTUS case and the entire docket is accessible for free on supremecourt.gov :-)
  - tptacek 6y ago
    It was the same for me, but I like it when I can grab something that hasn't hit Courtlistener yet for, like, 50 cents. :) It's a good message board power-up, I guess.
- r00fus 6y ago
  And install/use RECAP so you can make PACER use more free. https://free.law/recap https://free.law/recap