5 ms·

And Robinhood has opened up GME buying to 30 shares per account. Looks like their restrictions weren’t that significant in the grand scheme after all. You know

And Robinhood has opened up GME buying to 30 shares per account. Looks like their restrictions weren’t that significant in the grand scheme after all. You know what was significant? Options expirations day was Friday. GME has lost virtually all its momentum since then.

libertine 6y ago
>Looks like their restrictions weren’t that significant in the grand scheme after all. It's precisely the opposite: it looks like their restrictions made a huge impact in the grand scheme. Basically this dip was caused by their restrictions simply because they cut most of the demand that was driving prices. It wouldn't make any impact if the supply side followed the demand loss, but it doesn't work like that. Even if people held, the ones that were still selling drove the prices down. Any restriction on demand is a bottle neck. Don't forget that this movement wasn't drove by few large players getting huge positions, it was basically done by tiny players with small positions but at volume - and Robinhood was the bulk of the volume.
- valuearb 6y ago
  Robinhood is now allowing 100 share purchases. GME continues to suck air. And last weeks trading reports showed retail investors were net sellers of GME after Monday.
  - libertine 6y ago
    >Robinhood is now allowing 100 share purchases. GME continues to suck air. This doesn't take from the fact that Robinhood restrictions had a major impact, which is what I said. I never said this stock would be indefinitely high, or that it would go to the moon, or anything like that. The wave would crash eventually after the hype was over. Still, Robinhood restrictions removed a massive amount of demand from the market, and that has consequences - namely on stock price, momentum of the market, hype, everything. The market went sideways when Elon Musk smoked a joint on a popular podcast, so how come the most popular app for retail investors imposing demand restrictions, to buy a stock bound to a popular movement, wouldn't have any impact on it? >And last weeks trading reports showed retail investors were net sellers of GME after Monday. Like I said, the supply with restricted demand drove prices down - people were selling, and after restrictions they could only sell. Some were planned, some were panic, some were automatic.
    - valuearb 6y ago
      They were net sellers on Tuesday and Wednesday, before the restrictions. While GME was vaulting to the moon.
      - libertine 6y ago
        I don't know what else to say to you mate. Supply < Demand - prices increases. Supply > Demand - price drops. There was always sellers in the market, the supply wasn't 0. It doesn't matter who was selling: institutions, hedge funds, or retail. The point is that demand was larger then supply until restrictions were set.
        valuearb 6y ago
        So by your math the price declined on Tuesday and Wednesday because this is driven by retail investors and they were net sellers? Or maybe, just maybe, the purchases market makers required to cover those massive call option bets got released when options expired?
    - dr-detroit 6y ago
      the government doesn't give a subsidy for smoking a joint that was so very out of character for Musk
    - Rapzid 6y ago
      Maybe it did, but Robinhood and other brokers reactions were predictable enough to be factored into the risk posed by the volatility of the stock. Knowledge is the real power; something that was in severe short supply in simple narratives WSB was throwing up all over the internet to get late buyers in the game.
      - libertine 6y ago
        > Robinhood and other brokers reactions were predictable enough to be factored into the risk posed by the volatility of the stock. You're saying the reactions were predictable after brokers took measures and justified their actions. The reality is that no one, not even Robinhood predicted the volume of transactions and the capital requirements for it.

libertine 6y ago

>Looks like their restrictions weren’t that significant in the grand scheme after all. It's precisely the opposite: it looks like their restrictions made a huge impact in the grand scheme. Basically this dip was caused by their restrictions simply because they cut most of the demand that was driving prices. It wouldn't make any impact if the supply side followed the demand loss, but it doesn't work like that. Even if people held, the ones that were still selling drove the prices down. Any restriction on demand is a bottle neck. Don't forget that this movement wasn't drove by few large players getting huge positions, it was basically done by tiny players with small positions but at volume - and Robinhood was the bulk of the volume.

valuearb 6y ago
Robinhood is now allowing 100 share purchases. GME continues to suck air. And last weeks trading reports showed retail investors were net sellers of GME after Monday.
- libertine 6y ago
  >Robinhood is now allowing 100 share purchases. GME continues to suck air. This doesn't take from the fact that Robinhood restrictions had a major impact, which is what I said. I never said this stock would be indefinitely high, or that it would go to the moon, or anything like that. The wave would crash eventually after the hype was over. Still, Robinhood restrictions removed a massive amount of demand from the market, and that has consequences - namely on stock price, momentum of the market, hype, everything. The market went sideways when Elon Musk smoked a joint on a popular podcast, so how come the most popular app for retail investors imposing demand restrictions, to buy a stock bound to a popular movement, wouldn't have any impact on it? >And last weeks trading reports showed retail investors were net sellers of GME after Monday. Like I said, the supply with restricted demand drove prices down - people were selling, and after restrictions they could only sell. Some were planned, some were panic, some were automatic.
  - valuearb 6y ago
    They were net sellers on Tuesday and Wednesday, before the restrictions. While GME was vaulting to the moon.
    - libertine 6y ago
      I don't know what else to say to you mate. Supply < Demand - prices increases. Supply > Demand - price drops. There was always sellers in the market, the supply wasn't 0. It doesn't matter who was selling: institutions, hedge funds, or retail. The point is that demand was larger then supply until restrictions were set.
      - valuearb 6y ago
        So by your math the price declined on Tuesday and Wednesday because this is driven by retail investors and they were net sellers? Or maybe, just maybe, the purchases market makers required to cover those massive call option bets got released when options expired?
  - dr-detroit 6y ago
    the government doesn't give a subsidy for smoking a joint that was so very out of character for Musk
  - Rapzid 6y ago
    Maybe it did, but Robinhood and other brokers reactions were predictable enough to be factored into the risk posed by the volatility of the stock. Knowledge is the real power; something that was in severe short supply in simple narratives WSB was throwing up all over the internet to get late buyers in the game.
    - libertine 6y ago
      > Robinhood and other brokers reactions were predictable enough to be factored into the risk posed by the volatility of the stock. You're saying the reactions were predictable after brokers took measures and justified their actions. The reality is that no one, not even Robinhood predicted the volume of transactions and the capital requirements for it.