Anger as trading in GameStop shares is restricted
28/01/2021
|
news
|
business
|
1,469
Shares in the games firm dive as major trading platforms try to control frenzied buying.
Agreed, bunt lets just hope it doesn’t reduce faith in the markets and leads to other bubbles popping as it’ll just compound the Brexit/covid recession
Can't agree this is a speculative play, the value of short positions is known! The hedge funds got greedy and tried to finish off a retailer, holding 140% of available shares in short position is a poor idea to say the least. About time these funds realised they don't hold a monopoly on scalping from others...
"not backed up by any real value"
why do people keep referring to the valuation of GME as if they should be the authority on what it's worth?
the reality is the 140% short is the fundamentals behind the stock, it really is this valuable because everyone knows the short sellers are going to have to cover!!
It's smart research, and your question could be applied to anything in the stock market
why do people keep referring to the valuation of GME as if they should be the authority on what it's worth?
the reality is the 140% short is the fundamentals behind the stock, it really is this valuable because everyone knows the short sellers are going to have to cover!!
It's smart research, and your question could be applied to anything in the stock market
Like Tesla ?
But it is their money and they are perfectly entitled to do exactly what they like with it............................
No different to any other investments/gambling just high stakes.
The big sell wont happen before the shorters margin call. If thwy can keep persuading people to buy then the price keeps going up. I know someone with 10 shares at 80 with a limit of 950, thats his holiday if it hits or a quick sell if not. It is already over 500 now, thats a couple of months wages in 3 days.
I'll lose everything as long as they do to. I've been broke before I can be broke again, no problem. They haven't
A less capitalist take on this story can be found at Jacobin magazine by Doug Henwood: "The GameStop Bubble Is a Lesson in the Absurdity and Uselessness of the Stock Market."
It doesn't prove that, though, it's just shown that it's possible to gamble with and manipulate it, as with most things in life.
Not really a bubble, this was all done on purpose to try to draw attention to immoral shorting.
"Absurdity and Uselessness of the Stock Market"
What's a better way to allocate a country's capital? Central planning sure doesn't work.
Problem isn't with market, problem is with wide boys always finding loopholes & shortcuts.
We saw the same thing with democracy last decade, when it proved Absurd and Useless in delivering good results.
Keep regulating & refining for gradual improvement.
What's a better way to allocate a country's capital? Central planning sure doesn't work.
Problem isn't with market, problem is with wide boys always finding loopholes & shortcuts.
We saw the same thing with democracy last decade, when it proved Absurd and Useless in delivering good results.
Keep regulating & refining for gradual improvement.
It's a clever prank on the short sellers, but it's still a speculative bubble not backed up by any real value, the moment the first people decide to sell out it's going to crash.
Some people have made millions of dollars, they're going to want to keep it. It's a big game of chicken being played with life-changing sums of money.
Some people have made millions of dollars, they're going to want to keep it. It's a big game of chicken being played with life-changing sums of money.
have no faith in any markets, they are all fake and designed to keep the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Covid recession, Brexit just got a massive boost when a German MEP and the EU threatened an EU ban on vaccine exports, and the German MP whinged that the US and UK don't treat the EU with respect and that the EU had weapons! Hard to have any respect after that rant.
This article was apparently updated 7 minutes ago. How hard is it for the BBC to fact check the headline? I can go to Google and see in under one minute that the shares are up another 25% in post-market. So why are they claiming they are down 20%?
Do you want the BBC to add a stock ticker into the article? You missed the point of the article 100%; it's about pump & dump trade to undermine the corporate short selling.
It fell in after-hours (which is what the article was based upon) and is rising in pre-market.
The fact you don't know the difference in that is telling.
The fact you don't know the difference in that is telling.
You haven't realized the market moves much faster than a news cycle until just now? Unless they timestamp their price references it is pretty much useless data.
Can't just keep buying shares forever, sooner or later there's no more to buy. Once the demand for the shares goes so does their value and the price plummets.
You missed the point of the article 100%; it's about pump & dump trade to undermine the corporate short selling.
That’s not what this is... is about short sellers naked shorting shorts, which is illegal by the way, which the retail investors have caught onto and now by is buying the stocks and raising the price it’s forcing them into a corner and they don’t like it so they’re moaning. If you want to see something similar then google the 2008 VW short squeeze
It's a clever prank on the short sellers, but it's still a speculative bubble not backed up by any real value, the moment the first people decide to sell out it's going to crash.
Some people have made millions of dollars, they're going to want to keep it. It's a big game of chicken being played with life-changing sums of money.
Some people have made millions of dollars, they're going to want to keep it. It's a big game of chicken being played with life-changing sums of money.
Can't agree this is a speculative play, the value of short positions is known! The hedge funds got greedy and tried to finish off a retailer, holding 140% of available shares in short position is a poor idea to say the least. About time these funds realised they don't hold a monopoly on scalping from others...
Yes, that part is true which is why it's a clever prank, but the value it's at now is made up of people's real money and the only reason it's holding up is because of strangers trusting each other. Anyone putting in money now to keep it held up risks losing it all, and I'm sure that most who now hold 6 or 7 figure values are becoming very tempted to sell out, as soon as one or two do, they'll all.
What is there for the funds to realise? A moral lesson, or the fact - and it is a fact - that their employees get paid to do their jobs, and the firms make big money.
All shorts are speculative. All long positions are speculative. All day trading is speculative. The entire stock market is speculation.
All shorts are speculative. All long positions are speculative. All day trading is speculative. The entire stock market is speculation.
The stock market was always just gambling, only thing is when horse started losing you could cash out and bet on how hard it’s lose
There is a good thread on reddit about buying Silver. This precious metal is so undervalued because the markets is manipulated. Silver was twice its current price in early 1980s. Todays price should be much much higher.
As an indistrial material, perhaps. Most investment in silver, physical or traded funds, is purely for speculation. So the value is whatever the market pays, and is wholly unrelated to whether the metal actuially exists or not.
Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
"Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure."
How, exactly, does selling shares below their listed value cause the company to fail?
The bet is on market price, not the success or failure of the company.
How, exactly, does selling shares below their listed value cause the company to fail?
The bet is on market price, not the success or failure of the company.
If you removed immoral people from the stock market you wouldn't have a stock market.
Even the communities who instigated this whole thing are making bets (it is in their name, after all). They're not different from anyone else. They look at the information, they analyse, they make a bet.
Even the communities who instigated this whole thing are making bets (it is in their name, after all). They're not different from anyone else. They look at the information, they analyse, they make a bet.
Should we also outlaw betting on sporting matches, as by placing a bet on a winning team, by implication you are betting on the other team to lose. Should that be made illegal too?
