[Merged] Wall Street Bets subreddit / Too late to buy Gamestop stock? - Page 7

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 07:34 AM

Hmmm. Just got a "Reddit cannot be reached" error. Are the billionaire elite striking back? I promise I just wanted to look at the cute kitties and puppies videos!

mumblethrax · 29th January 2021, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY

Doge

.01 to .05 in the past 24 hours

Which hedge fund gets screwed by that?

Seems like they've moved on from populist retribution to...something else.

SuburbanTurkey · 29th January 2021, 08:06 AM

new job listing up. Salary better be incredible:

Quote:

Job Opportunity!

Robinhood seeks a Federal Affairs Manager based in Washington D.C. to focus on federal advocacy and government affairs related to legislative and regulatory matters.
@RobinhoodApp

https://twitter.com/DaybookJobs/stat...58613665300482

Brainster · 29th January 2021, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by Cain

I'm trying to understand how this works. Here's an analogy I'm basing off something I saw on Twitter.

Jerry has an original painting from an artist named Roy that's valued at $1,000, but who is to say what's it's really worth?

Kramer-Newman believe Roy's work is wildly over-valued. They believe Roy turns out paintings like a factory, so his pieces are certain to go down in price. Kramer-Newman rent the painting from Jerry with the intention of selling it for $950. When the painting inevitably drops in value, they'll buy it back -- maybe for as little as $100 -- and return it to Jerry.

They find a sucker named George who plops down the $950 bucks. Later that day, Roy chokes to death on Junior Mints, and all of his paintings rocket up in value. George has the best luck! Now Kramer-Newman will have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to buy back the painting and return it to Jerry.

Accepting that unique works of art are not quite like fungible shares, are these cases analogous in important respects?

Yes, this is a good analogy. It could be improved, by saying that there are multiple paintings and Kramer-Newman can buy any of Roy's paintings and give it to Jerry. See part of the concept of the short squeeze is that when the short-seller gives up and has to buy the stock back, this creates more demand for the stock which drives the price up yet further (profiting those who engaged in the squeeze).

Cavemonster · 29th January 2021, 08:21 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

I've seen some serious antisemitic messages connected with this thing.

I don't know whether they constitute the chicken or the egg in terms of this particular action; but there's a lot of people who apparently equate hedge fund traders losing money with "Jews" losing money, and they are quite pleased with what's going on and are saying so.

As a supporting argument to this, it should be noted that Discord has said that it banned the WSB channel due to hate speech and misinformation, not anything to do with trading or this recent activity.

This looks like a 4chan image.
They use anti-semitic and racist images and claim for EVERYTHING. Half of them are edgy teenages who don't fully understand what they're saying and half of them are real bigots.

But you'll find similar crap for almost anything they discuss.
I don't think that characterizes any side of this incident, it's just a constant gross underbelly of our country right now.

There's a congresswoman who thinks that wildfires are caused by Jewish space lasers.

Mader Levap · 29th January 2021, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by Arcade22

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

Originally Posted by lomiller

Short selling doesn't make the bankruptcy come any faster.

This is lie. It can contribute to it.

Gamestop was a profit making machine with strong quarterly profits and growth trends before the big bad shorters came along and ruined it's reputation.

I was talking about shorters in general and you know it.

You know how people deliberately misrepresenting situation or context are called, right?

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Cavemonster

There's a congresswoman who thinks that wildfires are caused by Jewish space lasers.

Lots of lasers have tips like that, you can't automatically assume they're Jewish.

Distracted1 · 29th January 2021, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by Cavemonster

This looks like a 4chan image.
They use anti-semitic and racist images and claim for EVERYTHING. Half of them are edgy teenages who don't fully understand what they're saying and half of them are real bigots.

But you'll find similar crap for almost anything they discuss.
I don't think that characterizes any side of this incident, it's just a constant gross underbelly of our country right now.

There's a congresswoman who thinks that wildfires are caused by Jewish space lasers.

Well, technology being what it is, that's nothing new- just a rehash of "Jewish Lightning" for the modern age.

Cavemonster · 29th January 2021, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Lots of lasers have tips like that, you can't automatically assume they're Jewish.

I've heard that makes the laser less sensitive.

Checkmite · 29th January 2021, 09:26 AM

My perspective, supported by an (alleged) industry professional:

People have been buying tulips because they think a hedge fund losing its shirt is something that's never happened before, and "breaks the system" or "exposes Wall Street". Even now they're continuing to use this kind of language to describe what they think is happening. They are sadly mistaken.

Meadmaker · 29th January 2021, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by Cain

I'm trying to understand how this works. Here's an analogy I'm basing off something I saw on Twitter.

Jerry has an original painting from an artist named Roy that's valued at $1,000, but who is to say what's it's really worth?

Kramer-Newman believe Roy's work is wildly over-valued. They believe Roy turns out paintings like a factory, so his pieces are certain to go down in price. Kramer-Newman rent the painting from Jerry with the intention of selling it for $950. When the painting inevitably drops in value, they'll buy it back -- maybe for as little as $100 -- and return it to Jerry.

They find a sucker named George who plops down the $950 bucks. Later that day, Roy chokes to death on Junior Mints, and all of his paintings rocket up in value. George has the best luck! Now Kramer-Newman will have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to buy back the painting and return it to Jerry.

