• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Investment Thread - For all your money needs

Louis Gossett Jr said:
Basically short selling would be fine in a vacuum if nobody knew you shorted the company. Instead its big company X shorted the company, well shit things must really be bad, thats the downward pressure.
Click to expand...

Short positions are not disclosed on 13-Fs. That is actually something that this whole situation could change... There is a big push for transparency of short positions.

The investors that trumpet their short positions are generally hacks.
 
I can't imagine trying to model the information that comes out of WSB since a lot is just incoherent nonsense.
 
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
I can't imagine trying to model the information that comes out of WSB since a lot is just incoherent nonsense.
Click to expand...

"I am betting my mortgage on this failing business and holding until I see them cry. I like the stock, don't listen to me i'm r-worded i'm not a financial advisor"
 
DeaconBrews said:
I don't think a company should be shorted 136%, and if it is allowed the people shorting it should be allowed to get caught with their pants down.
Click to expand...

yep. and if let played out, i think it would be a lesson for institutional investors that would prevent irresponsible naked shorting like that in the future. and those taking that risk are likely to be punished as we just saw.
 
I didn't even think about the normal institutions that own way more shares than the dumbasses on WSB. WSB taking down the suits by checks notes, earning Blackrock over 2 billion dollars, and a guy that dealt in subprime autoloans 500 million.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
perhaps not, but you also haven't even tried

you've said "short sellers do a lot of research" and "companies decided to become public and knew what they were getting into"

I'm just trying to understand the theoretical defense of naked shorts and how they, theoretically, improve the material conditions of the public at-large -- I'm having a hard time connecting the dots between the paper money gains of a successful naked short and the material gains in reality

especially in a world where over 100% of the float can be shorted -- that, at least, deserves some regulation, no?
Click to expand...

I haven't tried mostly because I think it is related to politics and I try to stay away from that on here. I'm largely a free market guy. It's difficult for me to bridge the gap you're talking about between paper money gains and material gains in reality. Material gains in reality feels a little touchy-feely, but I am sure there is an argument for smarter people to make that would address that.

I don't know the answer to your regulation question. But I see two things happening right now, and I'm OK with both of them. You had an initial short squeeze that really punished shorts on GME... I'm fine with that. Short selling is risky and seeing some of these hedge funds get their faces ripped off should be helpful in that it illustrates the risk involved. The other thing, however, is a Ponzi scheme where retail investors are all piling into GME in order to artificially inflate the stock price... That is not going to end well for retail investors.

There are also the issues with brokers like Robinhood trying to stay solvent. It's kind of what I posted above... Retail investors want "free" trading, but there are costs involved with trading and somebody is going to pay those. Usually it is through payment for order flow and regulators have been supportive of that because it means lowers prices for consumers. Not sure what comes of that in the short term. Probably nothing, aside from a lot of media hype about screwing the little guy without understanding how these things actually work.
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
I didn't even think about the normal institutions that own way more shares than the dumbasses on WSB. WSB taking down the suits by checks notes, earning Blackrock over 2 billion dollars, and a guy that dealt in subprime autoloans 500 million.
Click to expand...

 
Yeah I assume all those companies are the ones fueling the actual selling of shares since they need to come from somewhere for the WSB dumb dumbs to buy. So instead of holding to the moon they hold until someone that just put their rent on a credit card buys GME for 300 dollars a share.
 
DeacsATS said:
I haven't tried mostly because I think it is related to politics and I try to stay away from that on here. I'm largely a free market guy. It's difficult for me to bridge the gap you're talking about between paper money gains and material gains in reality. Material gains in reality feels a little touchy-feely, but I am sure there is an argument for smarter people to make that would address that.

I don't know the answer to your regulation question. But I see two things happening right now, and I'm OK with both of them. You had an initial short squeeze that really punished shorts on GME... I'm fine with that. Short selling is risky and seeing some of these hedge funds get their faces ripped off should be helpful in that it illustrates the risk involved. The other thing, however, is a Ponzi scheme where retail investors are all piling into GME in order to artificially inflate the stock price... That is not going to end well for retail investors.

There are also the issues with brokers like Robinhood trying to stay solvent. It's kind of what I posted above... Retail investors want "free" trading, but there are costs involved with trading and somebody is going to pay those. Usually it is through payment for order flow and regulators have been supportive of that because it means lowers prices for consumers. Not sure what comes of that in the short term. Probably nothing, aside from a lot of media hype about screwing the little guy without understanding how these things actually work.
Click to expand...

it's cool -- we may have reached an impasse

but I'm trying to keep politics out of it -- that's my whole point in asking you as a "free market guy" -- what's the free market rationale for naked shorts?

since I first asked the question I've done some googling and found some defenses, so I think I follow the theory that naked shorting provides liquidity and sharpens efficiencies in markets


if connecting paper gains to material gains seems touchy-feely then I guess I don't know what to say -- what is even the point of an economic system if not to serve humankind? the "economy" doesn't just exist for its own sake
 
on a whim i went YOLO on BB and it hasn't moved at all. when does the money start pouring in?
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
it's cool -- we may have reached an impasse

but I'm trying to keep politics out of it -- that's my whole point in asking you as a "free market guy" -- what's the free market rationale for naked shorts?

since I first asked the question I've done some googling and found some defenses, so I think I follow the theory that naked shorting provides liquidity and sharpens efficiencies in markets


if connecting paper gains to material gains seems touchy-feely then I guess I don't know what to say -- what is even the point of an economic system if not to serve humankind? the "economy" doesn't just exist for its own sake
Click to expand...

When I say short selling provides liquidity and helps to make the market more efficient, I doubt that satiates your desire to tie it to benefits in the everyday economy. That was kind of my point, anyway.
 
Question from a novice:

So is what we're looking at now a game of chicken between GME holders and the shorters who are delaying returning the stock? Either the holders panic sell and the shorters are able to cover their positions at a survivable loss or the shorters can't ride the fees and are forced to fulfill their contracts, causing the value to skyrocket?
 
ipitytheblue said:
Question from a novice:

So is what we're looking at now a game of chicken between GME holders and the shorters who are delaying returning the stock? Either the holders panic sell and the shorters are able to cover their positions at a survivable loss or the shorters can't ride the fees and are forced to fulfill their contracts, causing the value to skyrocket?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that is pretty accurate. There is definitely an element of a retail Ponzi scheme here, as well... But it seems like the short interest is still pretty high (tough to get real-time data on that).
 
I'd think all the recent media coverage really helps the holders' position. If more and more of GME is bought up by committed holders, the shorters are fucked...
 
wtf

hXVAd6M.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top