Well said ! I think you have 99% of support here - yet Govts DO NOTHING!
why are short sellers bad? I dont have much knowledge on subject and i'm genuinely interested.
a quick google just claims it unethical to bet on failure but doesnt mention affecting the company's future. Also apparently its has its benefits in liquidity for the market
a quick google just claims it unethical to bet on failure but doesnt mention affecting the company's future. Also apparently its has its benefits in liquidity for the market
Get your self off to the USSR comrade, leave us capitalist in peace, while your there try out your free speech
Removed
It should be illegal... it's all part and parcel of casino capitalism and has nothing to do with the true worth of a company. It's rich people making money from money, rather than making money from hard work and tangible sold investments.
Furthermore, it's all part of the same malaise that crashed the world economy in 2008, when rich people were constantly reselling bad debt.
Clean up now!!
Furthermore, it's all part of the same malaise that crashed the world economy in 2008, when rich people were constantly reselling bad debt.
Clean up now!!
buying and selling stock affects stock price which drives market capitalization.
market cap has absolutely nothing to do with revenue and profit.
Companies operate on revenue and profit, not market cap.
profit affects market value. Market value does not, in any direct way, affect profit.
These are basic concepts that you don't seem to understand with your comment.
market cap has absolutely nothing to do with revenue and profit.
Companies operate on revenue and profit, not market cap.
profit affects market value. Market value does not, in any direct way, affect profit.
These are basic concepts that you don't seem to understand with your comment.
Your comment show complete ignorance of the issue. ALL stock traders basically bet. Full stop. Having said that, some short sellers do good by defending, us, the market, against bubbles like the mortgage one that caused the 2008 debacle. Or they would have had against the Dutch tulip bubble in 1637. Tulips dearer than a house? Short selling would have stopped that.
I don’t think you get it. Stocks mostly rise to pay your future pension. These individuals are rich guys finding a way to get round regulations to essentially take shares off you at a lower price. They are robbing you but you celebrate them?
I am a capitalist not a communist, however I completely agree with your comments revolution99. Capitalism can only work properly in the interest of society at large, if the market is regulated and controlled by sensible laws, which it currently isn’t because of vested interests. Another failure is the lack of control over monopolies especially in the high-tech sector.
Not true. Maybe they just want a balanced (i.e. long / short neutral) portfolio.
The shares such companies are shorting can be seen and therefore can help investors. I would agree the number of shares shorted probably should'nt exceed the total issued.
Massive market manipulation going on by the hedgefunds. Discord bans wallstreetbets for basically made up reasons, robinhoodapp then stops ppl buying the shares.
Never forget the stock market is absolutely corrupt and only there to protect the hedge funds
Never forget the stock market is absolutely corrupt and only there to protect the hedge funds
I gather this is your bitterness talking, now that you've missed the boat?
Cheer up, mate. The next BTC cycle will start shortly.
Cheer up, mate. The next BTC cycle will start shortly.
Absolutely. And one has to wonder how the wider market gets to know what these short sellers are investing in. It feels like insider dealing and it undermines investor confidence in targeted businesses which contributes to their ability or otherwise to secure finance when required.
It should be criminal but when you have the likes of Rees-Moog in our government it never will be.
It should be criminal but when you have the likes of Rees-Moog in our government it never will be.
That's shortsighted. Short sellers provide a useful function in signalling potentially severe problems in the company to the smaller investors, giving them a chance to get out before it's too late. It's part of price discovery. I've never shorted (wish I could, don't like spread bets) but I always check the short interest before buying stocks. It's a key indicator. If it starts increasing, I sell.
This article was apparently updated 7 minutes ago. How hard is it for the BBC to fact check the headline? I can go to Google and see in under one minute that the shares are up another 25% in post-market. So why are they claiming they are down 20%?
No - I expect them to no lead with a headline that is demonstrably false - and has been for many hours. It's literally the main headline, the sub-headline and it's misinfo.
judging by your choice of username - it seems to be your mission to be the "i know better" goon
Removed
There's a great line form the film Kind Hearts and Coronets...
"I feel entitled to point out that we here regard our function as the encouragement of constructive investment and not the financing of mere gambling transactions."
"I feel entitled to point out that we here regard our function as the encouragement of constructive investment and not the financing of mere gambling transactions."
Pump and dump is only a problem when the usual people aren't profiting. When share prices and fall because of Wallstreet, well that's just business. When it's retail its the Russians, fraud and breaks the fabric of the economy.
The trade whether it be buy or sell is visible to the market and those who read the markets usually have a good sense of why a large trade was made. Pump and dump is a completely different matter.
Can't agree this is a speculative play, the value of short positions is known! The hedge funds got greedy and tried to finish off a retailer, holding 140% of available shares in short position is a poor idea to say the least. About time these funds realised they don't hold a monopoly on scalping from others...
Yes, that part is true which is why it's a clever prank, but the value it's at now is made up of people's real money and the only reason it's holding up is because of strangers trusting each other. Anyone putting in money now to keep it held up risks losing it all, and I'm sure that most who now hold 6 or 7 figure values are becoming very tempted to sell out, as soon as one or two do, they'll all.
Why would anyone put their money in now on a high? That would be foolish for any investor.
Everyone is always risking their money. Nothing new there.
They are buying and holding as it is a battle between their confidence (diamond hands) and the short sellers greed (it must nearly be over, time for me to short this nonsense). As more people short it, more people buy it. The short sellers pay mark-to-market every single day. The Diamond Hands Rocket 'artists' confidence grows every post
They are buying and holding as it is a battle between their confidence (diamond hands) and the short sellers greed (it must nearly be over, time for me to short this nonsense). As more people short it, more people buy it. The short sellers pay mark-to-market every single day. The Diamond Hands Rocket 'artists' confidence grows every post
Value stocks over the last 5-6 years have 50-100x their annual profit taking. It would take Tesla 1600 years to match an annual income to its current stock valuation.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
It's not just about income, it's about the value of assets and future prospects. The value of Tesla's operation alone is huge, the infrastructure it's built is huge. To build something of equivalence you'd need vast sums of money, and because it's so hard and expensive to compete, it means they're one of the few games in town if not the only game in town.
Not another once in a lifetime crash, there's already been a couple since I was born!
Can't agree this is a speculative play, the value of short positions is known! The hedge funds got greedy and tried to finish off a retailer, holding 140% of available shares in short position is a poor idea to say the least. About time these funds realised they don't hold a monopoly on scalping from others...
What is there for the funds to realise? A moral lesson, or the fact - and it is a fact - that their employees get paid to do their jobs, and the firms make big money.
All shorts are speculative. All long positions are speculative. All day trading is speculative. The entire stock market is speculation.
All shorts are speculative. All long positions are speculative. All day trading is speculative. The entire stock market is speculation.
A short term pump not backed by future prospects of the actual company, by people who are making a short term point, is exactly a bubble.
Wrong. It was done to make someone very rich by convincing a lot of people who are about to lose money that they're getting one over on the establishment.
