Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Bloomberg: How WallStreetBets Pushed GameStop Shares to the Moon


No Excuses

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Bonez3 said:

Jeez, I was just asking a question... for a friend

I realize it reads snarky but he’s right. And he’s trying to be helpful. 
 

Options trading isnt bad if done right but you can absolutely get savaged doing it wrong 

 

and not understanding that the financial obligation of being wrong in a short position is potentially limitless is part of it 

 

It’s honestly why I ever looked into it more. I know you’re supposed to do it so that doesn’t happen. But it’s be just like me to make that mistake and I just don’t need that problem 

 

Ps @techboycarries his anti-stock-trading soap box with him everywhere he goes but he knows what he’s talking about ;) 

Edited by tshile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tshile said:

I realize it reads snarky but he’s right. And he’s trying to be helpful. 
 

Options trading isnt bad if done right but you can absolutely get savaged doing it wrong 

 

and not understanding that the financial obligation of being wrong in a short position is potentially limitless is part of it 

 

It’s honestly why I ever looked into it more. I know you’re supposed to do it so that doesn’t happen. But it’s be just like me to make that mistake and I just don’t need that problem 

I definitely appreciate his honest and surely very prudent advice. I was simply curious in general, I shouldn't even post hello in this thread for the most part. But, like the rest of America I'm looking into Stock Market for Dummies. 

 

Anyway, you want it all to crash, let me bet dollar #1. I can guarantee thats when the bubble bursts

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tshile said:

How do you do an upside down rocket?

 

CAUSE THATS THE TRAJECTORY OF MY NOKIA STOCK

THANKS REDDIT
 

160 ROCKETS STRAIGHT INTO THE GROUND


Nokia was always a faker. I don’t know why people thought it was anything other than a quick buck. I’m kinda surprised that AMC held on today and that gives me hope for next week. BB is questionable. They’re doing... things, but it’s been tough to gauge interest. At least, with AMC, people will start going to the movies at some point. Might not be this year. Might not be next. If they can stay in business then they’ll make money eventually.

 

GME is interesting. People are expecting a big pop. I am, but I’m also concerned that the shorts will be able to cover themselves in a way that eliminates a major squeeze and it’s just level and then fizzles as people lose interest. We have until next Friday to make GME pop at MAX. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

Maybe I'm way off but it occurs to me that a large union (such as a real Chicago PD) should be chasing the more stable return rates rather than exposing itself to the whims of the rates seen occasionally with hedge funds. 

 

I guess I'm not educated enough on the processes but I always thought these largest retirement systems were more regulated and watched (and more conservative in their investments).

 

Thx for the info guys.

 

They can do what CALPERS  did and just get the taxpayers to bail them out when their investments don't pay out like they expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, techboy said:

 

Okay, look... Everyone knows that my primary point in these threads is that active trading is a bad idea. And in terms of optimal behavior, it is.

 

But if you're going to do it anyway (and I have no illusions as to the power of the research to persuade everyone otherwise), Robinhood is about the worst way to go about it, and not just because of this, or their gamification of their platform similarl to casinos or microtransaction based games.

 

The biggest problem is that their "free" can actually be quite expensive, because they're not a charity... They make their money in a variety of ways, one of which is by how they route trade executions. That's not a big deal for someone like me, who makes two or three trades a year, but it can add up if you're going to be jumping in and out of positions.

 

That's the biggest thing that bothers me about Robinhood and what's been going on... Democratization is cool, but I'm seeing a lot of people playing with things they don't fully understand. Other examples would be margins, options, or currency, which is a BRUTAL world.

 

If you're going to trade, you need to do due diligence about things like trade execution, not look for fun platforms.

 

All that out if the way, I've heard good things about Interactive Brokers if this is really what you want to do, but again, I'm not an active trader, so due diligence is key.

 

This is how I think about most of this too.  I have always avoided trading individual stocks.  I was enough of a geek that I was reading books on efficient market theory in my teens.  I really dislike the idea of shorting stocks, and I also think people are being really stupid if they are investing in "meme stocks" based on what they read on reddit.  As much as I dislike these things, I think people should be allowed to make their own decisions, and accept the consequences of their choices.

 

As for Robinhood, I can understand how people see their behavior in stopping people from buying GME as rigging the game in favor of the elite.  However, I can also see reasons they might do that which have nothing to do with that characterization.

 

We have seen a lot of financial people brought in front of congress and being told they should be put in jail for loaning too much money to people for school or houses that they should have known was too much for " the little guy" to pay back.

 

If I am making decisions at Robinhood, I would feel fairly uncomfortable with the idea of letting massive numbers of people who have no idea what they are doing spend their savings buying a stock that everyone knows is going to crash at some point in the near future.  If you read through the reddit discussions on this, you see acknowledgment from so many people that they don't understand what they are doing.