Accepting that unique works of art are not quite like fungible shares, are these cases analogous in important respects?

I'm curious about the relationship here between the original lender and the speculators. I understand the owner is happy to rent(?) out his shares to make money, but what are the typical terms in the contract? Are the shares borrowed for a specified period of time? Can Jerry demand his painting back at any time?

Not quite.

Jerry has an original painting from an artist named Roy that's valued at $1,000, but who is to say what's it's really worth?

Kramer-Newman believe Roy's work is wildly over-valued. They believe Roy turns out paintings like a factory, so his pieces are certain to go down in price. Kramer-Newman promise to sell Elaine the painting for 950 dollars.

Elaine says, "But you don't have the painting". Kramer says not to worry, they have agreed to buy the painting from Jerry. Fred has an identical copy anyway, so Elaine gives Fred some money. Fred gives Elaine the painting. Elaine goes on her merry way having paid 950 dollars for a painting. Kramer owes Fred a painting. Fred has 950 dolllars that he owes to Kramer as soon as Kramer gives him the painting. Fred really wants the painting, but he knows there is no problem, because Kramer actually has 2,000 dollars in his account, so he agrees to wait until Kramer actually has the painting. He's in no rush. Kramer can afford the painting. Part of Fred's deal is that Kramer has to keep enough money in his account to buy the painting, no matter what the current market value of the painting is.

Bob gets wind of this deal. Bob goes to Jerry and pays Jerry 2,000 dollars for the painting. Fred sees that the value of the painting is 2,000 dollars, but that's all Kramer has in the account, and demands that Kramer produce the painting right now, because if it goes up any higher, Kramer won't be able to afford the painting. Kramer is forced to buy the painting for 2,000 dollars. Bob refuses to sell, but Janet has an identical copy and agrees to sell it for 2100 dollars. Kramer has to pay Janet 2100 dollars.

Now Janet has 2100 dollars. Kramer has -2100 dollars. Kramer has one copy of the painting. Fred has 950 dollars. Bob has a painting, and -2000 dollars. Jerry has 2000 dollars, and no longer has a painting.

Kramer gives Bob the painting. Fred gives Kramer 950 dollars, except he informs Kramer that the 950 dollars was really a loan, and he charges interest.

So, when it's all done, Jerry has 2000 dollars and no longer has a painting.
Fred has the interest he made on the loan.
Janet has 2100 dollars, and no longer has a painting.
Bob is out 2000 dollars, but he has a painting.
Kramer is out 1150 dollars plus interest. (He doesn't have a painting, but he didn't start out with one.)
Elaine has 950 dollars, and a painting.

Now Bob has a painting. He tries to sell it, but it turns out no one really liked those paintings anyway. Jerry says he never really liked the painting much, but it was in a cool frame, so he'll give Bob 100 bucks for it.

ETA: Now, having worked through the analogy, I would say the big difference between what you wrote and what is happening with Gamestop is that Roy never died. In fact, everyone knows Roy's painting is junk and not worth much. It only went up in price because Bob knew that Kramer had to give Fred a painting. Knowing that, people held out and made Kramer pay more than the painting was worth.

A regular short sale is pretty much what your analogy from twitter is like. A "short squeeze" is what happens in my analogy. People are forced to buy shares because they have agreed to provide the shares to the broker. The price goes up not because of something related to the company business, but just because all the people who thought the stock would go down have to cover the shares they promised to give back to the broker. What is going on with Gamestop is that we have the biggest short squeeze in history, made even more interesting because it was triggered by amateurs on reddit.

JoeMorgue · 29th January 2021, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

People have been buying tulips because they think a hedge fund losing its shirt is something that's never happened before, and "breaks the system" or "exposes Wall Street". Even now they're continuing to use this kind of language to describe what they think is happening. They are sadly mistaken.

The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it.

Again the poor masses are allowed to screw with the stock market for personal gain just as much as "Official Members of the Super Inclusive 'Real Serious Investors' Club."

p0lka · 29th January 2021, 09:50 AM

Today the freetrade app for UK users has blocked U.S. trade buying. They also blocked selling at market opening temporarily. Talk about market manipulation.

BobTheCoward · 29th January 2021, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it.

Again the poor masses are allowed to screw with the stock market for personal gain just as much as "Official Members of the Super Inclusive 'Real Serious Investors' Club."

But based on the post you quoted, the argument is that this is real serious investors vs real serious investors. The masses are not players.

Checkmite · 29th January 2021, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it.

Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it.

The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes.

BobTheCoward · 29th January 2021, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it.

The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes.

Do we know if there are people who invested money they can't afford and we're manipulated?

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it.

The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes.

The hedge funds are just as guilty of violating the same basic rule: don't gamble with money you don't have. "But we can make huge fortunes doing that!" they object. Yes, and they can lose huge fortunes as well. Crybabies who lose a gamble merit little sympathy.

Checkmite · 29th January 2021, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Do we know if there are people who invested money they can't afford and we're manipulated?