A classic move. Pit a group against another group to make them think they're fighting for themselves when in reality they're fighting for the fire starter.
A classic move. Pit a group against another group to make them think they're fighting for themselves when in reality they're fighting for the fire starter.
There is a good thread on reddit about buying Silver. This precious metal is so undervalued because the markets is manipulated. Silver was twice its current price in early 1980s. Todays price should be much much higher.
Silver has been up 6% today thanks to reddit. Silver is so important in green energy it has a great future
Was this article written to scare day traders?
Overnight is when daytraders cannot get involved. Means next to nothing to us normies.
Besides, GME is up to $440 in premarket.
Also, would like to know why Trading212 et al. think they can just block share buying? If that's not an attempt at market manipulation (shares can't go up if we can't buy), then what is? Only the big boys can win eh?
Overnight is when daytraders cannot get involved. Means next to nothing to us normies.
Besides, GME is up to $440 in premarket.
Also, would like to know why Trading212 et al. think they can just block share buying? If that's not an attempt at market manipulation (shares can't go up if we can't buy), then what is? Only the big boys can win eh?
It is rigged for the big boys. Do you remember in the Big Short how much money one needed to get an ISDA. Those 2 boys made $30,000,000 in 4 years from their garage and that numpty JP Morgan Chase employee sneered at them because they didn't know the needed one billion plus for an ISDA agreement.
It should scare day-traders. Once they've successfully forced the short-sellers out of the market, the price will plummet as they themselves take out their money to go for their next target.
Those who pushed it from say 400-500% are going to be absolutely cleaned out.
Those who pushed it from say 400-500% are going to be absolutely cleaned out.
Remember that the people who are buying on Trading 212 etc are also doing it on leverage. If (when) the price drops they can lose more than their initial investment and have to stump up more money.
Any losses that the retail investor cannot pay for has to be absorbed by the broker. The price is so inflated, there numbers could be massive.
Any losses that the retail investor cannot pay for has to be absorbed by the broker. The price is so inflated, there numbers could be massive.
Rules for thee but not for me. Coroporations and hedge funds can do all the market manipulation they want, yet when amateurs on Reddit do it it's suddenly despicable and in need of regulation.
Are there similar groups in the UK looking at UK stocks? It sounds interesting.
I agree that it seems it is ok for the big boys to do it but not a group of individuals!
I agree that it seems it is ok for the big boys to do it but not a group of individuals!
Complete scam, let the people buy if they want. True a few have made a killing but most are not in it for the money this time and have hit the goal of making this a global issue
Of course it was. The Money is desperate to protect itself and will do just about anything it can to a) scare the day traders out of the market and b) push for legislation to protect them against this happening again.
Yes.
Yes it was.
Yes it was.
Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
So going by your comment you feel that the market price has nothing to do with the success or failure of a company.
Does that not highlight a massive issue with our economy?
Does that not highlight a massive issue with our economy?
Because the stock is being shorted market sentiment drives down the stock even further. Any company covenants stipulating the share price must not fall below a certain price, allows a creditor to demand repayment of any debt or take over the firm at that lower price.
DidYouEvenReadTheArticle replied:
How, exactly, does selling shares below their listed value cause the company to fail?
--------------------
It's not the selling that's the problem. It's the co-ordination of the selling and publicising of short selling positions that is the problem.
How, exactly, does selling shares below their listed value cause the company to fail?
--------------------
It's not the selling that's the problem. It's the co-ordination of the selling and publicising of short selling positions that is the problem.
Because it can hinder new investment in the company. Potential investors think its going to fail. Key staff leave the business - and hiring new talent becomes more difficult. Customers may buy elsewhere for fear they are going to lose their money/not receive what they paid for. There are loads of real world consequences to shorting a companies shares. Share price is based on the profitability.
Nevertheless, the 'bet' has knock-on effects.
Stock markets must be forced back into their original role. That is as means for new business and established business to raise capital through stock issue and to facilitate holders of extant shares trading among themselves.
Stock markets must be forced back into their original role. That is as means for new business and established business to raise capital through stock issue and to facilitate holders of extant shares trading among themselves.
They win if the company losses
That is a naive comment. Short selling is parasitic 'borrowing' shares and then 'returning' them once the price has changed. There is no investment activity whatsoever and it should be illegal. It serves no-one but the hedge fund.
Value stocks over the last 5-6 years have 50-100x their annual profit taking. It would take Tesla 1600 years to match an annual income to its current stock valuation.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
It's not just about income, it's about the value of assets and future prospects. The value of Tesla's operation alone is huge, the infrastructure it's built is huge. To build something of equivalence you'd need vast sums of money, and because it's so hard and expensive to compete, it means they're one of the few games in town if not the only game in town.
I suspect like most companies their 'assets' are not worth a fraction of what they put on the books, as is shown up at every liquidation of every failed company. You may have paid a fortune to have a mega factory but unless many people want it, in the same place, instantly, instead of building their own, it is near worthless.
I remember too well before the dot.com bust, Netscape, Llycos, pets.com all claiming 'value stock' status pricing in yet to come growth. Never happened.
Sure you might pick the 'Amazon' or 'Apple', otherwise you're betting on a future that might never happen. Why not wait until the dust settles?
Sure you might pick the 'Amazon' or 'Apple', otherwise you're betting on a future that might never happen. Why not wait until the dust settles?
"Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure."
How, exactly, does selling shares below their listed value cause the company to fail?
The bet is on market price, not the success or failure of the company.
How, exactly, does selling shares below their listed value cause the company to fail?
The bet is on market price, not the success or failure of the company.
It's the same on the flip side. How many companies are valued massively above their underlying value. For example, is Tesla really worth it's market value?
This article was apparently updated 7 minutes ago. How hard is it for the BBC to fact check the headline? I can go to Google and see in under one minute that the shares are up another 25% in post-market. So why are they claiming they are down 20%?
Do you want the BBC to add a stock ticker into the article? You missed the point of the article 100%; it's about pump & dump trade to undermine the corporate short selling.
Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
Do you want the BBC to add a stock ticker into the article? You missed the point of the article 100%; it's about pump & dump trade to undermine the corporate short selling.
DIAMOND HANDS!!
Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
Betting on teams within a football match doesn't alter the actual value or performance of the team. Your example shows a lack of understanding within the financial sector.
When you buys shares, the share price goes up due to demand. When you sell shares the value of the company goes down due to lack of demand (if there are no buyers). If you bet shares fall, you have no interest in the company bettering and being to make other positions, opposite to your bet, to continue the collapse.
Your comment is so naive - using your example you are effectively putting half of the opposing team on crutches - this needs to be stopped
Difference is that a bet on a match has no bearing on the outcome of a match.
Short selling is a self-fulfilling prophecy: they 'know' that shorting reduces share price... and they know when and to whom they're doing it, so it's not a true bet as much as an expectation of the outcome of their own actions.
