12 ms·
GameStop drops by 40% in 25 minutes
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dragontamer 6y agoAnd its back. Look, I think this whole GME thing is stupid: but following the price is also stupid. I guess if its your first bubble, this is exciting stuff, but these things come crashing down eventually. Hertz is a better saga to follow, since that saga is almost done. I don't know if any news on GME has come out recently, but nothing is quite as final as bankruptcy court (in the case of Hertz). If you look at the timescales at which stocks meme / move, its on the order of years. Decades even, in the case of Enron and literal scams like Madoff. GME isn't even a scam, its just the market doing its thing. For Hertz, it entered meme status AFTER it started bankruptcy proceedings last year. Those proceedings are still not over yet. It just goes to show how long things take in the world of finance. The daily ups and downs are largely noise. Try not to be distracted by them.
- sandworm101 6y ago>> GME isn't even a scam, its just the market doing its thing. Short-term scams do exist. Identifying and leveraging a potential squeeze situation is standard market behavior, but taking to twitter to rally the masses into a stock is really just a confidence trick. Pump and dump is a real thing.
- runarberg 6y agoThe categorization of scam is interesting in this context. Why isn’t gamestop considered a scam? Why is Enron? From the point of view of a worker which gets their profits diluted in dividends payed to shareholders, the very existence of a stock market very much looks like a scam. Another interesting aspect is various cryptocurrencies (or—as per recent discussion—NFTs). I guess whatever the establishment is uncomfortable with will be labelled as scam. Perhaps future will look at GameStop as a scam. But from my point of view, trading in stocks is always a scam.
- dragontamer 6y ago> From the point of view of a worker which gets their profits diluted in dividends payed to shareholders I hate Tesla, but their IPOs and SPOs are a great example of what the stock market offers, and why a dividend (or other reward) is necessary. Without raising $5 Billion from investors back in 2014, Tesla wouldn't have had the money to build their Nevada Gigafactory. ------ Banks offer loans, which depend on interest rates. Shareholders don't want money, they want a share of the future profits. As such, the "promise" you make to a shareholder is more flexible, longer-looking, a better deal for most people involved. If you can't make money this year, or next year, or 5 years from now... shareholders are forward looking enough to still give you money. As long as that share they received truly benefits 5, 10, 15, or 20 years from now. ---------- Owning a right to future profits and a vote for the board-of-directors is a powerful thing. Shareholders become one of the owners of the company, with all the rights associated with that. --------- So. Lets timetravel back to 2014. Tesla needs money. It wants public money: willing to give you a piece of ownership (aka: future dividends and a vote for the board-of-directors). It promises to use that money to build a Gigafactory in Nevada. Today: we now have a company, and set of shareholders, who BOTH benefit from the situation. That's the magic of the stockmarket. It turns out that the "promise of future profits + voting rights" is a powerful item to trade.
- runarberg 6y agoThis still doesn’t make things look less like a scam. An anecdote of where the scheme worked for some people in the past is a very common thing for a scammer to tell future victims in order to persuade them into the scam. Example: [Person A] was a single parent living paycheck to paycheck, then they started selling [pyramid product X] and now they’re sending their kids through collage on the profits alone. Shareholders not making money is akin to saying that pyramid scammers don’t make money, off course they do... Otherwise they wouldn’t be spending their time and energy doing this. Every dollar you earn by doing nothing is a dollar made by someone else they didn’t get.
- dragontamer 6y agoThere's no payoff for a pyramid scheme. They just pile money somewhere, without actually doing anything with it. A pyramid scheme is literally the "Wicked and Evil" 3rd servant from the parable of the talents. They waste the huge pile of money by burying it and not really making it work for their masters. The expectation of the Stock Market is to do something with the money. For Amazon, the IPO allowed them to buy servers. For Google, same thing: tons of computers cost tons of money. For Tesla, they bought a Nevada Factory. The money disappeared into a Factory, and then the Factory made money later (which is then used to increase the value of shares and make everyone who participated richer). ---------- This is allowed in part, because it works. It makes society stronger. It rewards risk-takers who would otherwise do nothing with their money. It provides thinkers with money and capital when they need it most. If the scheme doesn't work out, the investors lose, but they're still happy that they got to partake in the experiment. Stocks are the original "Kickstarter". And I argue that they're far more fair than kickstarter. Owning a vote for the board-of-directors + a share of the promised dividend is worth a hell of a lot more than stupid keychains.
