The rule for a small cap like GME is 30% up or down in a 5 minute window. It's totally automatic.
WSB vs Wall Street / Gamestop Stock and others blown up by Subreddit
- Thread starter Kasper
- Start date
The rule for a small cap like GME is 30% up or down in a 5 minute window. It's totally automatic.
Wall Street always wins
How did Wall Street win this round? Was it forcing the RH app to stop buys of GME or was there some other underhand deal?
Last edited:
Mudrick Capital Gains $200 Million on AMC, GameStop Bets
Amazing wealth redistribution coming to light. People managed to move $200 Million worth from Melvin Capital, just across 54th street to Mudrick Capital. I'll keep everyone posted on where else in Midtown Manhattan and SW Connecticut we find that evil Melvin money has landed.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google
Amazing wealth redistribution coming to light. People managed to move $200 Million worth from Melvin Capital, just across 54th street to Mudrick Capital. I'll keep everyone posted on where else in Midtown Manhattan and SW Connecticut we find that evil Melvin money has landed.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google
This whole thing looks like an episode of Billions when it was still good.
Either way, big money always wins.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hedg...2-gamestop-party-morning-brief-110406546.html
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hedg...2-gamestop-party-morning-brief-110406546.html
Sorry that I must bump this again, but I just find it too ironic. We have located some more of that sweet sweet justice money taken from the evil Melvin. This time it is Senvest Management that reportedly made $700M on GME. Senvest's NYC offices are across the street from Melvin on Madison Avenue.
So the great taking down of Wall Street continues to go well, it is important to rotate the money around the 4 corners of the Madison & 54th... it will lead to great instability and collapse.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-hedge-fund-made-700-million-on-gamestop-11612390687
So the great taking down of Wall Street continues to go well, it is important to rotate the money around the 4 corners of the Madison & 54th... it will lead to great instability and collapse.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-hedge-fund-made-700-million-on-gamestop-11612390687
Poor souls who just jumped later on the GME bandwagon are the ones left with an empty bank account.
Saw a post on WSB earlier today about some 65 year old guy YOLO’ing 50k of of his retirement money on GME. I just don’t get why people are still betting on GME, hoping to be millionaires in a week.
Saw a post on WSB earlier today about some 65 year old guy YOLO’ing 50k of of his retirement money on GME. I just don’t get why people are still betting on GME, hoping to be millionaires in a week.
I really dont get how you and others can come across as quite so smug that people tried to stick it to the hedge funds and look to have failed.
I also don’t get why they would want “great instability and collapse” in the middle of a pandemic that’s wiping billions, if not trillions, off the global economy.
A decade of being vilified by people who have absolutely no fecking clue what you do has that effect.
2021 is shaping up to be a really interesting year if fecking hedge funds have a victim complex. Now ive seen it all.
Do we know what happened to Melvin Capital?
I havent been following this too closely but always thought they were sacrificial lamb while other traders were going to make money off this.
I havent been following this too closely but always thought they were sacrificial lamb while other traders were going to make money off this.
Yes indeed. With interest rates so very low, people's savings, investments and pensions would be even more badly affected.
Agreed. There should probably be some degree of regulation to create tighter standards (not sure what exactly).
From a strictly trading perspective, a trader will form a view of whether they believe global and nation-specific GDP will expand or contract over a specific time horizon, then express that view through whichever asset classes they think will make them money. That includes going long on assets they believe will fare well and short on those they believe won't, and in the process this allows the trader to hedge against risk. Therefore, shorting plays a perfectly valid role in the trading ecosystem imo, because it acts as a vehicle to preserve capital.
Last edited:
It also helps keep bubbles in check by keeping a downward pressure on hyped up stocks, thereby reducing the scale of future crashes.
I'm not a big supporter of it and i think there should be far more control over who can do it and to what extent, but it does serve a purpose.
I'm far from on the side of hedge funds in all this, but I've got to admit to taking a bit of pleasure in this blowing up in the face of redditors who were trying to brand their get rich quick scheme as some sort of protest or social movement.
Everyone from hedge funds to redditors at every stage was in it to make money; it's hard to care too much about the winners and losers in that scenario. I just hope that there weren't too many idiots who put in money they couldn't afford to lose.
Because the rhetoric was bullshit. The trade was excellent, I admire the people who saw it early and I have zero pity for the hedge funds that got caught with their pants down. But the rhetoric was just a dumb mass that didn't know 2 things about how the markets and investing work, and just bought into whatever the shiniest conspiracy theory of the day was. Then wrapped it in the classic "little guys defeat the big guys" narrative. Sure some little guys did well, and they were the catalyst for some big guys taking a big fall. But a revolution it was not.
