4 ms·

Don’t go down the rabbit hole, there’s nothing there.

vessenes 2y ago
I mean, this has been an extremely good trade in the last seven days. Closing it out tomorrow would put Gills in unusually elite company anywhere in the world, working for any bank or fund. Rennaissance revenue per trader per year is on the order of like $30mm, and overall fund returns are not usually more than 30%, implying those traders run like $100mm. Gills has turned nearly a 2x in seven days on a $170mm or so base. Please tell me you find that unimpressive.
- therobots927 2y ago
  How do you not understand the difference between Gill making a good trade and a bunch of average joes deciding they’ve discovered a vast Wall Street conspiracy? Do you understand the context here or not? Gill is getting rich because people are buying the stock, many of whom are buying it for conspiratorial reasons.
  - vessenes 2y ago
    I didn't push any conspiracy language at all. The market is a bustling place with quite a lot of collusion, conversation, planning and coordinating. It also has a number of macro dynamics that are ... not what retail investors think happens when they buy a stock. There's a lot of continuous process innovation, business model innovation, and new ideas people / companies / hedge funds try all the time. The system is immensely complex, and has some unintended consequences. With all that, who needs weirdo conspiracy theories? I see this as one group of people found out they have more power than expected given some relatively novel market dynamics, and someone is very efficiently making a point about it in the capitalized market of ideas. No conspiracy needed. No need to be hostile about people marching behind RoaringKitty with pitchforks either though; this is fun and interesting stuff.
    - therobots927 2y ago
      The original comment I was replying to explicitly asked about the “phantom shares” theories. When I said don’t go down that rabbit role, that is what I was referring to. Not the real market dynamics behind the price movement. And I’m not hostile towards anyone who believes in that, I myself used to believe it. I just think it’s a waste of time because there is zero proof that phantom shares of GameStop even exist. GameStop has also carried out two dilutions since this whole thing started, raising about $2B. If anyone is creating “phantom shares” and selling them to people, it’s the company itself. These theories are dangerous because they rope in people who don’t know enough to know better.

I mean, this has been an extremely good trade in the last seven days. Closing it out tomorrow would put Gills in unusually elite company anywhere in the world, working for any bank or fund. Rennaissance revenue per trader per year is on the order of like $30mm, and overall fund returns are not usually more than 30%, implying those traders run like $100mm. Gills has turned nearly a 2x in seven days on a $170mm or so base. Please tell me you find that unimpressive.

therobots927 2y ago
How do you not understand the difference between Gill making a good trade and a bunch of average joes deciding they’ve discovered a vast Wall Street conspiracy? Do you understand the context here or not? Gill is getting rich because people are buying the stock, many of whom are buying it for conspiratorial reasons.
- vessenes 2y ago
  I didn't push any conspiracy language at all. The market is a bustling place with quite a lot of collusion, conversation, planning and coordinating. It also has a number of macro dynamics that are ... not what retail investors think happens when they buy a stock. There's a lot of continuous process innovation, business model innovation, and new ideas people / companies / hedge funds try all the time. The system is immensely complex, and has some unintended consequences. With all that, who needs weirdo conspiracy theories? I see this as one group of people found out they have more power than expected given some relatively novel market dynamics, and someone is very efficiently making a point about it in the capitalized market of ideas. No conspiracy needed. No need to be hostile about people marching behind RoaringKitty with pitchforks either though; this is fun and interesting stuff.
  - therobots927 2y ago
    The original comment I was replying to explicitly asked about the “phantom shares” theories. When I said don’t go down that rabbit role, that is what I was referring to. Not the real market dynamics behind the price movement. And I’m not hostile towards anyone who believes in that, I myself used to believe it. I just think it’s a waste of time because there is zero proof that phantom shares of GameStop even exist. GameStop has also carried out two dilutions since this whole thing started, raising about $2B. If anyone is creating “phantom shares” and selling them to people, it’s the company itself. These theories are dangerous because they rope in people who don’t know enough to know better.