- dragontamer 6y agoGME is... very much a bubble. But its not a scam because there's a nugget of truth here still. GME's board of directors is planning to transform the company from a mall-based retailer into an online distributor of games. This will require money, and... well... a high-stock price will allow GME to make a secondary offering to fund the development of a new webpage, that will become the cornerstone of this new online-distributor business. This isn't exactly a venture I'd put my money on. But hey, some people clearly are willing to play the game. (Whether they know what's going on is another question) -------- Just because there's a bunch of dumbasses throwing money at this doesn't necessarily mean its a scam. Don't get me wrong, I think they're all wasting their money (so I'm going to stay away from it). But you know what? If it works out for them, good for them! I honestly am rooting for them to be successful. I mean, really, think about the chances here. They look low, but are they as low as say... Star Citizen actually getting released? From a video-game perspective, the long-shot chance of Gamestop becoming an online powerhouse is probably more likely than Star Citizen ever coming out (or insert any other dumb kickstarter idea in here)
- z3ncyberpunk 6y agoEven if it is a scam, the public is entirely justified in seeing it through, considered how the so-called Wall Street elites that you pointed out do it on the daily and space zero repercussions ever. Please stop worshiping billionaires
- smnrchrds 6y agoI'm certain the GME bubble will burst at some point. I am almost as certain that when this inevitably happens, those who lost their money will blame hedge funds, short sellers, Wall street, elites, the system, etc. instead of looking into the mirror.
- dragontamer 6y agoEnron and Madoff are examples of what "some time" means. Yeah, all bubbles / ponzi schemes run out of money eventually. But 17 years (Madoff) is longer than most people's radar. If you decide to go short, you gotta be right not only in the direction of the stock, but also in the timing of it. Timing is everything. Unfortunately, timing is also the most random.
- gruez 6y agoenron/madoff isn't really comparable because there's a mastermind behind both of them. GME? not so much.
- sandworm101 6y agoJust because you cannot see the mastermind doesn't mean that there isn't someone pulling strings. And the Madoff scam wasn't a single person. There were lots of naïve participants/benefiters enjoying the profits of that scam. In that sense it is a parallel to gamestop: A small cadre of people influencing things, and lots of little people participating in what they should reasonably understand to be a pyramid. The situation has Fyre written all over it..
- svachalek 6y agoA certain unprintable Redditor with initials DFV?
- filoleg 6y agoAh yeah, the guy who moved the entire stock market and beat the hedge funds with only $50k invested, despite GME stock trading volumes in billions of dollars per day. /s If someone seriously thinks that DFV (or the entirety of WSB, for that matter) would even physically be able to notably move a ticker such as GME, then I don't have much to say to them, because this is completely inane. With some penny stocks that have almost no trading volume? Sure, technically possible. But with something like GME, it is quite not that simple. For a solid frame of reference, the entire holdings of GME that DFV had after the gigantic pump were about $50mil, one of the largest retail traders by far. Institutional traders? They did individual GME trades in volumes of $700mil+ each on a daily basis. Not $700mil+ for all institutional investors combined, but individually. Cannot be bothered to find a citation for it now, but iirc institutional investors also held about 75-80% of all outstanding GME shares throughout the entire pump.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoIt's just frustrating to see otherwise reasonable people start tossing out crazy conspiracy theories about the Day of the Short Squeeze when GME will go to infinity and we'll take all the hedge funds' money. I can't even escape from it by staying off social media, because a quarter of my friends are in on it. I'm a lot less troubled than I was the first time around because there doesn't seem to be any severe systemic risk, but I still really wish I could figure out how to convince people to knock it off.
