3 ms·
“Queen of wallstreetbets” is (presumably) not a compliment, it’s a reference to the idiots on the subreddit of that name, notorious for their irrational support
by antonvs 4y ago
“Queen of wallstreetbets” is (presumably) not a compliment, it’s a reference to the idiots on the subreddit of that name, notorious for their irrational support of companies like Gamestop, and completely disconnected from any actual understanding of market behavior.
- skinnymuch 4y agoWho is connected to market behavior? Look at Tesla’s market cap a year ago. Doesn’t seem like the mainstream is either.
- anigbrowl 4y agodisconnected from any actual understanding of market behavior Kind of assumes markets yield truth when left alone. It's equally true that a small but well-coordinated swarm can shape market behavior when directed at the right target, even if the swarm's activity is not correlated with anything like underlying asset value or earnings. I am not a fan of WallStreetBets but I don't think of them as idiots; more that they're making the argument (by demonstration) that their open and shameless manipulations are just a less polite version of what already happens behind the respectable facade of financial institutions staffed by well-credentialed traders in nice suits. Having spent a lot of time around trading desks (from tiny funds to private banks) I don't think they're wholly wrong. Although they epitomize the greatest weaknesses of crowd/swarm behavior as well its strengths, they are typically playing with their own money rather than collecting 2% to do the same thing with client funds.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Kind of assumes markets yield truth when left alone. Which is silly, markets don’t exist when left alone.