News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility by zamalek on Friday January 29, 2021 @01:37PM (#25960703)
Shorting more than 100% of the stock is excessive and irresponsible. That figure is not a conspiracy theory: it is public information that the SEC releases monthly.

Whether hedge fund managers did make a call to their buddies is not the only thing in question here (although the SEC will surely determine the truth). Shorting a stock drives the price down and, while this is no less legal than buying a stock, the question is whether shorting 136% of the stock counts as outright manipulation. Reddit kids have done nothing but pop an artificial bubble, they did not participate in manipulation; as the hedge fund managers and their buddies claim.

> QAnon

I have yet to see the baby cookbook or other evidence of their ridiculous claims.

Re:Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility by esoterica on Friday January 29, 2021 @01:56PM (#25960895)
The parent commenter claimed that brokerages were colluding to drive the price of GME down to benefits the shorts. That is QAnon-level evidence-free conspiracy theorizing. The clearing houses were demanding more collateral and brokerages couldn't afford or didn't want to put it up.

> whether shorting 136% of the stock counts as outright manipulation

I refer you to the snarky top comment about how all the Dunning-Kruger victims who claim manipulation do not actually know what manipulation is. Shorting a stock is not manipulation and neither is lots of people deciding to short a stock. 136% of the stock is shorted because a lot of people were shorting it, not because Some Guy decided to single-handedly short 136% of the float.

> Reddit kids have done nothing but pop an artificial bubble

So GameStop was an artificial bubble at $10 but not at $500? Really?

Re:Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility by beagle3 on Friday January 29, 2021 @03:25PM (#25961962)
IB claimed to have hiked margin to 100% which is a reasonable response. However, I have heard from many sources that they in fact rejected buy orders even with cash - which, if true, and I have every reason to believe so, makes any explanation about margins and technical reasons seem ridiculous.

There is surely some deeper non public reason that every single retail broker - but no single institutional broker - stopped accepting GME buys but kept honoring sells. It might or might not be a call from hedge fund buddies, but it is still likely illegal.

When I was working at a hedge fund, I once executed a few hundred mil notional on a supposedly anonymous exchange, taking advantage of an obvious counterparty mistake.

Within 10 minutes, I got a call from said counterparty, telling me that next time I do that, they’ll make sure I’m kicked off the exchange.

Anonymous my ass. Legal my ass. And yet, it happened - I’m sure I wasn’t the first or the last - the other side kept making those mistakes. I stopped taking advantage of them. This kind of behavior is rampant in Wall Street. Only difference is it has been done now in the open, very visibly, and with thousands - perhaps tens of thousands - identifiable victims.

Re:Statement of SEC Regarding Recent Market Volatility by zamalek on Friday January 29, 2021 @02:11PM (#25961071)
> So GameStop was an artificial bubble at $10 but not at $500? Really?

Did I claim that? I wouldn't touch GME with a barge pole.