Finance is already full of bullshit. CNBC pretty much offers it up from 5AM to 10PM before they cut to shitty infomercials, and a lot of companies are also peddling bullshit all day. I wish the bullshit would go away so that some of the actually insightful stuff could actually come to light, but I see little chance of that. In any case, this whole incident has just added another serving of it.
They had about 50-55% losses. Point72 and Citadel invested $2.75B in them, so latest reports are that despite the losses they still have $8B under management (from $12B, to under $6B and then back up to $8 with the investment). As a fund manager the main challenge they face now is how many clients opt to request their money back, which could potentially reduce the firm to not worth running anymore. But curiously, because the fund had been closed to new money before all this and was well regarded, there might actually be people out there willing to add new money and offset some of the redemptions they might see. So its all up in the air a bit, and we only hear whatever is intentionally leaked to the press. But they're not tits-up.
Thank you. Eye watering figures but bizarrely sounds like they perhaps dodged the bullet that was first talked about.
No victim complex. I don't work for a hedge fund and never have. It's just a little tiresome that when a bunch of redditors got themselves screwed over trying to make a quick buck through blatant market manipulation, it's still seen as evil banks vs. the little man, just because they were masquerading it as a social protest.
It's even worse than that, reading people who bought in at $50 or whatever encouraging others to get in at $300+. It is redditor vs redditor.
Probably the initial investors like DFV, who had done their research on the company, were trying (and succeeded at) to make money. Since the story hit mainstream news and gained global attention, its taken on a completely different form which is a social protest. Go onto the WSB Reddit and you will see pages after pages of people who are still buying more shares, and are holding them regardless of how low they go. A lot of these people have given up any idea of trying to make money off it, its now very much just an FU to the hedge funds and regulators who appear to have been doing everything in their power to make sure the "little man" loses.
I just find it baffling that anyone can look at this whole scenario and come to the conclusion of "those poor poor hedge funds, im glad the retail investors got screwed over like they deserve!".
Your rhetoric has been no better and keeps missing the point.
It's really simple.
Consider two basic options
A) 100% of the profits go to hedge funds that overleveraged, no media attention is brought to the situation, the wealthy parasites carry one doing what they have been doing
B) 95% of profits go to other hedge funds, 5% go to smaller retail investors, media attention is to brought to things like shorting up to 140% of stock, and there is some potential at much needed regulation and oversight in high finance and hopefully better laws governing how these funds operate
Even if Option B was only 1% to retail investors, Option B is still 100% superior to option A.
The really dumb rhetoric was coming out of the finance media whining about "boo market manipulation" when the finance industry has been doing unpunished market manipulation for decades and sticking the general public with the bills (from LTCM to the 2008 crash).
I've asked you before but you never responded. If you actually care, how about you list all the shady things you see the finance industry doing that you feel are worse that HFT and things like what happened here?
Last edited:
The battle was won last week. The problem is that many of these people do not know how to take a W. What you are saying right now is not so different than feeling sympathy for those poor Qanon supporters because all they wanted to do was catch some pedophiles. The ones that got in late, or most of them anyway, are doing it out of greed. Look at the change in tone as the stock starting sliding. They weren't HOLD HOLD HOLD ing the line to screw the hedge funds, they did it because they saw other people's gains and wanted to become millionaires themselves. Imagine buying a lottery ticket where the longer you hold onto it, the better your chances are at hitting the jackpot. They didn't understand the stock market at all, and was only going on whichever reddit post got the most awards (ie the most convincing theories on why melvin and other HFs are screwed).
And the retail investors who bought at $300? And have lost 80 percent?
HFTs are skimming a fraction of a spread from open market stock trading, by just being faster at playing the bid/ask game across several exchanges. It's hardly the crime of the century, and its already being pushed back on by the emergence of exchanges like IEX. It's not good that there are HFT shops, but its hardly what really concerns me.
I'm more concerned that Investment Banks continue to be just living and breathing conflicts of interest. I'd much prefer it if business lines were sectioned up by a regulator and determined that firms can't operate in more than 1 segment at a time. It would be pretty much a revolution of the industry vs how its been the past 50 or more years, which makes it unlikely, but I would welcome it. It wouldn't eliminate systemic risk, because as the S&L crisis should teach us you can still have systemic risk even if you have a pulverized industry. But it might eliminate the fact that anytime you're dealing with a bank it can almost by definition not be straightforward in the current configuration. Corporates in particular seem to be recurring victims of Investment Banks' feckery. Manipulating currency fixes when contracts are being set-up, rolled or marked, the whole libor manipulation, the fact that for some reason every bank in the US charges the same % to do an IPO, no price competition or nothing.