More like a player placing a bet on a game in which he's playing... and that's illegal...
Short selling is a self-fulfilling prophecy: they 'know' that shorting reduces share price... and they know when and to whom they're doing it, so it's not a true bet as much as an expectation of the outcome of their own actions.
More like a player placing a bet on a game in which he's playing... and that's illegal...
So we should be allowed to buy shares in companies we think will do well in the future, but not the reverse?
Yes, this is a nice 'win' for the man on the street against big city villains, but surely if you think something is over-valued you can take an opposing view? Not hugely different from betting on sports results is it?
Yes, this is a nice 'win' for the man on the street against big city villains, but surely if you think something is over-valued you can take an opposing view? Not hugely different from betting on sports results is it?
I suspect most rightly feel there is a big difference between deciding a share is not worth keeping or buying at a price, and selling a share you do not own, aiming to buy it back for less before giving it back. Perhaps such behaviours should not be possible, those involved can place bets on share prices with gambling companies instead.
An utterly perfect quote and a noble goal
Yeah. Because $500 a share at pre-market, is a 20% loss?
Go away BBC. You bore me.
Go away BBC. You bore me.
What goes up must come down. It’ll all end in tears.
Anyone could spend 30mins researching the subject and see this is misleading story to publish.
In such volatility choosing to publish in a brief moment of after hours trading is not fair on the story developing here, as I speak it is now +40% overnight.
How about the real story, in that the 'retail' investing market found something Wall Strett didn't, and are now beating them at their own game
In such volatility choosing to publish in a brief moment of after hours trading is not fair on the story developing here, as I speak it is now +40% overnight.
How about the real story, in that the 'retail' investing market found something Wall Strett didn't, and are now beating them at their own game
100% agreed - I just made a similar post here saying exactly this. It was as if the writer typed "Gamestop" into google and spent 5 minutes regurgitating headlines from CNBC etc. Highly misleading story - very disappointing for BBC
Yep, but 95% of the 'Retail' investors are going to get ruined when the ones who started it decide to take their profits. The later you got in, the more you lose.
The price can't hold once people start selling, it will go back to roughly where it started.
The price can't hold once people start selling, it will go back to roughly where it started.
Except that they didn't find something; they made it up and convinced others to buy the stock based on fabricated stories about these failing companies being a hidden success. That's illegal, and called market manipulation.
Agree on the misleading story though. BBC doesn't know a lot about finance. E.g. they don't know that hedge funds aren't Wall Street, as most are not even based in New York.
Agree on the misleading story though. BBC doesn't know a lot about finance. E.g. they don't know that hedge funds aren't Wall Street, as most are not even based in New York.
This is bitcoin "investing" moving to the stock market. The share price doesn't reflect any fundamental value. The issue is how you extract your 500% gains
It's not like the retail investors found anything, GME is a dog and will fail in a digital world. The price rose so much because Elon Musk bought share, not what i call a retail investor but them my portfolio is only modest.
Whilst it's held up as a victory for the little guys, the reality is it's a short-lived "mania" and the people holding the shares will lose almost all their money - once the share price goes back to where it should be.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
And why don't the SEC investigate shorting stock? More importantly, why hedge funds are allowed to borrow more shares than available on the market?
When you talk about where the share price 'should' be, where is that? When Wall Street firms are the ones who dictate the pricing of the stock. We are doing to them, what they do to us and they don't like it. Simple as.
When you talk about where the share price 'should' be, where is that? When Wall Street firms are the ones who dictate the pricing of the stock. We are doing to them, what they do to us and they don't like it. Simple as.
Those of us who are invested are well aware of the potential that we will lose it all. It doesn't matter, this is a war on Wall Street that we are winning.
There is no "Where it Should be" its usually where institutional traders want it to be. For once they don't like it as they weren't in control. You have missed the point with this franchise its not about the little guy making money its about the big guy losing it - these private traders are happy to lose a bit if the big guns lose more. Self-sacrifice is something greedy people never understand.
Should we also outlaw betting on sporting matches, as by placing a bet on a winning team, by implication you are betting on the other team to lose. Should that be made illegal too?
Value stocks over the last 5-6 years have 50-100x their annual profit taking. It would take Tesla 1600 years to match an annual income to its current stock valuation.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
That’s not what this is... is about short sellers naked shorting shorts, which is illegal by the way, which the retail investors have caught onto and now by is buying the stocks and raising the price it’s forcing them into a corner and they don’t like it so they’re moaning. If you want to see something similar then google the 2008 VW short squeeze
Should we also outlaw betting on sporting matches, as by placing a bet on a winning team, by implication you are betting on the other team to lose. Should that be made illegal too?
When you buys shares, the share price goes up due to demand. When you sell shares the value of the company goes down due to lack of demand (if there are no buyers). If you bet shares fall, you have no interest in the company bettering and being to make other positions, opposite to your bet, to continue the collapse.
Just fantastic. The short-sellers happily bankrupt genuine investors by dumping stock they don't own. To see them out-foxed by the internet users will presumably encourage a little caution in the future.
One wonders how Muddy Waters would have fared if Burford have been 'protected' in this way?
One wonders how Muddy Waters would have fared if Burford have been 'protected' in this way?
The share price broke $500 today. This article is misleading.
The shorters are the bad guys here, not the guys who are buying the shares.
Trading platforms stopping people buying shares now is illegal and market manipulation. They are doing this to help the 1%.
The shorters are the bad guys here, not the guys who are buying the shares.
Trading platforms stopping people buying shares now is illegal and market manipulation. They are doing this to help the 1%.
Trading platforms that aren't allowing buys at this time is nothing short of disgusting. They're being paid a hefty sum to stop buys.
I don't think anyone has said the buyers are the bad guys, just that they should perhaps be more careful. Is a company that was valued at about $200m a few weeks ago really worth over $30bn today? Maybe it is, but what happens to those buying at $400+ if those who bought early decide to take their profits and the price falls (very quickly) back down towards $50 or lower again?
The short traders appear correct in their assessment of the fundamentals of the company. The current high trading price didn't arise from anything done (e.g. statement of intent) or achieved (e.g. higher turnover) by GameStop.
Did it hit that price before the article was published ?
Trading platforms let you buy on leverage, so really you're borrowing money to buy. Losses can outstrip investments and if the customer cannot pay, the platform covers the cost.
That is why they have stopped. You can still buy on any investing platform where you take ownership of the actual shares.
That is why they have stopped. You can still buy on any investing platform where you take ownership of the actual shares.
Trading platforms stopping people from buying shares have simply been told by the SEC to put a stop to it before the problem gets out of hand. You are looking at a witch hunt where they prey on shorts. It's not something we should be encouraging. It's so easy to manipulate the market with this garbage.
Shorting is not a problem, inflating the value of something is.
Shorting is not a problem, inflating the value of something is.
It should have been stopped earlier there are market breakers in place for a reason. Shares don't increase by 50% a day!
Value stocks over the last 5-6 years have 50-100x their annual profit taking. It would take Tesla 1600 years to match an annual income to its current stock valuation.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
Put reason over emotion and you'll soon realise the stock market is about to witness a once in a lifetime event that'll bankrupt a lot of speculators out there.
When the hedge funds do it, its investing, but when the small guys do it its gambling.
One rule for some...
It's always investing but when the small guys get burned they tend to throw themselves off bridges.
That is why the markets implemented stringent requirements to ensure individuals have sufficient capital, income and understanding before they are allowed to trade in derivatives and other complex products.
If cowboy trading Apps are bypassing those protections it needs to be addressed, ASAP.
That is why the markets implemented stringent requirements to ensure individuals have sufficient capital, income and understanding before they are allowed to trade in derivatives and other complex products.
If cowboy trading Apps are bypassing those protections it needs to be addressed, ASAP.
All investing is a gamble. Short selling may drive down share price but when sold back creates a vacuum enabling lower value shares to be bought and by shareholders who seek more profit. Most investers are short term who will buy if shares drop anyway but those who are long term will reap the rewards of that original vision, hopefully, as it is still a gamble nontheless.
Nothing is garanteed.
Nothing is garanteed.
No hedge funds, you know HEDGE not gamble. When day traders, pros and small, speculate it's gambling.
Utter rubbish...
Unless you are a long term share holder or investor it's all gambling.
The US might as well come clean. What is the difference between placing a bet on a sporting outcome or a commercial or share outcome.
Not allowing one but allowing the other is at odds with reality and surely goes against their constitutional freedoms.
The US might as well come clean. What is the difference between placing a bet on a sporting outcome or a commercial or share outcome.
Not allowing one but allowing the other is at odds with reality and surely goes against their constitutional freedoms.
the entire idea of short selling, is gambling & should be outlawed, as should micro second trades where algorythms buy & sell stocks by the millions in micro seconds. Time for the stock market to return to its original purpose. That bankers are allowed to be manipulating the market for their benefit is criminal, its simply not called that because the politicians they've bought ,do as they're told.
Whilst it's held up as a victory for the little guys, the reality is it's a short-lived "mania" and the people holding the shares will lose almost all their money - once the share price goes back to where it should be.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
And why don't the SEC investigate shorting stock? More importantly, why hedge funds are allowed to borrow more shares than available on the market?
When you talk about where the share price 'should' be, where is that? When Wall Street firms are the ones who dictate the pricing of the stock. We are doing to them, what they do to us and they don't like it. Simple as.
When you talk about where the share price 'should' be, where is that? When Wall Street firms are the ones who dictate the pricing of the stock. We are doing to them, what they do to us and they don't like it. Simple as.
Let's hope not it is so funny. Strange this fall started after it became wider public news, as in reported here to the non involved.
The share price broke $500 today. This article is misleading.
The shorters are the bad guys here, not the guys who are buying the shares.
Trading platforms stopping people buying shares now is illegal and market manipulation. They are doing this to help the 1%.
The shorters are the bad guys here, not the guys who are buying the shares.
Trading platforms stopping people buying shares now is illegal and market manipulation. They are doing this to help the 1%.
Nice reporting, pity when you made your update 19 minutes ago you failed to mention that is it trading at 31.27% in pre-market and has been for the past 2 hours so in no way shape or form down.
Disappointing reporting here from the BBC
Disappointing reporting here from the BBC
Dave mate its all market manipulation - retail traders cant trade in the pre-market Wall Street running scared HOLD GME
Folks in the US cant even buy Dave mate..... HOLD GME
With the gradual move of games slowly moving aware from Disc to Download I am afraid these type of stores are heading the same way as the likes of HMV.
Not once has this been referred to as a 'pump and dump' by those in the know. I'm sick of reading this term in relation to $GME.
One rule for them, another for us.
One rule for them, another for us.
And what happens when those holding millions worth of shares decide they want to realise and secure that money? It will fall, and once the trend begins downwards, everyone with any sense will get their money out of it as fast as they can, hence the "dump".
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
Either you believe the current value is a true value for the stock, or you believe this is a pump and dump.
If you think it is a true value - fine. But you won't find much company.
If you think it is a true value - fine. But you won't find much company.
A 'pump and dump' involves:
Secretly buying stock - 'Dingbat Minerals'
Making untruthful statements (the pump phase - posting to every forum / spam list that Dingbat Minerals have struck gold BUY NOW !!!!!!)
Letting everyone else buy Dingbat Minerals
Getting out before it turns out Dingbat Minerals do bath salts
This is not a pump and dump - it is all in public
Secretly buying stock - 'Dingbat Minerals'
Making untruthful statements (the pump phase - posting to every forum / spam list that Dingbat Minerals have struck gold BUY NOW !!!!!!)
Letting everyone else buy Dingbat Minerals
Getting out before it turns out Dingbat Minerals do bath salts
This is not a pump and dump - it is all in public
That's because it isn't pump and dump. This is an example of a short squeeze in the market. I don't think you understand the difference.
This is fantastic - well done to them - hedging is a curse and yet it is seen by Govts as the victim! Unbelievable
It's because the Hedge Funds just bank rolled both candidates at the US election. Their guy is always in power.
Hedging is a legitimate business tool used by many exporters (for example to protect future sales revenue against currency movements). Not at all the same as a hedge fund.
Hedging and Hedge Funds are two very different things....
This is also not all its seems and the little guys winning against the big. The big guys (institutional investors) have seen the momentum and jumped aboard.
E.g. 1m reddit investors @ $1k each = $1bn
5 institutional investors @ $200m each (mere slush funds to them) = $1bn.....
Its big guys against big guys....
This is also not all its seems and the little guys winning against the big. The big guys (institutional investors) have seen the momentum and jumped aboard.
E.g. 1m reddit investors @ $1k each = $1bn
5 institutional investors @ $200m each (mere slush funds to them) = $1bn.....
Its big guys against big guys....
Well down to who? They all lost their shirts!
Hedging is a totally different process to short selling and is usually used to minimise risk or volatility by institurional investors. Look up the definition! You clearly haven't got a clue what you are talking about.
So we should be allowed to buy shares in companies we think will do well in the future, but not the reverse?
Yes, this is a nice 'win' for the man on the street against big city villains, but surely if you think something is over-valued you can take an opposing view? Not hugely different from betting on sports results is it?
Yes, this is a nice 'win' for the man on the street against big city villains, but surely if you think something is over-valued you can take an opposing view? Not hugely different from betting on sports results is it?
I suspect most rightly feel there is a big difference between deciding a share is not worth keeping or buying at a price, and selling a share you do not own, aiming to buy it back for less before giving it back. Perhaps such behaviours should not be possible, those involved can place bets on share prices with gambling companies instead.