- dragontamer 6y agoFor most people, this is a gambling thing. For them, its not much different than spending $100 or $500 on blackjack and slots. Its entertainment to them. Sure, some of us are trying to do work (aka: properly price things, determine which companies deserve our money, etc. etc.), and these events are distracting... But if its just a bubble, I don't think there's much harm in letting it run its course. Let them gamble, as long as no sharks swim by to illegally try to extract money from their fun. Of course, if someone in particular you know has a gambling problem (and might lose their life savings), that's a different story.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoYeah, I agree with all of that - it doesn't seem like there's any huge number of people putting their life savings into it. I'm just vaguely annoyed by gambling in general and don't like when I have to hear about it all the time.
- capableweb 6y agoMaybe rather than seeing GME as a crazy event that even made your "reasonable" friends non-reasonable, could it be that you thought they were more reasonable than they actually were?
- runarberg 6y ago> this whole GME thing is stupid: but following the price is also stupid. I will top that by stating: “Nothing that happens in the stock market is stupider then the fact that the stock market exists.”
- twirlock 6y agoHertz memestock tulip le wtf i hate Reddit now Elon Musk is a snakeoil salesman.
- zamalek 6y ago> I guess if its your first bubble The bubble is/was at both ends. I honestly have to agree that it was undervalued at the time that the original GME posts were made, but it's also very overvalued right now. GameStop has limited immunity from the problem other brick-and-mortars are facing: console games purchased through digital content delivery platforms cannot be transferred to friends, where-as games that are purchased at GameStop typically can be. There's also hardware to be purchased and other goodies. GameStop is not intrinsically doomed to failure, if they proactively differentiate from digital content delivery. That being said, it's highly doubtful that GameStop will outpace digital content delivery platforms (like Steam/PSN/XBox Live/etc.), unless they build their own. In my opinion, they do potentially have a sustainable 8-9 figure market cap. This bubble is going to pop, just as much as the squeeze had to happen.
- capableweb 6y agoGameStop is not just competing with digital content and delivery, they are also competing against established all-in-one stores like Carrefour and Fnac, that typically carries everything GameStop (currently) carries plus more. If they can make themselves different enough to give people a reason to buy their PS5 at GameStop instead of at Carrefour, remains to be seen.
- rualca 6y ago> I guess if its your first bubble, this is exciting stuff, but these things come crashing down eventually. Portraying gamespot's case as a bubble is either ignorant or disingenuous. It's a game of chickens between hedge funds using glaringly obvious market manipulation to drive their shorts and retail investors who spotted how the hedge fund's overplayed their hand. > Hertz is a better saga (...) Hertz has zero to do or in common with gamespot's saga. Hedge funds cornered themselves by shorting over 100% of gamespot's stock, and thus forcing themselves to buy over 100% of gamespot's stock back for whatever the market will be asking to be able to deliver on their contracts. Hertz was a company already in bankruptcy.
- Triv888 6y agoThat whole GME thing is not stupid... institutions are holding 106% of GME stocks... not sure how much non-institutions are holding. What is stupid is what the government is allowing institutions to do. > % Held by Institutions 106.22 https://invest.ameritrade.com/grid/p/site#r=jPage/https://research.ameritrade.com/grid/wwws/research/stocks/summary?c_name=invest_VENDOR&symbol=GME https://invest.ameritrade.com/grid/p/site#r=jPage/https://re...
- aeternum 6y agoHolding 106% can be perfectly rational, it happens just because shorts create a loan. Suppose we have a company and an institution has analyzed the books and knows is worth $10/share, shares are currently trading at $5. Suppose this is an unusually small company and there are only 100 shares outstanding total. Institution buys them all up since it's such a good deal. Along comes Citadel who decides the company is going bankrupt and decides to sell the company short. Borrows 50 shares from the institution's broker and puts them up on the market. Now the institution sees that 50 more shares are available again at $5. Still the institution knows they are worth $10/share.. it's completely rational to purchase those shares and increase the holding to 150 shares even if the official shares outstanding is only 100 shares. Institution can sell all 150 for $10 a share assuming they are eventually right about the validation and Citadel will be the one that needs to make up the difference.
