4 ms·

This is a weird way to say "retail investors couldn't continue to engage in illegal market manipulation for a couple days because of margin requirements between

This is a weird way to say "retail investors couldn't continue to engage in illegal market manipulation for a couple days because of margin requirements between Robinhood and counterparties". They had to stop purchases for one or two securities for a couple days until they could secure a billion dollar loan and clear some pending transactions. It was far less of an issue than the conspiracy folks wanted it to be.

downrightmike 4y ago
Yeah Fuck retail! Market Makers should be the only ones allowed to artificially destroy any companies that they feel like! Get back in your lane Pleb, this is not a game they'll ever let you succeed in.
lamentDOTconfig 4y ago
- notavalleyman 4y ago
  This is an emotively charged post, but it's factually wrong, and basically a conspiracy theory. Over 100% short interest doesn't imply anyone broke the law. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-19/matt-levine-s-money-stuff-gamestop-baffles-the-sec-too https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-19/matt-l... > Short interest can exceed 100%—as it did with GME—when the same shares are lent multiple times by successive purchasers https://www.reuters.com/article/us-retail-trading-shortselling-explainer/explainer-how-were-more-than-100-of-gamestops-shares-shorted-idUSKBN2AI2DD https://www.reuters.com/article/us-retail-trading-shortselli... > HOW CAN MORE THAN 100% OF A COMPANY’S SHARES BE SHORTED? > Once the short seller borrows the shares from the lender and then sells them back into the market, the new owner of the shares is free to lend them out, just as the previous owner did, and have no idea they are on the other side of a short sale. Also, the reason the buttons were taken off the app, was because RH were having to post extra collateral due to volatiltiy. RH had to draw down extra loans to pay the collateral. For one broker, the collateral was 100%. The memeing was not sustainable for RH. There was no conspiracy. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-28/robinhood-is-said-to-draw-on-credit-lines-from-banks-amid-tumult?sref=gni836kR https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-28/robinhood... https://www.wsj.com/articles/gamestop-trading-restrictions-blamed-on-wall-streets-clearing-firm-by-online-broker-11611867105?mod=mhp https://www.wsj.com/articles/gamestop-trading-restrictions-b...
SeanAnderson 4y ago
Payment for order flow should be illegal. It was invented by Madoff and is illegal in most countries. Citadel submitted a request to the SEC stating that payment for order flow represents a major conflict of interest and should be made illegal. When the laws weren't changed - Citadel built their business model around it. I don't fault retail for approaching the situation in the way they did. It seems logical given the understanding that they're being preyed upon in situations advertised as beneficial to them.

downrightmike 4y ago

Yeah Fuck retail! Market Makers should be the only ones allowed to artificially destroy any companies that they feel like! Get back in your lane Pleb, this is not a game they'll ever let you succeed in.

lamentDOTconfig 4y ago

notavalleyman 4y ago
This is an emotively charged post, but it's factually wrong, and basically a conspiracy theory. Over 100% short interest doesn't imply anyone broke the law. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-19/matt-levine-s-money-stuff-gamestop-baffles-the-sec-too https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-19/matt-l... > Short interest can exceed 100%—as it did with GME—when the same shares are lent multiple times by successive purchasers https://www.reuters.com/article/us-retail-trading-shortselling-explainer/explainer-how-were-more-than-100-of-gamestops-shares-shorted-idUSKBN2AI2DD https://www.reuters.com/article/us-retail-trading-shortselli... > HOW CAN MORE THAN 100% OF A COMPANY’S SHARES BE SHORTED? > Once the short seller borrows the shares from the lender and then sells them back into the market, the new owner of the shares is free to lend them out, just as the previous owner did, and have no idea they are on the other side of a short sale. Also, the reason the buttons were taken off the app, was because RH were having to post extra collateral due to volatiltiy. RH had to draw down extra loans to pay the collateral. For one broker, the collateral was 100%. The memeing was not sustainable for RH. There was no conspiracy. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-28/robinhood-is-said-to-draw-on-credit-lines-from-banks-amid-tumult?sref=gni836kR https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-28/robinhood... https://www.wsj.com/articles/gamestop-trading-restrictions-blamed-on-wall-streets-clearing-firm-by-online-broker-11611867105?mod=mhp https://www.wsj.com/articles/gamestop-trading-restrictions-b...

SeanAnderson 4y ago

Payment for order flow should be illegal. It was invented by Madoff and is illegal in most countries. Citadel submitted a request to the SEC stating that payment for order flow represents a major conflict of interest and should be made illegal. When the laws weren't changed - Citadel built their business model around it. I don't fault retail for approaching the situation in the way they did. It seems logical given the understanding that they're being preyed upon in situations advertised as beneficial to them.