There are people self-reporting they've invested their life savings, or portions thereof, or who are obviously first-time investors expressing a hope of making a lot of gains. Yes, these people were manipulated into participating in this bubble. They got Robin Hood accounts and started loading money into them because someone on Reddit told them that doing so would "stick it to the man", but they otherwise have very little idea what they're doing.

If any regulation changes come out of this at all, they will mostly likely be against Robin Hood and services like it, for making it too easy for neophytes to fall victim to bubbles.

theprestige · 29th January 2021, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it.

The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes.

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Do we know if there are people who invested money they can't afford and we're manipulated?

That's my question too. It's been suggested a couple times that there's been some sort of conspiracy (on the part of GME executives, apparently) to encourage lay investors to get involved in this.

I would like to see evidence that anything like this is actually going on. Are we supposed to seriously consider that maybe a Gamestop C*O contracted a Russian bot farm to craft a stealth social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purposes of boosting his stock price in twilight hours of his corporation?

theprestige · 29th January 2021, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

There are people self-reporting they've invested their life savings, or portions thereof, or who are obviously first-time investors expressing a hope of making a lot of gains. Yes, these people were manipulated into participating in this bubble. They got Robin Hood accounts and started loading money into them because someone on Reddit told them that doing so would "stick it to the man", but they otherwise have very little idea what they're doing.

If any regulation changes come out of this at all, they will mostly likely be against Robin Hood and services like it, for making it too easy for neophytes to fall victim to bubbles.

There are people reporting a lot of things on the Internet. For all we know, the entire r/wallstreetbets subreddit is just teenagers and bored housewives LARPing at Wall Street.

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 11:00 AM

I'm afraid to ask certain of my acquaintances if they're aware of all this business. I fear some of them are quite impractical enough to have attempted to join in an effort to "get rich quick". Sadly, financial intelligence is not the same as book learning or street smarts, and many people can be clever in other ways but abysmal morons when it comes to money.

I'm damn glad my older relatives are too far behind the technology curve to have attempted trading on their own, or else there would be a lot of sad people in various trailer parks soon.

marting · 29th January 2021, 11:00 AM

I'm pretty sure there are lots of advanced math peeps looking at how to monitor reddit and other social networks to identify GSW type activity early. It's no accident that the highest performance (nanoseconds counts) programming language conferences are funded by financial institutions.

They make money the old fashioned way. Statistics, big data, and speed of processing.

lobosrul5 · 29th January 2021, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

There are people self-reporting they've invested their life savings, or portions thereof, or who are obviously first-time investors expressing a hope of making a lot of gains. Yes, these people were manipulated into participating in this bubble. They got Robin Hood accounts and started loading money into them because someone on Reddit told them that doing so would "stick it to the man", but they otherwise have very little idea what they're doing.

If any regulation changes come out of this at all, they will mostly likely be against Robin Hood and services like it, for making it too easy for neophytes to fall victim to bubbles.

I'm curious to know what regulation changes that you would like to see implemented? Waiting periods for retail investors is all I can come up with. Thats going to be deeply unpopular and unfair since the big guys will still be able to trade instantly. IF RH makes it easier to trade than the likes of Etrade, TD Ameritrade ,or Fidelity, its not really by that much. The difference was marketing basically.

ETA: Oh I suppose they could restrict small investors from directly buying stocks? ETF's and mutual funds only. But I bet within weeks there will be a meme based ETF.

Arcade22 · 29th January 2021, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Mader Levap

I was talking about shorters in general and you know it.

You know how people deliberately misrepresenting situation or context are called, right?

I'm pretty sure other investors do that too, which brings us to the big question: why are some people obsessed by "short sellers"? Investors of every kind hype their own investments.

Suddenly · 29th January 2021, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by Arcade22

I'm pretty sure other investors do that too, which brings us to the big question: why are some people obsessed by "short sellers"? Investors of every kind hype their own investments.

People who root for other people's misfortune are not generally held in esteem.

Checkmite · 29th January 2021, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

I'm curious to know what regulation changes that you would like to see implemented?

I don't know. I can't really think of any. My instinct is that something protective should be done; but anything protective of small-time investors, who stand to lose the most in situations like this, as you say would inevitably be seen as "repressing" poor investors in favor of rich ones.

trustbutverify · 29th January 2021, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it.

Again the poor masses are allowed to screw with the stock market for personal gain just as much as "Official Members of the Super Inclusive 'Real Serious Investors' Club."

I agree. However, many of those poor masses late to the party are going to get scalped. In some cases, tragically so.

Checkmite · 29th January 2021, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Are we supposed to seriously consider that maybe a Gamestop C*O contracted a Russian bot farm to craft a stealth social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purposes of boosting his stock price in twilight hours of his corporation?

No; you're supposed to seriously consider that maybe decidedly-non-amateurs on Reddit "crafted" a perfectly open social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purpose of facilitating a pump-and-dump scheme.

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

People who root for other people's misfortune are not generally held in esteem.

On the other hand, people do seem to esteem justice. People like it when other people's bad behavior leads to bad results. It even works if the behavior isn't bad, but merely foolish: ideally everyone learns from such events, both the participants and the observers.

Misfortune is only not "rooted for" when the subject of it doesn't seem to deserve it. When they do deserve it, well, it's satisfying in some manner.