- jfengel 6y agoThe noise is precisely why people are distracted. A lot of people would love to get rich by buying low and selling high within that noise. The more noise there is, the more opportunities there are. That's gambling, not investing, but people love gambling. As with gambling, the house always wins, but some people come out ahead anyway. Like lottery winners, that makes people dream. In this case there may even have been some house disadvantage: too much pessimism by investors not only made opportunities for legitimate investing wins, but the quirks of the rules left them open to having to materialize losses. Any such advantage to investors is long since gone, but it amplifies the lotto excitement.
- zenbane 6y agohttps://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/gamestop-stock-price-retail-trading-reddit-wallstreetbets-net-purchases-2021-3-1030170484 https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/gamestop-sto... First time might have been retail traders but this is all about big whales. Shorts are pinned - all shorts must cover. Writing this off as a retail pump and dump is ignorance.
- smaili 6y agoInterestingly AMC had a similar shape as well. Coincidence?
- ohashi 6y agoThe two tend to have similar patterns most days
- thunderbird120 6y agoNo, considering the same people are buying it for the same reasons.
- legitster 6y agoThe two stocks are targeted by the same group of investors. It would make sense they move together.
- hydroreadsstuff 6y agoKOSS as well
- w-m 6y agoTrading has been halted 7 times today, as of now: https://www.nyse.com/trade-halt-current https://www.nyse.com/trade-halt-current
- z3ncyberpunk 6y agobecause the economy is rigged for the rich
- themihai 6y agoPump it -> sell it -> short it -> halt buying -> profit!
- limeblack 6y agoCould someone explain the games stop draw? Apple has over 500 stores while gamestop has over 5500.
- Trasmatta 6y agoThere is no draw, it's a meme stock that's had a cult form around it.
- andrewmunsell 6y agoI'm pretty sure most people would argue that it has nothing to do with market fundamentals or the valuation of Gamestop as a company. There's a mixture of wanting to stick it to hedge funds (based on the idea that a short squeeze could happen), power from it being a meme, and other social factors. You'll often see optimism on Reddit about changes that Gamestop is making to their stores or business model, but I think that's really the minority here. Disclaimer: I have previously bought/sold GME purely out of personal interest for the phenomenon (and have no position in it now, nor do I have a plan to buy any more), but this is not financial advice.
- ohashi 6y agoThe Reddit belief is short squeeze. That there are fewer shares available than people (hedge funds) have shorted. Thus if price goes up, they have to buy to cover, pushing price up even more, and the cycle continues. Until it bursts at some point (not really talked about). It doesn't have a lot to do with financial future of GameStop. It's overvalued as a company almost surely. But it's not a scam company, it's not going bankrupt, but the draw is a certain class of investor bet way too heavily against it that it created an opportunity to take advantage of, GameStop just happens to be the field the game is being played on.
