Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Pension fund managers aren't the target investor base for an equity raise by the WSB names - the trapped shorts are. I'm sure every investment bank is urging all these companies to issue shares, and many of them will. It's practically management malfeasance to NOT raise equity at these inflated prices. I wonder what the WSB crowd's gameplan is for this not too distant (days or a week or two) eventuality.
Yes, I can confirm, I have screenshots from yesterday morning showing that GME, AMC, etc. were not coming up in search on RH. After yesterday's close, those tickers did come up. Totally Orwellian to just disappear tickers like that.
This is the first time I have attempted to track down this kind of information. These are just a few of what I found. Which one is accurate? If any? I would think that if you are going to play the "Short Squeeze" game you really need to have accurate information from the start of the process.
The market regulators failed everyone. 140% short - that's their failure to protect market participants, businesses, traders. But I doubt they will be held accountable. They weren't in 2008.
THats a good question. They are pretty close. This is a game individual retailers play, I have seen one particular youtuber who sells a class apply it primarily to penny stocks/very low floats that gap on some news. I think there are tools out there, if you are really interested check out Warrior Trading (not an endorsement at all, I don't recommend paying for trading education at all) but some of his vidoes explain the process and may name the service he uses. I know that reliable data is rarely free.
I don't understand this statement at all. We are talking business and money here, not literally kicking the big guys. The "little" guys as you put it did the homework and found a way to beat the big guys fair and square, until they changed the rules. Have you ever watched a professional sports game where when the game was almost over the league decided to change the rules so they could help the favorite? I haven't. Shorting has risks. These guys go on TV and are lauded for their bravery and intelect for going against the conventional wisdom and talking up their short. Or, like some hedge fund managers, go on TV and are given free air time to literally cray and scare the s*&^ out of the country so their shorts pay out. All part of the game and if they can dish it out they ought to be able to take it.
I don't know if RH actually did anything wrong here or not, but their whole marketing plan just blew up in their face and I suspect they are done. TDA has free commissions and AWESOME service.
Wait just a minute....when my measly account is overextended, I get that “margin call” notification. What about the hedge funds who are the Market Makers for Robinhood? They are not Bookies!
I'm not taking any position one way or another about who's right or wrong. I agree that this is just business.
I only quoted the news article so people could be up to date on this part of the situation, which is that Robinhood is getting financially squeezed from the runnup. It might well fail. It's something to know about in this ongoing situation, that's all.
As to the little guy part, I notice that there is a narrative about little guys beating up the big guys, and people do seem to take sides based on that idea. I did not give any belief I may have on the subject.
But since you asked ( well, not exactly, but sort of raised the question), I think that the people who piled on the buying were actually fully within their rights, just as I think that it was inevitable that the shorts would be squeezed and would therefore boost it higher, and that it was inevitable that Robinhood would also be in a jam, as they are and as the news article explains, and will need capital to not go under. I think it is not totally out of the picture that they may go under anyway. If so, I will not shed a tear, but will just shrug and say, "That's business."
I also think many of the very new, very young traders who jumped onto this bandwagon are going to lose their shirts, and while I am sorry, this is just business too. They may not have seen a bubble before, but now they are in one. No one likes what happens with these things when they start losing, as many who are in it always do. The moral would be to not jump in this kind of runnup. They don't ever end well for anyone. Firms, sometimes very big ones, not small ones like Robinhood, have died in bubbles. So, financially, have totally innocent investors/traders/speculators/bandwagon-jumpers. These things are seriously damaging.
By the way, TDA would do no differently if it were their head on the block, and it would not be a bad thing or a good thing. It would be a survival thing, and they would not give a single thought to traders who were being hurt while TDA tried to survive, which is never a guaranteed thing.
So now you have what I believe, if you want to object. I hope you understand that my position is that these insane runnups do no good and only harm, and that anyone who is in it has a very good chance of losing in a big way.
They are also damn tempting, and it is best to simply stay away from the temptation. A few will do well, but most will not.
Bob.
When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
Is the run-up insane it was shorting it insane? The big guys are the ones who lost their shirts first (and btw created the squeeze). They get bailed out (once again) by the entity (RH) whose entire existence is predicated on the exact opposite of their behavior.
It's richly ironic and orwellian.
Oh and also btw TDA has great customer service if anyone is interested in a new full service discount broker.
well, not exactly, but sort of raised the question), I think that the people who piled on the buying were actually fully within their rights, just as I think that it was inevitable that the shorts would be squeezed and would therefore boost it higher, and that it was inevitable that Robinhood would also be in a jam, as they are and as the news article explains, and will need capital to not go under. I think it is not totally out of the picture that they may go under anyway. If so, I will not shed a tear, but will just shrug and say, "That's business."