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

I don't know. I can't really think of any. My instinct is that something protective should be done; but anything protective of small-time investors, who stand to lose the most in situations like this, as you say would inevitably be seen as "repressing" poor investors in favor of rich ones.

Nonsense. It's the turnaround time of the investments, not the total amount, that matters. Ordinary folks can (and should) be investing their pittances for the long haul, years at a time, they shouldn't be playing at day-trading. Just like ordinary folks drive cars but shouldn't race them, sing but shouldn't release albums, and play computer games but shouldn't quit their jobs to become "streamers".

lobosrul5 · 29th January 2021, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by Arcade22

I'm pretty sure other investors do that too, which brings us to the big question: why are some people obsessed by "short sellers"? Investors of every kind hype their own investments.

Lets say you hold $10,000 worth of a company in stock. You are a normal buy and hold investor. You don't pay attention to the stock market every single second of the day. A capital investoment group opens a short position on the company then puts out a press release saying how they think its going to tank. Within a few milliseconds of that press release going out, algorithmic traders have sold millions of shares and the stock is now trading 25% lower. You just lost $2500.

Conversely, someone does the opposite and wants the stock to go up, well you just instantly made a bunch of money.

Which is more fair to the little guy?

trustbutverify · 29th January 2021, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

People who root for other people's misfortune are not generally held in esteem.

Like people who buy gold, rooting for the misfortune of those whose retirement funds are in USDs. Or defense attorneys rooting for the misfortune of victims seeking some small measure of justice.

Suddenly · 29th January 2021, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

I don't know. I can't really think of any. My instinct is that something protective should be done; but anything protective of small-time investors, who stand to lose the most in situations like this, as you say would inevitably be seen as "repressing" poor investors in favor of rich ones.

Have they bothered to require all public dealing brokers to hold a fiduciary duty to the public yet? I sort of lost track.

People who get into these schemes get what they deserve. If they get wiped out, so be it. Their greed is their problem.

If the industry needs reformed to protect the little guy, maybe it needs to focus on the people who want nothing to do with this casino and end up losing jobs, etc, because pirates in neckties have no downside to risk.

Not the ones that think they are in on a scam and get burned.

BobTheCoward · 29th January 2021, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

There are people reporting a lot of things on the Internet. For all we know, the entire r/wallstreetbets subreddit is just teenagers and bored housewives LARPing at Wall Street.

A lot of people say a lot of things about Hawaii.

trustbutverify · 29th January 2021, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

No; you're supposed to seriously consider that maybe decidedly-non-amateurs on Reddit "crafted" a perfectly open social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purpose of facilitating a pump-and-dump scheme.

You may be on to something there.

Suddenly · 29th January 2021, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

Like people who buy gold, rooting for the misfortune of those whose retirement funds are in USDs. Or defense attorneys rooting for the misfortune of victims seeking some small measure of justice.

Well, yes. That is how psychology works. Sometimes it is stupid, but short selling is literally wanting a company to crash and for the vast majority of people that is a hateful desire no matter what abstract arguments about market efficiency exist.

TragicMonkey · 29th January 2021, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Lets say you hold $10,000 worth of a company in stock. You are a normal buy and hold investor. You don't pay attention to the stock market every single second of the day. A capital investoment group opens a short position on the company then puts out a press release saying how they think its going to tank. Within a few milliseconds of that press release going out, algorithmic traders have sold millions of shares and the stock is now trading 25% lower. You just lost $2500.

Conversely, someone does the opposite and wants the stock to go up, well you just instantly made a bunch of money.

No, you haven't. You have gained or lost nothing until you sell that stock.

Quote:

Which is more fair to the little guy?

If the little guy wasn't prepared to risk $10,000 he should not have invested $10,000. He knew it was a gamble. Fairness is everybody gets treated the same, not everybody gets the outcome they desire.

Checkmite · 29th January 2021, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Suddenly

People who get into these schemes get what they deserve. If they get wiped out, so be it. Their greed is their problem.

I do not understand this schizophrenic sentiment towards this situation, where on one hand we're supposed to be cheering this bubble because it allegedly represents "Joe Six-Pack breaking Wall Street", but when it's pointed out that Joe Six-Pack is going to suffer potentially serious damage when the bubble bursts it's now a dismissive "well that's what he deserves for being getting involved".

Distracted1 · 29th January 2021, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

No, you haven't. You have gained or lost nothing until you sell that stock.

If the little guy wasn't prepared to risk $10,000 he should not have invested $10,000. He knew it was a gamble. Fairness is everybody gets treated the same, not everybody gets the outcome they desire.

Very valid points.

Distracted1 · 29th January 2021, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

I do not understand this schizophrenic sentiment towards this situation, where on one hand we're supposed to be cheering this bubble because it allegedly represents "Joe Six-Pack breaking Wall Street", but when it's pointed out that Joe Six-Pack is going to suffer potentially serious damage when the bubble bursts it's now a dismissive "well that's what he deserves for being getting involved".

Joe six pack should not be validating the Pyramid scheme by participating in it in the first place.
IMO

29th January 2021, 07:34 AM	#241
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,744	Hmmm. Just got a "Reddit cannot be reached" error. Are the billionaire elite striking back? I promise I just wanted to look at the cute kitties and puppies videos!
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

29th January 2021, 08:06 AM	#243
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,540	new job listing up. Salary better be incredible: Quote: Job Opportunity! Robinhood seeks a Federal Affairs Manager based in Washington D.C. to focus on federal advocacy and government affairs related to legislative and regulatory matters. @RobinhoodApp https://twitter.com/DaybookJobs/stat...58613665300482
	__________________ Gobble gobble

29th January 2021, 08:13 AM	#244
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 18,358	Originally Posted by Cain I'm trying to understand how this works. Here's an analogy I'm basing off something I saw on Twitter. Jerry has an original painting from an artist named Roy that's valued at $1,000, but who is to say what's it's really worth? Kramer-Newman believe Roy's work is wildly over-valued. They believe Roy turns out paintings like a factory, so his pieces are certain to go down in price. Kramer-Newman rent the painting from Jerry with the intention of selling it for $950. When the painting inevitably drops in value, they'll buy it back -- maybe for as little as $100 -- and return it to Jerry. They find a sucker named George who plops down the $950 bucks. Later that day, Roy chokes to death on Junior Mints, and all of his paintings rocket up in value. George has the best luck! Now Kramer-Newman will have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to buy back the painting and return it to Jerry. Accepting that unique works of art are not quite like fungible shares, are these cases analogous in important respects? Yes, this is a good analogy. It could be improved, by saying that there are multiple paintings and Kramer-Newman can buy any of Roy's paintings and give it to Jerry. See part of the concept of the short squeeze is that when the short-seller gives up and has to buy the stock back, this creates more demand for the stock which drives the price up yet further (profiting those who engaged in the squeeze).
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

29th January 2021, 08:21 AM	#245
Cavemonster Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,663	Originally Posted by Checkmite I've seen some serious antisemitic messages connected with this thing. I don't know whether they constitute the chicken or the egg in terms of this particular action; but there's a lot of people who apparently equate hedge fund traders losing money with "Jews" losing money, and they are quite pleased with what's going on and are saying so. As a supporting argument to this, it should be noted that Discord has said that it banned the WSB channel due to hate speech and misinformation, not anything to do with trading or this recent activity. This looks like a 4chan image. They use anti-semitic and racist images and claim for EVERYTHING. Half of them are edgy teenages who don't fully understand what they're saying and half of them are real bigots. But you'll find similar crap for almost anything they discuss. I don't think that characterizes any side of this incident, it's just a constant gross underbelly of our country right now. There's a congresswoman who thinks that wildfires are caused by Jewish space lasers.
Cavemonster Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,663	__________________ The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON

29th January 2021, 08:27 AM	#246
Mader Levap Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 1,576	Originally Posted by Arcade22 Originally Posted by Mader Levap Originally Posted by lomiller Short selling doesn't make the bankruptcy come any faster. This is lie. It can contribute to it. Gamestop was a profit making machine with strong quarterly profits and growth trends before the big bad shorters came along and ruined it's reputation. I was talking about shorters in general and you know it. You know how people deliberately misrepresenting situation or context are called, right?
	__________________ Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Republicans is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.

29th January 2021, 08:05 AM	#242
mumblethrax Species traitor Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 2,812	Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY Doge .01 to .05 in the past 24 hours Which hedge fund gets screwed by that? Seems like they've moved on from populist retribution to...something else.

29th January 2021, 08:37 AM	#247
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,744	Originally Posted by Cavemonster There's a congresswoman who thinks that wildfires are caused by Jewish space lasers. Lots of lasers have tips like that, you can't automatically assume they're Jewish.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

29th January 2021, 09:02 AM	#248
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,622	Originally Posted by Cavemonster This looks like a 4chan image. They use anti-semitic and racist images and claim for EVERYTHING. Half of them are edgy teenages who don't fully understand what they're saying and half of them are real bigots. But you'll find similar crap for almost anything they discuss. I don't think that characterizes any side of this incident, it's just a constant gross underbelly of our country right now. There's a congresswoman who thinks that wildfires are caused by Jewish space lasers. Well, technology being what it is, that's nothing new- just a rehash of "Jewish Lightning" for the modern age.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

29th January 2021, 09:14 AM	#249
Cavemonster Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,663	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Lots of lasers have tips like that, you can't automatically assume they're Jewish. I've heard that makes the laser less sensitive.
Cavemonster Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 6,663	__________________ The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON

29th January 2021, 09:26 AM	#250
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 26,548	My perspective, supported by an (alleged) industry professional: People have been buying tulips because they think a hedge fund losing its shirt is something that's never happened before, and "breaks the system" or "exposes Wall Street". Even now they're continuing to use this kind of language to describe what they think is happening. They are sadly mistaken.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

29th January 2021, 09:40 AM	#251
Meadmaker Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 25,538	Originally Posted by Cain I'm trying to understand how this works. Here's an analogy I'm basing off something I saw on Twitter. Jerry has an original painting from an artist named Roy that's valued at $1,000, but who is to say what's it's really worth? Kramer-Newman believe Roy's work is wildly over-valued. They believe Roy turns out paintings like a factory, so his pieces are certain to go down in price. Kramer-Newman rent the painting from Jerry with the intention of selling it for $950. When the painting inevitably drops in value, they'll buy it back -- maybe for as little as $100 -- and return it to Jerry. They find a sucker named George who plops down the $950 bucks. Later that day, Roy chokes to death on Junior Mints, and all of his paintings rocket up in value. George has the best luck! Now Kramer-Newman will have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to buy back the painting and return it to Jerry. Accepting that unique works of art are not quite like fungible shares, are these cases analogous in important respects? I'm curious about the relationship here between the original lender and the speculators. I understand the owner is happy to rent(?) out his shares to make money, but what are the typical terms in the contract? Are the shares borrowed for a specified period of time? Can Jerry demand his painting back at any time? Not quite. Jerry has an original painting from an artist named Roy that's valued at $1,000, but who is to say what's it's really worth? Kramer-Newman believe Roy's work is wildly over-valued. They believe Roy turns out paintings like a factory, so his pieces are certain to go down in price. Kramer-Newman promise to sell Elaine the painting for 950 dollars. Elaine says, "But you don't have the painting". Kramer says not to worry, they have agreed to buy the painting from Jerry. Fred has an identical copy anyway, so Elaine gives Fred some money. Fred gives Elaine the painting. Elaine goes on her merry way having paid 950 dollars for a painting. Kramer owes Fred a painting. Fred has 950 dolllars that he owes to Kramer as soon as Kramer gives him the painting. Fred really wants the painting, but he knows there is no problem, because Kramer actually has 2,000 dollars in his account, so he agrees to wait until Kramer actually has the painting. He's in no rush. Kramer can afford the painting. Part of Fred's deal is that Kramer has to keep enough money in his account to buy the painting, no matter what the current market value of the painting is. Bob gets wind of this deal. Bob goes to Jerry and pays Jerry 2,000 dollars for the painting. Fred sees that the value of the painting is 2,000 dollars, but that's all Kramer has in the account, and demands that Kramer produce the painting right now, because if it goes up any higher, Kramer won't be able to afford the painting. Kramer is forced to buy the painting for 2,000 dollars. Bob refuses to sell, but Janet has an identical copy and agrees to sell it for 2100 dollars. Kramer has to pay Janet 2100 dollars. Now Janet has 2100 dollars. Kramer has -2100 dollars. Kramer has one copy of the painting. Fred has 950 dollars. Bob has a painting, and -2000 dollars. Jerry has 2000 dollars, and no longer has a painting. Kramer gives Bob the painting. Fred gives Kramer 950 dollars, except he informs Kramer that the 950 dollars was really a loan, and he charges interest. So, when it's all done, Jerry has 2000 dollars and no longer has a painting. Fred has the interest he made on the loan. Janet has 2100 dollars, and no longer has a painting. Bob is out 2000 dollars, but he has a painting. Kramer is out 1150 dollars plus interest. (He doesn't have a painting, but he didn't start out with one.) Elaine has 950 dollars, and a painting. Now Bob has a painting. He tries to sell it, but it turns out no one really liked those paintings anyway. Jerry says he never really liked the painting much, but it was in a cool frame, so he'll give Bob 100 bucks for it. ETA: Now, having worked through the analogy, I would say the big difference between what you wrote and what is happening with Gamestop is that Roy never died. In fact, everyone knows Roy's painting is junk and not worth much. It only went up in price because Bob knew that Kramer had to give Fred a painting. Knowing that, people held out and made Kramer pay more than the painting was worth. A regular short sale is pretty much what your analogy from twitter is like. A "short squeeze" is what happens in my analogy. People are forced to buy shares because they have agreed to provide the shares to the broker. The price goes up not because of something related to the company business, but just because all the people who thought the stock would go down have to cover the shares they promised to give back to the broker. What is going on with Gamestop is that we have the biggest short squeeze in history, made even more interesting because it was triggered by amateurs on reddit.
	__________________ Yes, yes. I know you are right. But would it hurt you to provide some information? Last edited by Meadmaker; 29th January 2021 at 09:49 AM.

29th January 2021, 09:45 AM	#252
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 31,560	Originally Posted by Checkmite People have been buying tulips because they think a hedge fund losing its shirt is something that's never happened before, and "breaks the system" or "exposes Wall Street". Even now they're continuing to use this kind of language to describe what they think is happening. They are sadly mistaken. The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it. Again the poor masses are allowed to screw with the stock market for personal gain just as much as "Official Members of the Super Inclusive 'Real Serious Investors' Club."
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

29th January 2021, 09:50 AM	#253
p0lka Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: near trees, houses and a lake. Posts: 2,266	Today the freetrade app for UK users has blocked U.S. trade buying. They also blocked selling at market opening temporarily. Talk about market manipulation.

29th January 2021, 10:25 AM	#254
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,435	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it. Again the poor masses are allowed to screw with the stock market for personal gain just as much as "Official Members of the Super Inclusive 'Real Serious Investors' Club." But based on the post you quoted, the argument is that this is real serious investors vs real serious investors. The masses are not players.

29th January 2021, 10:31 AM	#255
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 26,548	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it. Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it. The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

29th January 2021, 10:34 AM	#256
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,435	Originally Posted by Checkmite Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it. The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes. Do we know if there are people who invested money they can't afford and we're manipulated?

29th January 2021, 10:46 AM	#257
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,744	Originally Posted by Checkmite Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it. The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes. The hedge funds are just as guilty of violating the same basic rule: don't gamble with money you don't have. "But we can make huge fortunes doing that!" they object. Yes, and they can lose huge fortunes as well. Crybabies who lose a gamble merit little sympathy.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

29th January 2021, 10:55 AM	#258
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 26,548	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Do we know if there are people who invested money they can't afford and we're manipulated? There are people self-reporting they've invested their life savings, or portions thereof, or who are obviously first-time investors expressing a hope of making a lot of gains. Yes, these people were manipulated into participating in this bubble. They got Robin Hood accounts and started loading money into them because someone on Reddit told them that doing so would "stick it to the man", but they otherwise have very little idea what they're doing. If any regulation changes come out of this at all, they will mostly likely be against Robin Hood and services like it, for making it too easy for neophytes to fall victim to bubbles.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

29th January 2021, 10:55 AM	#259
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 50,630	Originally Posted by Checkmite Again, "Wall Street" at large, doesn't even care about this. A handful of hedge funders at best are perturbed; but aside from complaining, there's nothing they can really do about it. The far bigger problem is all of the people who were manipulated into joining this pump as a form of "activism", and invested money they really couldn't afford, and who are about to lose everything when the pop comes. Originally Posted by BobTheCoward Do we know if there are people who invested money they can't afford and we're manipulated? That's my question too. It's been suggested a couple times that there's been some sort of conspiracy (on the part of GME executives, apparently) to encourage lay investors to get involved in this. I would like to see evidence that anything like this is actually going on. Are we supposed to seriously consider that maybe a Gamestop C*O contracted a Russian bot farm to craft a stealth social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purposes of boosting his stock price in twilight hours of his corporation?

29th January 2021, 10:57 AM	#260
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 50,630	Originally Posted by Checkmite There are people self-reporting they've invested their life savings, or portions thereof, or who are obviously first-time investors expressing a hope of making a lot of gains. Yes, these people were manipulated into participating in this bubble. They got Robin Hood accounts and started loading money into them because someone on Reddit told them that doing so would "stick it to the man", but they otherwise have very little idea what they're doing. If any regulation changes come out of this at all, they will mostly likely be against Robin Hood and services like it, for making it too easy for neophytes to fall victim to bubbles. There are people reporting a lot of things on the Internet. For all we know, the entire r/wallstreetbets subreddit is just teenagers and bored housewives LARPing at Wall Street.

29th January 2021, 11:00 AM	#261
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,744	I'm afraid to ask certain of my acquaintances if they're aware of all this business. I fear some of them are quite impractical enough to have attempted to join in an effort to "get rich quick". Sadly, financial intelligence is not the same as book learning or street smarts, and many people can be clever in other ways but abysmal morons when it comes to money. I'm damn glad my older relatives are too far behind the technology curve to have attempted trading on their own, or else there would be a lot of sad people in various trailer parks soon.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

29th January 2021, 11:00 AM	#262
marting Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 2,262	I'm pretty sure there are lots of advanced math peeps looking at how to monitor reddit and other social networks to identify GSW type activity early. It's no accident that the highest performance (nanoseconds counts) programming language conferences are funded by financial institutions. They make money the old fashioned way. Statistics, big data, and speed of processing.
marting Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 2,262	__________________ Flying's easy. Walking on water, now that's cool.

29th January 2021, 11:05 AM	#263
lobosrul5 Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 2,194	Originally Posted by Checkmite There are people self-reporting they've invested their life savings, or portions thereof, or who are obviously first-time investors expressing a hope of making a lot of gains. Yes, these people were manipulated into participating in this bubble. They got Robin Hood accounts and started loading money into them because someone on Reddit told them that doing so would "stick it to the man", but they otherwise have very little idea what they're doing. If any regulation changes come out of this at all, they will mostly likely be against Robin Hood and services like it, for making it too easy for neophytes to fall victim to bubbles. I'm curious to know what regulation changes that you would like to see implemented? Waiting periods for retail investors is all I can come up with. Thats going to be deeply unpopular and unfair since the big guys will still be able to trade instantly. IF RH makes it easier to trade than the likes of Etrade, TD Ameritrade ,or Fidelity, its not really by that much. The difference was marketing basically. ETA: Oh I suppose they could restrict small investors from directly buying stocks? ETF's and mutual funds only. But I bet within weeks there will be a meme based ETF.
lobosrul5 Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 2,194	Last edited by lobosrul5; 29th January 2021 at 11:09 AM.

29th January 2021, 11:08 AM	#264
Arcade22 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 6,823	Originally Posted by Mader Levap I was talking about shorters in general and you know it. You know how people deliberately misrepresenting situation or context are called, right? I'm pretty sure other investors do that too, which brings us to the big question: why are some people obsessed by "short sellers"? Investors of every kind hype their own investments.
	__________________ We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr And no, Cuba is not a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, and it's definitely less so than Sweden. - dann

29th January 2021, 11:26 AM	#265
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 4,121	Originally Posted by Arcade22 I'm pretty sure other investors do that too, which brings us to the big question: why are some people obsessed by "short sellers"? Investors of every kind hype their own investments. People who root for other people's misfortune are not generally held in esteem.

29th January 2021, 11:27 AM	#266
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 26,548	Originally Posted by lobosrul5 I'm curious to know what regulation changes that you would like to see implemented? I don't know. I can't really think of any. My instinct is that something protective should be done; but anything protective of small-time investors, who stand to lose the most in situations like this, as you say would inevitably be seen as "repressing" poor investors in favor of rich ones.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

29th January 2021, 11:30 AM	#267
trustbutverify Philosopher Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 8,895	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue The "breaks" and "exposes" part is Wall Street treating the apple cart as their and theirs alone to be the one to decide when to overturn and are now pitching a fit because someone else overturned it. Again the poor masses are allowed to screw with the stock market for personal gain just as much as "Official Members of the Super Inclusive 'Real Serious Investors' Club." I agree. However, many of those poor masses late to the party are going to get scalped. In some cases, tragically so.
	__________________ "To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength" -Leni Riefenstahl Wollen owns the stage

29th January 2021, 11:30 AM	#268
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 26,548	Originally Posted by theprestige Are we supposed to seriously consider that maybe a Gamestop C*O contracted a Russian bot farm to craft a stealth social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purposes of boosting his stock price in twilight hours of his corporation? No; you're supposed to seriously consider that maybe decidedly-non-amateurs on Reddit "crafted" a perfectly open social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purpose of facilitating a pump-and-dump scheme.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

29th January 2021, 11:32 AM	#269
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,744	Originally Posted by Suddenly People who root for other people's misfortune are not generally held in esteem. On the other hand, people do seem to esteem justice. People like it when other people's bad behavior leads to bad results. It even works if the behavior isn't bad, but merely foolish: ideally everyone learns from such events, both the participants and the observers. Misfortune is only not "rooted for" when the subject of it doesn't seem to deserve it. When they do deserve it, well, it's satisfying in some manner.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

29th January 2021, 11:35 AM	#270
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,744	Originally Posted by Checkmite I don't know. I can't really think of any. My instinct is that something protective should be done; but anything protective of small-time investors, who stand to lose the most in situations like this, as you say would inevitably be seen as "repressing" poor investors in favor of rich ones. Nonsense. It's the turnaround time of the investments, not the total amount, that matters. Ordinary folks can (and should) be investing their pittances for the long haul, years at a time, they shouldn't be playing at day-trading. Just like ordinary folks drive cars but shouldn't race them, sing but shouldn't release albums, and play computer games but shouldn't quit their jobs to become "streamers".
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

29th January 2021, 11:38 AM	#271
lobosrul5 Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 2,194	Originally Posted by Arcade22 I'm pretty sure other investors do that too, which brings us to the big question: why are some people obsessed by "short sellers"? Investors of every kind hype their own investments. Lets say you hold $10,000 worth of a company in stock. You are a normal buy and hold investor. You don't pay attention to the stock market every single second of the day. A capital investoment group opens a short position on the company then puts out a press release saying how they think its going to tank. Within a few milliseconds of that press release going out, algorithmic traders have sold millions of shares and the stock is now trading 25% lower. You just lost $2500. Conversely, someone does the opposite and wants the stock to go up, well you just instantly made a bunch of money. Which is more fair to the little guy?
lobosrul5 Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 2,194

29th January 2021, 11:39 AM	#272
trustbutverify Philosopher Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 8,895	Originally Posted by Suddenly People who root for other people's misfortune are not generally held in esteem. Like people who buy gold, rooting for the misfortune of those whose retirement funds are in USDs. Or defense attorneys rooting for the misfortune of victims seeking some small measure of justice.
	__________________ "To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength" -Leni Riefenstahl Wollen owns the stage

29th January 2021, 11:40 AM	#273
Suddenly No Punting Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Not In Follansbee Posts: 4,121	Originally Posted by Checkmite I don't know. I can't really think of any. My instinct is that something protective should be done; but anything protective of small-time investors, who stand to lose the most in situations like this, as you say would inevitably be seen as "repressing" poor investors in favor of rich ones. Have they bothered to require all public dealing brokers to hold a fiduciary duty to the public yet? I sort of lost track. People who get into these schemes get what they deserve. If they get wiped out, so be it. Their greed is their problem. If the industry needs reformed to protect the little guy, maybe it needs to focus on the people who want nothing to do with this casino and end up losing jobs, etc, because pirates in neckties have no downside to risk. Not the ones that think they are in on a scam and get burned.

29th January 2021, 11:40 AM	#274
BobTheCoward Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 20,435	Originally Posted by theprestige There are people reporting a lot of things on the Internet. For all we know, the entire r/wallstreetbets subreddit is just teenagers and bored housewives LARPing at Wall Street. A lot of people say a lot of things about Hawaii.

29th January 2021, 11:41 AM	#275
trustbutverify Philosopher Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 8,895	Originally Posted by Checkmite No; you're supposed to seriously consider that maybe decidedly-non-amateurs on Reddit "crafted" a perfectly open social media campaign aimed at amateurs on Reddit, for the purpose of facilitating a pump-and-dump scheme. You may be on to something there.
	__________________ "To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength" -Leni Riefenstahl Wollen owns the stage