Shorting has entered the political arena

[pdq]

Acer wrote:

It's still not clear to me why I should care.

Well, for one, Robinhood, which I thought was supposed to stand on the side of the little investor, somehow decided yesterday that they wouldn’t let their customers buy any more GameStop.

Why? Dunno. But the conspiratorial mind could easily think they were knuckling under to pressure from someone.

I think the stock market is important and should/must exist. I also think there’s a lot of little ways it’s rigged and that’s not right.

PS- I’m not personally involved in either side of GameStop.

[Bill in NC]

cbelt3 wrote:
r/wallstreetbets is a mad herd of people who have completely bankrupted a hedge fund and a bank. And made a few thousand millionaires. And now the wall street machine is fighting back. It's a classic swarm approach and has worked.

And now Wall Street is fighting back and is doing ALL kinds of weird and 'this should be illegal' stuff.

With the Democrats in control, I have high hopes that this event may produce some serious rule changes. Hopefully in favor of the little guys. Because in the age of the internet, the little guys have as much smarts as the big guys.

They changed the rules on the Hunt brothers when they were trying to corner the silver market.

As a result, the Hunt brothers went from billionaires to millionaires.

[sekker]

pdq wrote:
[quote=Acer]

It's still not clear to me why I should care.

Well, for one, Robinhood, which I thought was supposed to stand on the side of the little investor, somehow decided yesterday that they wouldn’t let their customers buy any more GameStop.

Why? Dunno. But the conspiratorial mind could easily think they were knuckling under to pressure from someone.

I think the stock market is important and should/must exist. I also think there’s a lot of little ways it’s rigged and that’s not right.

PS- I’m not personally involved in either side of GameStop.
This. We absolutely need investments to be equal opportunity.

Also, I have no stake in GameStop unless they are somehow mixed in an index retirement fund.

[Acer]

pdq wrote:
[quote=Acer]

It's still not clear to me why I should care.

Well, for one, Robinhood, which I thought was supposed to stand on the side of the little investor, somehow decided yesterday that they wouldn’t let their customers buy any more GameStop.
Yes, I do acknowledge that this development has wider implications.

[Buzz]

pdq wrote:
[quote=Acer]

It's still not clear to me why I should care.

Well, for one, Robinhood, which I thought was supposed to stand on the side of the little investor, somehow decided yesterday that they wouldn’t let their customers buy any more GameStop.

Why? Dunno. But the conspiratorial mind could easily think they were knuckling under to pressure from someone.

I think the stock market is important and should/must exist. I also think there’s a lot of little ways it’s rigged and that’s not right.

PS- I’m not personally involved in either side of GameStop.
Robinhood was/is under-capitalized to play this scenario out at the highest level, and couldn't meet its cash reserve requirements; hence the shutdown while it dug into its credit lines to remain/regain its trading solvency.... If you traded thru Schwab, Fidelity or a real big player, you woulda been fine.
==

[Ted King]

Buzz wrote:

Robinhood was/is under-capitalized to play this scenario out at the highest level, and couldn't meet its cash reserve requirements; hence the shutdown while it dug into its credit lines to remain/regain its trading solvency.... If you traded thru Schwab, Fidelity or a real big player, you woulda been fine.
==

Here is a YouTube video from MSNBC of Stephanie Ruhle explaining the background for what is happening - including what you say about cash reserve requirement. She's a very sharp person who knows her stuff and knows how to clearly explain what's happening (video is about six minutes long):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAHLifZzKmg