It has not much to do with the corruption though.Has anybody been following this from January all the way through to now? I've been absolutely gripped- the corruption in financial markets is so much greater than one could possibly imagine.
Very exciting for shareholders with the likely announcement of a partnership with Loopring in the coming weeks also.
I imagine the corruption he's referring to isn't shorting, but the collusion between Robin Hood and Citadel et al to turn off the buy button at the peak, sending the stock price crashing. Then the whitewash of an enquiry, the refusal to intervene, etc.It has not much to do with the corruption though.
Shorting is neither evil, nor corruption. It is betting that the company is gonna lose in value because it is mismanaged (something that GME definitely was). In fact, it could be argued that shorting is a good thing, because it makes markets more efficient, and helps in discovering the real price of companies. Without shorting, the bubble gets bigger faster, and eventually more people lose money when it explodes.
The problem with GME was not shorting it by itself, but that it was done by a few companies in an absurd way. The hedge funds so much shorted it, to a ridiculous degree. When some people like Michael Burry and that guy in reddit found it, they then started buying shares/options knowing that if too many of them are out of the market, the shorts get fecked. WallStreetBets then went all crazy into it, and many other hedge funds went into it, exploiting the company being overshorted, in turn, fecking up the shorts (Citron/Melvyn Capital etc). In any case, it had nothing to do with the fundamentals, or with corruption in the financial markets, but it had a lot to do with at least two hedge funds being a bit of idiots.
I disagree. Shorting is not a problem. Being able to short 140% or the value is the problem. If you are not able to buy the company 140% times, why you should be able to short it 140% (or more). It is legal but it gives you more tools to push a stock down than push it up 140% vs 100%It has not much to do with the corruption though.
Shorting is neither evil, nor corruption. It is betting that the company is gonna lose in value because it is mismanaged (something that GME definitely was). In fact, it could be argued that shorting is a good thing, because it makes markets more efficient, and helps in discovering the real price of companies. Without shorting, the bubble gets bigger faster, and eventually more people lose money when it explodes.
The problem with GME was not shorting it by itself, but that it was done by a few companies in an absurd way. The hedge funds so much shorted it, to a ridiculous degree. When some people like Michael Burry and that guy in reddit found it, they then started buying shares/options knowing that if too many of them are out of the market, the shorts get fecked. WallStreetBets then went all crazy into it, and many other hedge funds went into it, exploiting the company being overshorted, in turn, fecking up the shorts (Citron/Melvyn Capital etc). In any case, it had nothing to do with the fundamentals, or with corruption in the financial markets, but it had a lot to do with at least two hedge funds being a bit of idiots.
I think any stock shouldn't be able to be traded more than perhaps twice a day. What added value is there to the company, market or world in traders being able to speculate on the value of a share by the microsecond? The underlying value of that company has not changed in that time so all it's doing is allowing extra instability into the market and for the pros to suck wealth away from amateurs who can't do microsecond-level automated trading.I disagree. Shorting is not a problem. Being able to short 140% or the value is the problem. If you are not able to buy the company 140% times, why you should be able to short it 140% (or more). It is legal but it gives you more tools to push a stock down than push it up 140% vs 100%
Then we should discuss if it is fair than a massive capital hedge fund can push beyond (down) the real value (or around) just to speculate and for financial game using a position of dominance.
Not everything that is legal is legitimate and can't be consider it corruption. But this is, I guess a matter of moral compass
That's not what happened. Because of the extreme price volatility they had to post more collateral to the clearing house, they couldn't do it so they had to stop trading. There was no whitewash, cover up etc.I imagine the corruption he's referring to isn't shorting, but the collusion between Robin Hood and Citadel et al to turn off the buy button at the peak, sending the stock price crashing. Then the whitewash of an enquiry, the refusal to intervene, etc.