- vkou 6y ago> The Reddit belief is short squeeze. That there are fewer shares available than people (hedge funds) have shorted. Thus if price goes up, they have to buy to cover, pushing price up even more, and the cycle continues. Until it bursts at some point (not really talked about). The problem is that Reddit is full of morons, who don't understand a single thing about short sales. When a stock is 150% shorted, there exist 250% shares of stock. That's because for every short sale, a new long position is created. It is impossible for there to be more short positions, than there are long positions. [1] Now, if[2], say 150% of the shares are held by buy-and-forget investors, who won't sell, regardless of where the price goes, a short squeeze is possible (Because there are fewer shares being actively traded, than there are short positions open.) The thing is, when GME goes to some ridiculous valuation like $300, some of those buy-and-forget investors may be inclined to take their money, and sell. Any half-actively managed fund would be crazy not to. Are short sellers getting margin-called applying upwards price pressure? Yes. Is that the only source of upwards price pressure? No, there's also a mountain of people with either FOMO, or the hope to unload the stock to a bigger fool. This is rational, in the same sense that investing early into a bubble, or a pyramid scheme is rational. [1] Unless you do a naked short sell[3]. Reddit screams about illegal naked short selling, without offering a shred of proof, because it doesn't understand the concept mentioned in the paragraph above. [2] Reddit also has no proof that this is the case, it's just a tribe of apes screaming 'hodl' at eachother. [3] The only people who naked short sell are market makers, who are incredibly risk averse, and balance their positions out on a regular basis. Hedge funds aren't market makers, and aren't allowed to naked short sell.
- raspyberr 6y agoThere's speculation this article was part of a coordinated attack. The stock then shot back up.
- gruez 6y ago>There's speculation this article was part of a coordinated attack WSB is almost qanon at this point. everything is a coordinated attack to them.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- exclusiv 6y agoThere's definitely some truth to that, but CNBC still has "GameStop drops 40% in 25 minutes" on the homepage. They were really quick to get that up when it happened but not so quick to alter the headline they want. Isn't it more newsworthy that it bounced back so quickly? It's up over $100/share since Monday. Currently up $20/share on the day and will be on the short sale restriction list tomorrow.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Solvitieg 6y agoI was onside with the retail investors during the short squeeze against wallstreet hedge funds. But I don't think that narrative holds anymore and its beginning to look like stock manipulation
- camjohnson26 6y agoThat narrative was never really accurate, there were plenty of hedge funds long too.
- andys627 6y agoShort interest is larger now than it was during round 1
- rualca 6y ago> Short interest is larger now than it was during round 1 Do you have a source for that?
- walshemj 6y agoAs Paul Newman said "If you're playing a poker game and you look around the table and and can't tell who the sucker is, it's you."
- yccs27 6y agoIt doesn't have to be manipulation. Just a bunch of people and goading each other in a presumed David-against-Goliath "fight", investors trying to predict their and each other's movements, and funds trying to capitalize on investor irrationality, in a market situation (high short interest) which is strongly susceptible to such fluctuations.
- ordinaryradical 6y agoThe thing that I find interesting about the responses to the Gamestop saga on HN is the certainty everyone portrays. Everyone is convinced that the retail investors and WSB crowd are greater fools, and yet here we are again at practically the same peak as the last time and there is even greater evidence of shorts having increased their positions to an impossible level of leverage. I think there is a bizarre Dunning-Kruger-like effect here, particularly when it comes to finance, where everyone is convinced they know far more than whoever is buying or selling GME. Look through old comment threads and you can see everyone making such convincing arguments that the short squeeze was already over and the GME would never be priced above $300 again...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- exclusiv 6y agoAnd they said shorts exited their positions. Then we saw Feb 12th's numbers and short interest was still high. New shorts? Definitely possible. And here we are. That big dip today puts it on the short sale restriction list so tomorrow will be interesting. AMC also had a similar big dip at about the same time as GME.
- gruez 6y ago> And they said shorts exited their positions. Then we saw Feb 12th's numbers and short interest was still high. High? It was down from 42.0% (2 weeks ago) to 30.2%. The week before unofficial estimates put the short interest at over 100%.