Yes, fair point. I guess you can only bet so much at a bookies though.
What a horrifically biased piece!
Short sellers had shorted 140% of the available stock in GME... 140%!! They borrowed more than they could physically buy back (unless the stock price kept falling, due to their shorting activities....).
It's the act of shorting that needs regulating, not average Joe's buying whatever stock they like.
Short sellers had shorted 140% of the available stock in GME... 140%!! They borrowed more than they could physically buy back (unless the stock price kept falling, due to their shorting activities....).
It's the act of shorting that needs regulating, not average Joe's buying whatever stock they like.
The act of shorting volumes above number of shares not the act of shorting per se. How many people go long on stocks without a care as to the underlying stock they are buying?
Agree shorting does need to be regulated but those at the top are so corrupt. One of the reasons why Trump came to power. The ordinary citizen felt politicians were not on their side.
It’s not “average Joe’s”, it’s wealthy people just finding another way to screw normal share dealing that one day hopefully pays your pension. What they are doing is in no one’s interest but their own.
No different to what those who made out big time did in the 2008 crisis. There was something like 30x+ the amount of CDS available than the bonds they were actually insuring! Short sales, particularly naked short selling (which is where you are when you have sold more stock short than actually exists!) is just wrong.
All those upvotes for a purely ignorant comment. What is this country turning into.
But then should we get on our high horse when governments have been manipulating the gold and silver price for decades, allowing bits of paper to be traded instead, sometimes with 100oz of paper gold only represented by 1oz of physical gold! Same with silver. We know its a con as even BoE was involved in holding down price of gold in 1999 along with USA
"In front of 3 witnesses, Bank of England Governor Eddie George spoke to Nicholas J. Morrell (CEO of Lonmin Plc) after the Washington Agreement gold price explosion in Sept/Oct 1999. Mr. George said "We looked into the abyss if the gold price rose further. A further rise would have taken down one or several trading houses, which might have taken down all the rest in their wake".....more to come
continued.
....." Therefore at any price, at any cost, the central banks had to quell the gold price, manage it. It was very difficult to get the gold price under control but we have now succeeded. The US Fed was very active in getting the gold price down. So was the U.K."
....." Therefore at any price, at any cost, the central banks had to quell the gold price, manage it. It was very difficult to get the gold price under control but we have now succeeded. The US Fed was very active in getting the gold price down. So was the U.K."
Probably both need more regulating. This is undermining faith in the entire system which could bring about economic collapse. Its not just a big game.
Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
Whilst it's held up as a victory for the little guys, the reality is it's a short-lived "mania" and the people holding the shares will lose almost all their money - once the share price goes back to where it should be.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
This is a money power shift the world needs, keep pushing people, there's actually nothing they can do regulation wise, other than the usual FUD. Any laws they attempt to pass will just be seen as blatant attempts to protect the wealthy. It's time to get even..
What goes up must come down. It’ll all end in tears.
I don’t normally post comments here, and BBC is an excellent site. But the quality of this original article was shocking:
Said premarket prices dropped due to retail investors panicking. You realise Robinhood/most retail investors can’t trade futures?
Suggested this was causing shock in wider markets. How - GME is $10-20bn cap vs $50trn US market??
It was as if this writer parroted CNBC blindly
Said premarket prices dropped due to retail investors panicking. You realise Robinhood/most retail investors can’t trade futures?
Suggested this was causing shock in wider markets. How - GME is $10-20bn cap vs $50trn US market??
It was as if this writer parroted CNBC blindly
Not once has this been referred to as a 'pump and dump' by those in the know. I'm sick of reading this term in relation to $GME.
One rule for them, another for us.
One rule for them, another for us.
And what happens when those holding millions worth of shares decide they want to realise and secure that money? It will fall, and once the trend begins downwards, everyone with any sense will get their money out of it as fast as they can, hence the "dump".
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
And what do you think Wall Street do when they short stock? Same thing, only isn't labelled as such.
That would depend on the logic of those buying being the same as those pros and you. Making money. If they are millions all happy to lose a share or two's worth on money eventually for the fun of participating in harming the greedy money centred lot. Then they may not sell. It is like paying out for entertainment, a holiday, etc. Spending not greed investing.
It's not a pump and dump it's about leveraging a short squeeze by forcing the shorts hands, its not our fault in their arrogance they've doubled down this could have been over but they refuse to lose. Look at VW 2008 short squeeze, shorters had to beg porsche to start selling.
It's not just about income, it's about the value of assets and future prospects. The value of Tesla's operation alone is huge, the infrastructure it's built is huge. To build something of equivalence you'd need vast sums of money, and because it's so hard and expensive to compete, it means they're one of the few games in town if not the only game in town.
I suspect like most companies their 'assets' are not worth a fraction of what they put on the books, as is shown up at every liquidation of every failed company. You may have paid a fortune to have a mega factory but unless many people want it, in the same place, instantly, instead of building their own, it is near worthless.
Assets are not always static, for example with Tesla's manufacturing system, they have a machine setup that cost hundreds of millions if not billions, the machines on their own didn't cost that, but the R&D and configuration of them did. When you liquidate you'll get the static assets but not the fluid ones. Monetary value can be as theoretical as positions in the market place or your reputation.
Short sellers bet on failure and, in doing so, promote failure.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
They are some of the lowest of the low.
And some of the richest of the rich.
What they do is morally criminal and it should be made illegal.
The fact short selling is not illegal says volumes about the lack of decent values of western capitalist governments.
By shorting something you are betting that the company will go down in value. When it starts going down you actually earn money by borrowing someone's shares, selling it at a lower price and then selling it back again to the original person at the original price. Lots of shorts is betting a company will fail and profiting form it.
In this context, the Hedge fund in question "borrowed" more stock than existed to sell and buy back later once the price had dropped.
In really simple terms a company has 10 apples they are owned by a few different companies and people, a second company borrows 13 apples (three don't exist) sells them and the value of the apples fall. Anyone who owns apples lose money, the borrower's made money.
In really simple terms a company has 10 apples they are owned by a few different companies and people, a second company borrows 13 apples (three don't exist) sells them and the value of the apples fall. Anyone who owns apples lose money, the borrower's made money.
They leveraged over 100% of the shares and when something is pushed that hard it makes it impossible to raise credit lines to keep a business afloat. This would cause a quick call to bankruptcy and no chance for employees to look for other work or hope for an investor buyout. If they had kept their bets reasonable (if you call any of them that) then this wouldn't even be happening. They got greedy
The is the true meaning of taking on the establishment (not the right-wing extremism version spouted by Trump and Farage|) where the real "Little Guy" takes on the leeches of society who trade on emptiness in an industry which has no substance of foundation i.e. London's Financial Services. long may this battle continue and lets see if "Greed is Good" when the little guy gets all the rewards.