The table is tilted folks. The game is rigged. It's big club. But you're not in it.
The part in the senate hearing and the guy regrets it was "on email"
The part in the senate hearing and the guy regrets it was "on email"
Last edited:
Just because they aren't crashing the market, or that there are other major issues with how capital controls finance regulation, doesn't mean its fair or should be allowed. It should have banned a decade ago along with a handful of other practices
On this, we can completely agree. Investment houses have long been an issue, and it's just gotten worse over the past 20 years. How do you envision this changing? Don't you think the more public awareness that exists the greater the potential for change?
Depends. I know a lot that just bought into it with "play money" knowing they could lose a couple hundred bucks just to A) have some fun or B) try to make a hedge fund lose money or C) support Gamestop out of nostalgia. I suspect the majority of people who lost fit one of those 3 categories.
There will be some retail investors who might have a lost more than they should have, thinking they would get rich. For that, I blame the hedge funds that shorted up to 140%, lack of personal financial responsibility, and overall lack of accessibility to investment knowledge for most people due to how the finance media is oriented these days. Also, the overall culture in America that glorifies get rich quick schemes and glorifies playing the stock market.
Last edited:
Bought 3 at $300 a pop.
If it fails I don't care.
If it goes back to $300, I don't care.
If it goes to $1K, I'm happy but the money won't change my life.
But if it makes the hedge funds lose billions, I'll be happy. And after the Robinhood/T212 debacle from last week, doubt I'll be using the conventional stock market.
Do you guys think these redditors broke the law somehow? I've seen at least one poster say this was illegal on their side. I've read that the hedge funds broke the law shorting this stock for more than 100% of the shares (and since some 75% aren't in circulation, some 400% of traded shares).
Some article suggested it should be a RICO case against the redditors. But if you see a stock over shorted, is it illegal to tell others and to perform a gamma squeeze or whatever it was?
Some article suggested it should be a RICO case against the redditors. But if you see a stock over shorted, is it illegal to tell others and to perform a gamma squeeze or whatever it was?
Take a guess as to who are the easiest fall guys in this. Bunch of small investors or the one with enough clout.
It's not against the law to short over 100% of the float. At least its not spelled out in any laws, and there's not case law precedent that I've heard of to frame it as a violation of any other existing law. It's not illegal... it's just stupid.
As far as the redditors, I don't think we'll see anyone charged. But I will mention that if 2 or more funds/institutions had gotten together to play this game (intentional short squeeze) and had chatted back and forth on how much they were buying and when, I think they would probably be charged.
Strange way of justifying gambling. If you don't care about $900 - why not give it to someone in need via a charity or something?
Isn’t it a good thing that a lot of people have witnessed the madness of the stock market by seeing this unfold? Maybe it will be the start of new legislation. Doubt it. But it must start somewhere.
Besides it’s their own money. It’s a lot less problematic than gambling away other people’s money like in 2008.
Besides it’s their own money. It’s a lot less problematic than gambling away other people’s money like in 2008.
That's the challenge. If we're going to wait for another implosion then that will probably be the wrong time. As we saw in 2008, by the time the shit hits the fan and you need to shore up the system the solution is pretty much only to back the existing banks. Also if you're suggesting that people being upset at hedge funds will make for a spur to break up investment banks, then you'll have to excuse me for being skeptical. It's a bit (and forgive my charged example) like thinking that the crowd storming the Capitol last month might make for better campaign finance law.
Essentially you'd need legislators to care about this, which is unlikely given the public doesn't much care about it and in the absence of that interest all that's left is the banks' lobbying. But if the public ever actually cared, then it would get done.
Also there needs to be an understanding that its not really a wealth redistribution thing. No one is really topping the US richest lists from Investment Banking, the ownership has become too pulverized for that. Arguably at this point Jamie Dimon and David Solomon punch above their weight in the influence/wealth ratio. That's why I don't think it gets much traction even on the left these days, that seems much more focused on taking down the businesses that have become the largest one way or another, not the ones that might present the most risk to society or extract the largest rents.
So this revolt against the bankers of Wall Street by the common man resulted in... let's see.... most of the common men losing money and loads of bankers making money.
Pretty much sums it up