- exclusiv 6y agoAnything over 10% is considered high. The narrative was that shorts exited their positions. In "GME round 1", S3 was reaching out to CNBC to correct them, saying most of the shorts are NOT covering. [1] The 100%+ was based on low float numbers or algorithms developed by companies like S3. Morningstar, as an example, currently reports the float at 27.29M. So their SI is 52% right now. Nobody really knows what it is at any given time. We have 2 week gaps in data. So yes, round 2, there appears to be a big drop in shorts, but who knows. There's a battle going on. After round 1, nobody would want a high short volume come reporting time. So what's the actual short volume. And what are the positions on those? Nobody knows. S3, from their algorithm estimates 20.52% right now. [2] [1] https://twitter.com/ihors3/status/1355226736733073416 https://twitter.com/ihors3/status/1355226736733073416 [2] https://twitter.com/ihors3/status/1369713610432393220 https://twitter.com/ihors3/status/1369713610432393220
- Judgmentality 6y agoI am having the time of my life today. Cashed out at $320 and bought back in at the dip. Wheee! Hedge funds are shorting from dark pools (EDIT - the public data was late, so it now seems unlikely it was a dark pool), and I am fucking excited to see what happens for the rest of the day and especially just before closing (and after hours).
- Melting_Harps 6y ago> Cashed out at $320 and bought back in at the dip. Wheee! I remember DFV posting about this at low double digits on WSB, but how is the tax liability on your side? This is why I prefer bitcoin, I can choose to stay and benefit from the appreciation without having to sell directly, whereas taxes on stocks was always a horrible proposition. My Charles Schwab brokerage account is more likely to get more activity from them adopting Bitcoin than any stocks, at this point if I'm honest.
- jljljl 6y agoHow are taxes for Bitcoin any different? Like stocks, you’d still pay taxes on the gains from selling.
- imtringued 6y agoSome people are crazy enough to get a loan against their Bitcoin. Unless you bank on your ability to pay the loan anyway this is an easy way to lose all your Bitcoin if you end up unemployed during a Bitcoin crash. Some companies require 300% backing in Bitcoin for each dollar you borrow and force you to liquidate at 110%. Paying capital gains is cheap compared to losing 66% of your Bitcoin.
- jljljl 6y agoWealthy people can do this with their stocks and other assets as well. Basically a mortgage but without the FHA
- 6y ago
- hydershykh 6y agoThis is just crazy, someone doesn't like when the retail is winning. Looking at the options flow for this, more than 100 million dollars have been spent on contracts today. Halting it all of a sudden only makes people lose money. Here are the options flow stats, crazy amount being spent on options. https://i.gyazo.com/dca500ef0f774a0019f0a42b7ac1e855.png https://i.gyazo.com/dca500ef0f774a0019f0a42b7ac1e855.png Source: https://www.tradytics.com https://www.tradytics.com
- kcg 6y agoHalts are based on specific criteria and rules, they aren't arbitrarily imposed. See: https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/content/MarketRegulation/LULD_FAQ.pdf https://www.nasdaqtrader.com/content/MarketRegulation/LULD_F...
- hydershykh 6y agoWell, we might want to consider changing the criteria a little bit. No?
- filoleg 6y agoI think that going up or down 10% (or more) in a span of 5 minutes is a pretty solid criteria for automatic halting, which is what it is today. If you have a better proposition for the halting criteria, please post it here.
- gruez 6y agobut options expire on friday? why pull off a dump now?
- slt2021 6y agosomeone just unloaded their calls that printed massive money
- spacedome 6y agoWhat do you think of tradytics? Looks really interesting, though I mainly trade OTC, which I sort of doubt it has much support for.
- eloff 6y ago80% of my portfolio is now in long-term PUTS against GME (like short-selling, but without the risk of margin calls if the price rises.) People want to treat it like a casino, fine. But that won't last. When it goes back down I'm going to make a nice profit out of this craziness. Or you know, lose a lot if it somehow stays insane for an entire year. I know what my money's on.
- ganeshkrishnan 6y agodepends on when your puts expire. Everyday you are losing money due to time premium. markets like this can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.
- eloff 6y agoThey're long-term puts. Options generally don't lose much that value in time premium until about 90 days before expiry and then it accelerates quite rapidly.
- mizzack 6y agoWait til you find out about IV crush
- eloff 6y agoThanks for that, I'll sleep better now.