The little guys will still lose, the company is probably dead sometime in the future stuck on high streets. However millions of them willing to lose a bit each is wrecking the greedy few that abused a system that enriches them. Their losses are concentrated on the few. Serve them right.
Whilst it's held up as a victory for the little guys, the reality is it's a short-lived "mania" and the people holding the shares will lose almost all their money - once the share price goes back to where it should be.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
I suspect like most companies their 'assets' are not worth a fraction of what they put on the books, as is shown up at every liquidation of every failed company. You may have paid a fortune to have a mega factory but unless many people want it, in the same place, instantly, instead of building their own, it is near worthless.
Assets are not always static, for example with Tesla's manufacturing system, they have a machine setup that cost hundreds of millions if not billions, the machines on their own didn't cost that, but the R&D and configuration of them did. When you liquidate you'll get the static assets but not the fluid ones. Monetary value can be as theoretical as positions in the market place or your reputation.
Should we also outlaw betting on sporting matches, as by placing a bet on a winning team, by implication you are betting on the other team to lose. Should that be made illegal too?
Lose steam....interesting use of words....investors were lured in in part by news media reports. Then those people in the know got out with their profits. It’s an old trick....and it usually works.
What goes up must come down. It’ll all end in tears.
Why is the BBC so pro-wallstreet? Almost as if the BBC Tory masters are looking after their banker buddies.
I'm guessing you'd see any story that didn't demand "death to the money lenders" as being "pro-wallstreet"
Whilst it's held up as a victory for the little guys, the reality is it's a short-lived "mania" and the people holding the shares will lose almost all their money - once the share price goes back to where it should be.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
Still a bit (lot?) of steam left yet. It's up 35% pre-market to $470 at 90 minutes before open .......
All a mugs game imo, with some 'innocents' probably going to lose a great deal at some point :(
All a mugs game imo, with some 'innocents' probably going to lose a great deal at some point :(
Whilst it's held up as a victory for the little guys, the reality is it's a short-lived "mania" and the people holding the shares will lose almost all their money - once the share price goes back to where it should be.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
The US authorities have failed in their duty, the share should have been suspended immediately it became clear what was happening, to save a lot of mug punters from getting burned.
There is no "Where it Should be" its usually where institutional traders want it to be. For once they don't like it as they weren't in control. You have missed the point with this franchise its not about the little guy making money its about the big guy losing it - these private traders are happy to lose a bit if the big guns lose more. Self-sacrifice is something greedy people never understand.
And what happens when those holding millions worth of shares decide they want to realise and secure that money? It will fall, and once the trend begins downwards, everyone with any sense will get their money out of it as fast as they can, hence the "dump".
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
I suspect most rightly feel there is a big difference between deciding a share is not worth keeping or buying at a price, and selling a share you do not own, aiming to buy it back for less before giving it back. Perhaps such behaviours should not be possible, those involved can place bets on share prices with gambling companies instead.
The is the true meaning of taking on the establishment (not the right-wing extremism version spouted by Trump and Farage|) where the real "Little Guy" takes on the leeches of society who trade on emptiness in an industry which has no substance of foundation i.e. London's Financial Services. long may this battle continue and lets see if "Greed is Good" when the little guy gets all the rewards.
Regulator William Galvin "contrived" - isn't that what Hedge Funds do matey?
So we should be allowed to buy shares in companies we think will do well in the future, but not the reverse?
Yes, this is a nice 'win' for the man on the street against big city villains, but surely if you think something is over-valued you can take an opposing view? Not hugely different from betting on sports results is it?
Yes, this is a nice 'win' for the man on the street against big city villains, but surely if you think something is over-valued you can take an opposing view? Not hugely different from betting on sports results is it?
Anyone could spend 30mins researching the subject and see this is misleading story to publish.
In such volatility choosing to publish in a brief moment of after hours trading is not fair on the story developing here, as I speak it is now +40% overnight.
How about the real story, in that the 'retail' investing market found something Wall Strett didn't, and are now beating them at their own game
In such volatility choosing to publish in a brief moment of after hours trading is not fair on the story developing here, as I speak it is now +40% overnight.
How about the real story, in that the 'retail' investing market found something Wall Strett didn't, and are now beating them at their own game
Not really, the BBC have a habit of doing exactly this in service to the establishment.
Sadly this seems to be the new norm with bbc reporting, really lame & and looking like very bad value for money these days. The hedge funds would probably be shorting bbc shares if they had a float now
I don't find find this disappointing for the BBC at all, it's same old BBC.
Err, it's up to $490 pre market, so the old rule of "if the headline is a question the answer is 'no'" is true. I'd imagine they'll suspended trading. Although how that will help the hedge funds I've no idea as they will still be short unless they can find some shares to buy.
I thought competition was supposed to be healthy. Obviously, the big boys don't like the little people playing them at their own game and winning. Most of these big traders are just as guilty in manipulating prices between themselves and they don't get hauled over the proverbial coals for it.
Seems to me that the Hedge funds didn't take account of the possibility of just this scenario. That is their bad.
So you admit that the amateurs are manipulating the price? great. SEC can fine both reddit and elon musk.
It gets worse. Citadel is the hedge fund that owns Melvin Capital who are the GME short seller predicted to lose BILLIONS due to the people noticing that they are shorting GME shares. Citadel owns the app Robinhood, who have banned purchases of new GME shares to limit losses. It's illegal market manipulation, which the SEC needs to investigate and no doubt will be a class action lawsuit.
I don’t normally post comments here, and BBC is an excellent site. But the quality of this original article was shocking:
Said premarket prices dropped due to retail investors panicking. You realise Robinhood/most retail investors can’t trade futures?
Suggested this was causing shock in wider markets. How - GME is $10-20bn cap vs $50trn US market??
It was as if this writer parroted CNBC blindly
Said premarket prices dropped due to retail investors panicking. You realise Robinhood/most retail investors can’t trade futures?
Suggested this was causing shock in wider markets. How - GME is $10-20bn cap vs $50trn US market??
It was as if this writer parroted CNBC blindly
And what happens when those holding millions worth of shares decide they want to realise and secure that money? It will fall, and once the trend begins downwards, everyone with any sense will get their money out of it as fast as they can, hence the "dump".
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
It doesn't matter that the reason for the pump was to screw over dodgy players, it's still fundamentally a pump and dump, a bubble.
That would depend on the logic of those buying being the same as those pros and you. Making money. If they are millions all happy to lose a share or two's worth on money eventually for the fun of participating in harming the greedy money centred lot. Then they may not sell. It is like paying out for entertainment, a holiday, etc. Spending not greed investing.
Leaving aside the rights & wrongs of the hedge fund / amateur traders involvement in GameStop, would you want your pension invested in a high street consumer electronics retailer that's been losing money for a few years now? I'd love the likes of Currys etc to be on every high street, but in the digital and Amazon age has changed everything.
Vote up to incl in your pension, or down to avoid.
