All things STOCKS

#7,628
#7,628
VolAllen said:
Man, I just saw where the Vols hired a new coach....who the hell is that guy?! 🤨
Click to expand...

I mean small school coaches are not generally well known, but how do you not remember a Heisman winning QB?..

Edit: Looks like Heupel finished runner up, so I can forgive you there. Could have sworn he won the Heisman.
 
Last edited:
#7,630
#7,630
Orange_Vol1321 said:
They do provide that. But there should be rules/law not allowing a stock to be shorted over a certain percentage. I don't feel sorry for these shorting firms one bit.
Click to expand...


The issue then becomes that people or institutions shorting a stock because they genuinely believe it is due to go down in price are restricted in their ability to trade on that position. If the restriction were 50 %, wouldn't someone coming at the 51st position have an argument ?

What about prohibiting options trading all together. You think shares in company x will go up, buy shares in company x. You think they will go down, buy a company y. With options trading, a certain portion of the value of a stock is tied to a see-saw battle where it gets led by whichever way the institutions have played it.
 
#7,631
#7,631
WSB thinks of it as part of the conspiracy against them, but these brokers are limiting orders to limit their own risk.

Both sides of the trade are total idiots here - both the "sophisticated" shorts and WSB bros. It will end in misery for both.
 
#7,632
#7,632
lawgator1 said:
The issue then becomes that people or institutions shorting a stock because they genuinely believe it is due to go down in price are restricted in their ability to trade on that position. If the restriction were 50 %, wouldn't someone coming at the 51st position have an argument ?

What about prohibiting options trading all together. You think shares in company x will go up, buy shares in company x. You think they will go down, buy a company y. With options trading, a certain portion of the value of a stock is tied to a see-saw battle where it gets led by whichever way the institutions have played it.
Click to expand...
Options serve a totally legitimate purpose (hedging).
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoDucks349
#7,637
#7,637
05_never_again said:
Options serve a totally legitimate purpose (hedging).
Click to expand...


No one is saying otherwise, but just because investor A may have a legitimate purpose does not mean that gargantuan institutional investor B has the same purpose, or even any legitimate one, at all, other than stock price manipulation.

Having said that, if B buys a huge position in a given stock that will drive the price of that stock up. But generally speaking that is not done to manipulate the futures price. In fact, B does not want that to occur.
 
#7,638
#7,638
Velo Vol said:
They're changing the rules overnight.
Click to expand...
Not really. Essentially what they're doing is saying they aren't going to loan more money/assume any more risk from a high stakes gambler that already has a considerable amount of money on the table, and if he loses might not be able to repay. They can do that at their discretion. That'd be quite something to say "No, you should be forced to assume whatever risk your customer wants you to."
lawgator1 said:
No one is saying otherwise, but just because investor A may have a legitimate purpose does not mean that gargantuan institutional investor B has the same purpose, or even any legitimate one, at all, other than stock price manipulation.

Having said that, if B buys a huge position in a given stock that will drive the price of that stock up. But generally speaking that is not done to manipulate the futures price. In fact, B does not want that to occur.
Click to expand...
You said "prohibiting options trading altogether." I'd say 95% of the money in options trading is for hedging purposes, the rest is speculative activity.
 
#7,639
#7,639
05_never_again said:
Not really. Essentially what they're doing is saying they aren't going to loan more money/assume any more risk from a high stakes gambler that already has a considerable amount of money on the table, and if he loses might not be able to repay. They can do that at their discretion. That'd be quite something to say "No, you should be forced to assume whatever risk your customer wants you to."
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: mr.checkerboards
#7,644
#7,644
Tri-CitiesVol said:
I thought they pulled the ability to trade the ticker entirely?
Click to expand...
Robinhood did, probably because they are losing their ass doing trades at this scale (remember, they don't charge commissions) and/or don't have the cash to enable them. Mark Cuban was wondering about that this morning. Interactive Brokers and some others have raised margin requirements to 100% in those names, meaning they won't loan you any money to buy those stocks.

They are trying to reduce their own risk at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carp
#7,645
#7,645
05_never_again said:
I think you mean limit it to trading with no margin (i.e., you have to have 100% equity). That's exactly what they've done, at least that's what Interactive Brokers did.
Click to expand...
That's fair. Or giving several trading days advance notice of the change is fair. But to spring it on customers overnight is amateurish.
 
#7,646
#7,646
There are going to be people that hang themselves when this all collapses. I could see trading brokers not wanting to appear as enablers for the ruin of lots of small time investors.
 
#7,649
#7,649
Velo Vol said:
That's fair. Or giving several trading days advance notice of the change is fair. But to spring it on customers overnight is amateurish.
Click to expand...
If you give several days notice, then you probably exacerbate the risk taking ("I gotta load up all I can before they raise margin requirements!"), which increases the broker's exposure. If you are going to do it, you kind of have to do it suddenly.

That the reason why I don't like circuit breakers, either at the market level or individual stock level. Assuming that the back office functions in the market are functioning normally, I don't know what purpose they serve. If anything, they actually serve as a magnet for prices because as price nears the circuit breaker, people (especially short-term traders) fear getting locked into their position, leading them to sell (or cover a short, if the circuit breaker is to the upside) and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 
#7,650
#7,650
Carp said:
Everything that was pumped is now tanking. Hope everyone in here who participated got out with your riches.
Click to expand...
Yep. I think it was hilarious what they were doing, and I hope as many WSB people as possible made money, but most will not. If you read the threads, I wouldn't describe most of them as traders but as ideologues. Most of them talk about never selling.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top