- filoleg 6y ago^This. It isn't all just about the stock price and expiration date/strike price. Case in point: had friends who bought GME puts 2 days ago. GME stock went significantly up in price since then, and so did my friends' puts. Why did their puts go up in price if the stock price went up? Because IV increased, which pumped the price of options across the board, both puts and calls. When IV crush occurs, the exact opposite happens.
- roland35 6y ago
- morpheuskafka 6y agoWhat is driving the action at this point? Aren't all of the hedge funds cashed out at this point?
- MrYellowP 6y ago/r/WallStreetBets considers - and I'm phrasing it nicely - to be unreliable and not worth considering as source of information in regards to GameStop, or actually generally.
- dwaltrip 6y agoWSB is straight-up crazy town. Granted, you can win money in crazy town. And one can stumble across an interesting idea or two. But it's still fucking crazy town.
- capableweb 6y agoWSB is just another internet, within the internet. The whole web used to be crazy town, until that was not OK anymore. As WSB continues to grow, more "normal" people will enter and eventually WSB will be like any other average place for average thought. Instead of the roller-coaster of gems and shitty posts.
- cdiamand 6y agoI'm having a fun time tracking the madness with my sideproject: https://topstonks.com/stocks/GME https://topstonks.com/stocks/GME Total comment volume on /r/wallstreetbets is up 300% over the last 24 hours
- exclusiv 6y agoCan you do comment volume to gains or loss? That would be interesting to see.
- Communitivity 6y agoI don't think GameStop is a case of this, but I can't help but see the GameStop stock story unfolding with the social media drivers and think of the result of a melding of two specific technologies into a third with horrifying implications for long term financial stability. First, the research over the last decade into social media persona swarms, where a single operator can program and control a large group of fake social media accounts whose details are created through methods such as Generative Adaptive Networks (GANs), a Machine Learning technique that can learn to produce something new that imitates an original. [1][2][3] Next, automated algorithmic trading [4], where algorithms determine what and when to buy (increasingly using Machine Learning), which is believed to account for 70-80% of U.S. stock trading. Last, the melding of the two, where automated traders use automated social media accounts to influence at opportune moments and then take advantage of the temporary dips or surges caused by that influence, possibly causing ripple effect dips or surges that the automated traders can use. As far as I know, right now this is just an interesting idea for a science fiction story (am planning to write that in the near term now, too). However, the technology to do this exists right now - the problem is one of integration rather than innovation. [1] https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/2/16/945768/- https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/2/16/945768/- [2] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110318/02153313534/us-military-kicks-off-plan-to-fill-social-networks-with-fake-sock-puppet-accounts.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110318/02153313534/us-mi... [3] https://www.networkworld.com/article/2201350/lots-of--people--you-interact-with-online-are-sockpuppets.html https://www.networkworld.com/article/2201350/lots-of--people... [4] https://www.fool.com/knowledge-center/what-is-algorithmic-trading.aspx#:~:text=Algorithmic%20trading%20uses%20computer%20programs,falls%20below%20a%20specific%20price https://www.fool.com/knowledge-center/what-is-algorithmic-tr.... [5] https://therobusttrader.com/what-percentage-of-trading-is-algorithmic/ https://therobusttrader.com/what-percentage-of-trading-is-al...
- pc86 6y agoWhile technically accurate, this is as disingenuous (read: dishonest) as playing around with axes on a graph and removing units because that's the only way to prove your point. A slightly more accurate description might be "GME gains 530% in a month and is still green for both day over day and on the day time scales." And even more accurate description might be "stock goes up and down in the same day."
- legitster 6y agoMy friends realized there is money to be made here, but I think the thing I realized is how time consuming it is. You really have to be on the prices all day. I am squarely of the belief that all of this fun and games will probably end shortly after people start going out and doing things again.
- jgalt212 6y agoChamath liquidating again.
- ejz 6y agoTotal chaos. It's a vol game, but you need a lot of time to do it well (and honestly need to know drivers of market volume, which is even harder to do from the outside).