Vote up to incl in your pension, or down to avoid.
I imagine this is not investing for greed, pension or otherwise. It is more like spending on a holiday or entertainment. Sure you will end up out of pocket, just as you are after a holiday or come out of a cinema. But you 'bought' fun with the money.
If you gamble with £1000, you are a reckless degenerate, crypto fantasist and need to be regulated for your own good - and if you win, we'll ask you why you want to withdraw your money.
If you gamble with a billion, you will have every safety net at your disposal; if you lose, we will bail you out at the cost of 10 years of austerity. If you win, you can pay 2% tax.
The game.
If you gamble with a billion, you will have every safety net at your disposal; if you lose, we will bail you out at the cost of 10 years of austerity. If you win, you can pay 2% tax.
The game.
Great... now I'm losing The Game
If you get as rich as Trump you basically pay nothing. The government pays you.
In the classic Randian 'liberal' line, Governments can (should) :-
Control the rich by giving them money.
Control the poor by starvation.
In the classic Randian 'liberal' line, Governments can (should) :-
Control the rich by giving them money.
Control the poor by starvation.
And if you gamble with people pensions and loose, you are business hero
The stock was shorted 140%. The hedge funds' expertise should be in managing risk - in this case they failed to do so appropriately. Private investors noticed this mistake and have taken advantage of this - I don't see what is wrong with this. A hedge fund could have equally taken advantage (and likely are) and they would have been seen as heroes.
Well said. It's an efficient market at play. The hedge fund over shorted and someone else realised the weakness and exploited it accordingly.
It's not a mistake, they're literally inflating a stock by manipulating the market.
What's wrong with it is that you could just witchhunt anyone who has a short in the market and make them lose a lot of money. The SEC rightfully should be putting a stop to this.
What's wrong with it is that you could just witchhunt anyone who has a short in the market and make them lose a lot of money. The SEC rightfully should be putting a stop to this.
Who's to say that the people who started the threads on Reddit aren't other hedge fund managers?
If you gamble with £1000, you are a reckless degenerate, crypto fantasist and need to be regulated for your own good - and if you win, we'll ask you why you want to withdraw your money.
If you gamble with a billion, you will have every safety net at your disposal; if you lose, we will bail you out at the cost of 10 years of austerity. If you win, you can pay 2% tax.
The game.
If you gamble with a billion, you will have every safety net at your disposal; if you lose, we will bail you out at the cost of 10 years of austerity. If you win, you can pay 2% tax.
The game.
Citadel Investment group and Paloma Partners - two big examples, many others. Do your research.
Any organisation that has accessed near zero rate borrowing facilitated by debt monetisation by central banks, for which taxpayers are ultimately on the hook, has been bailed out. That's every organisation by the way.
The global money supply was DOUBLED in order to keep the whole system afloat, without this most of these hedge funds would have gone under.
Most of the major hedge funds had made all their losses back inside 18 months to two years. Osborne was right when he said "We're all in this together".
They certainly are.
They certainly are.
The banks were doing exactly the same thing as the hedge funds.
Didn't need to - they earned a fortune shorting the banks that led to the crisis!
Long term capital management run by two nobel laureates was bailed out.
Not just hedge funds, the banks were at it too. Gambling with other people's money, lying to each other about interest rates etc. and even lying to each other about what they were selling to each other. So busy and desperate to make money they built up a massive house of cards. Then let the taxpayer foot the bill when it all came tumbling down.
I can name two at Bear Stearns, and that's in March of 2008 alone...
all of them.
Wow you are dumb.
Every one of them were, and again last March. They leverage up massively on bonds. BofE QE kept bond prices high and pumped billions in, inflating hedge funds assets.
Goldman Sachs hedge fund gets $3 billion bailout in 2007
Leaving aside the rights & wrongs of the hedge fund / amateur traders involvement in GameStop, would you want your pension invested in a high street consumer electronics retailer that's been losing money for a few years now? I'd love the likes of Currys etc to be on every high street, but in the digital and Amazon age has changed everything.
Vote up to incl in your pension, or down to avoid.
Vote up to incl in your pension, or down to avoid.
Yep, agree 100%. I'm taking a step back from the noise and emotion though. No different to Blockbuster. I'd love to still have a film store up the road still, but technology has moved to the Netflix era. For my pension though, I'd prefer Netflix shares than Blockbuster (if it were 2012).
When will the authorities come to their senses and stop this. They are little more than Snake oil salesmen.
Another example of how the BBC kisses the wall street arse 24/7 , pathetic reporting by useless journalists. Keep it up people lets help destroy this hedgefund corruption
Such disappointing reporting, there has been no mention of a pump and dump by the people involved. The share prices have only fallen after market due to short sellers using extended hours trading to pass shares back and forth at lower and lower prices to try and scare off retail investors. Why don't you cover broker apps stopping people from purchasing shares with no explanation?
Now that hedge funds are losing billions, suddenly there are calls from conservatives in the US for regulation. What did they do after the 2008 crash? Where were the regulators stopping naked shorts? Let alone the immorality of profiting off running companies into the ground. They shouldn't have shorted GME 140%. They gambled and lost to smart and organised retail investors who squeezed them.
There are always calls to outlaw it.
The only reason you see them in the news today is because there is an active event to tie the calls to.
The only reason you see them in the news today is because there is an active event to tie the calls to.
Exactly. The "big boys" don't like it when someone beats them at their own games. Typical users and abusers of their position. Short selli g should simy be banned it is just wrong. If they need to gamble go bet on a horse race.
Well said. Quite funny that the conservative element in the US (and across the world) don't like it when they're faced with competition and lose out. Doesn't matter what regulation they put in place, people always find a legal workaround.
Not true, Sean Hannity just had on Steve Morris (Morrison- I'm forgetting the exact name) whom I think was an advisor to Trump and he's for the little guy teaching the Wall Street big guys a lesson. Hannity: "I'm not a big trader at all, but I'm rooting for the little guy here". Charles Paine on FOX Business was just yelling his head off at the greed of the shorters at 140% on GameStop!!
Seems to me that Wall Street was fine whilst it was them that was earning money, now that it's normal people it needs regulating or changing. This biased BBC article just panders to the financial elite which is such a surprise for the BBC /s Also, well done to everyone who made money on this transaction.
I cannot find the BBC bias you refer to and suspect that is your paranoia.
Pity because it spoiled an otherwise excellent post.
Pity because it spoiled an otherwise excellent post.
Now that hedge funds are losing billions, suddenly there are calls from conservatives in the US for regulation. What did they do after the 2008 crash? Where were the regulators stopping naked shorts? Let alone the immorality of profiting off running companies into the ground. They shouldn't have shorted GME 140%. They gambled and lost to smart and organised retail investors who squeezed them.
Some people have made millions of dollars, they're going to want to keep it. It's a big game of chicken being played with life-changing sums of money.