I'm in both GME/AMC. Initially got in as the GME DD appears strong (without the inevitable and unpredictable collusion/feckery), am mainly staying now to put 2 fingers up to the big man and to help make them sweat.
Shorting to 140% can be legal, but mostly likely they way its been done wasn't. Sure, I can borrow a share, sell it, then borrow back from the person who bought it and sell it again. However, doing that results in you needing to buy that share back twice, which hasn't been happening. There's all kinds of tricks they can do to push the can down the road and that's what people are betting on. They can also just sell shares they don't own and use similar tricks, that's the rumoured naked shorting.I disagree. Shorting is not a problem. Being able to short 140% or the value is the problem. If you are not able to buy the company 140% times, why you should be able to short it 140% (or more). It is legal but it gives you more tools to push a stock down than push it up 140% vs 100%
Then we should discuss if it is fair than a massive capital hedge fund can push beyond (down) the real value (or around) just to speculate and for financial game using a position of dominance.
Not everything that is legal is legitimate and can't be consider it corruption. But this is, I guess a matter of moral compass
It was before Ryan Cohen took over- but if you take a look at the number of Amazon execs they have poached and the likely to be revealed NFT marketplace collaboration going on behind the scenes, it seems like they are working towards something big.I traded it a bit back in January and made some good money. I wouldn't be expecting much from it now, any institutional money is either long gone or well positioned, and it's a shitty business underneath it all.
This, but many other factors too. From controlling the media narrative, to large put options showing up in Brazilian hedgefunds, shill campaigns to huge swings in price on zero news- I definitely think that the whole truth hasn't been discovered yet.I imagine the corruption he's referring to isn't shorting, but the collusion between Robin Hood and Citadel et al to turn off the buy button at the peak, sending the stock price crashing. Then the whitewash of an enquiry, the refusal to intervene, etc.
I'm in both GME/AMC. Initially got in as the GME DD appears strong (without the inevitable and unpredictable collusion/feckery), am mainly staying now to put 2 fingers up to the big man and to help make them sweat.
I completely agree, however, it doesn't mean that all of their research is incorrect. You have to wade through a lot of memes and hope and nonsense to find the good stuff, but there is genuinely strong research from highly intelligent people (in my opinion)I followed it for a bit on Reddit but the whole thing has turned very cult-y
I think any stock shouldn't be able to be traded more than perhaps twice a day. What added value is there to the company, market or world in traders being able to speculate on the value of a share by the microsecond? The underlying value of that company has not changed in that time so all it's doing is allowing extra instability into the market and for the pros to suck wealth away from amateurs who can't do microsecond-level automated trading.
A bit sad innit? I'm pretty sure all the effort of some of our brightest minds and all the fossil fuels burned doing that could have cured cancer or something instead, seems a waste.I worked as a day trader and I didnt care about the stock. Nor the name nor what they were doing. I was looking to make 0 cents (earning comission to add liquidity to the market) to maximum 2 cents. I was doing between 100 to 200 operations a day. And all my colleagues the same. And all the dozens of office of the company the same. And all the companies the same. There were other strategies also, but for most, we didnt care anything about the stock. Pure speculation and quickness of fingers
Not only that. Billions pumped to speculations instead of real economyA bit sad innit? I'm pretty sure all the effort of some of our brightest minds and all the fossil fuels burned doing that could have cured cancer or something instead, seems a waste.
That too yep. Massive driver of inequality. Which is why nobody talks about it of course because the political classes like it that way.Not only that. Billions pumped to speculations instead of real economy
That's a lot of Ifs to bet on when it's priced like it's already happened.It was before Ryan Cohen took over- but if you take a look at the number of Amazon execs they have poached and the likely to be revealed NFT marketplace collaboration going on behind the scenes, it seems like they are working towards something big.
They should be posting their 9 week holidays sales figures on Monday. I'll post them on here if they do, should be a huge increase on recent years figuresThat's a lot of Ifs to bet on when it's priced like it's already happened.