 

If Robinhood had not restricted trading.  How do we think someone like AOC would have treated them when they are called to congress to explain why they allowed people that had no idea what they were doing when buying a stock that everyone on Wall Street knew was going to crash in the near future.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Springfield said:


Nokia was always a faker. I don’t know why people thought it was anything other than a quick buck. I’m kinda surprised that AMC held on today and that gives me hope for next week. BB is questionable. They’re doing... things, but it’s been tough to gauge interest. At least, with AMC, people will start going to the movies at some point. Might not be this year. Might not be next. If they can stay in business then they’ll make money eventually.

 

GME is interesting. People are expecting a big pop. I am, but I’m also concerned that the shorts will be able to cover themselves in a way that eliminates a major squeeze and it’s just level and then fizzles as people lose interest. We have until next Friday to make GME pop at MAX. 

 

 

what the hell are you talking about??   Nokia is one of 3 firms in the world that supplies backbone network equipment ... one of the other 2 is an opaque firm that is partially owned by the chinese govt, and possibly (probably) too compromised to be a reliable intelligence risk....

 

nokia is the flash in the pan??   of the three of those???

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DCSaints_fan said:

 

They can do what CALPERS  did and just get the taxpayers to bail them out when their investments don't pay out like they expected.

 

Honestly, what bailout are your speaking of? 😕

 

Fwiw, I've paid 5-8% of my salary pretax each paycheck for almost 20 years into Calpers. As have most state employees. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mcsluggo said:

 

 

what the hell are you talking about??   Nokia is one of 3 firms in the world that supplies backbone network equipment ... one of the other 2 is an opaque firm that is partially owned by the chinese govt, and possibly (probably) too compromised to be a reliable intelligence risk....

 

nokia is the flash in the pan??   of the three of those???


There you have it. NOK to the moon! This is the way.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Honestly, what bailout are your speaking of? 😕

 

Fwiw, I've paid 5-8% of my salary pretax each paycheck for almost 20 years into Calpers. As have most state employees. 

 

They why does CA need to give them $7 billion/year?

 

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-worker/article229329509.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DCSaints_fan said:

 

They why does CA need to give them $7 billion/year?

 

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/the-state-worker/article229329509.html

 

Did you read the almost 2 year old article? 

 

The one that says, "CalPERS on Tuesday advanced a scheduled increase in employer contribution ratesCalPERS on Tuesday advanced a scheduled increase in employer contribution rates, bringing the state’s total bill for the 2019-2020 budget year to about $7 billion. That money comes out of taxes and fees collected by the state and is part of the compensation promised to state workers." in the second paragraph? 

 

I'm still at a loss how this was a tax payer bailout? Looks to me that it was scheduled increased payments by the state. As I recall from that time period, this lines up with when I had to start kicking in extra $s to fund retiree healthcare costs in my monthly paycheck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Did you read the almost 2 year old article? 

 

The one that says, "CalPERS on Tuesday advanced a scheduled increase in employer contribution ratesCalPERS on Tuesday advanced a scheduled increase in employer contribution rates, bringing the state’s total bill for the 2019-2020 budget year to about $7 billion. That money comes out of taxes and fees collected by the state and is part of the compensation promised to state workers." in the second paragraph? 

 

I'm still at a loss how this was a tax payer bailout? Looks to me that it was scheduled increased payments by the state. As I recall from that time period, this lines up with when I had to start kicking in extra $s to fund retiree healthcare costs in my monthly paycheck. 

 

 

Quote

CalPERS on Tuesday advanced a scheduled increase in employer contribution rates, bringing the state’s total bill for the 2019-2020 budget year to about $7 billion. That money comes out of taxes and fees collected by the state and is part of the compensation promised to state workers.

 

 

That is, California taxpayers are giving the pension fund $7 billion per year.  

 

They are supposed to "correct" this by requiring more from current workers.   Historically CalPERS has been overly optimistic on the yearly ROI for its investments    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CalPERS

 

 

Quote

As of 2018, the agency has $360 billion in assets, and is underfunded by an estimated $150 billion, with current assets below 70% of necessary to provide for liabilities.[10][11] In an effort to reduce this shortfall, at the end of 2016 the board lowered their expected annual rate of return on investments from 7.5% to 7.0%, increasing the costs California cities must pay toward their workers' pensions.[12]

 

 

 

Edited by DCSaints_fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DCSaints_fan said:

 

They are supposed to "correct" this by requiring more from current workers.   Historically CalPERS has been overly optimistic on the yearly ROI for its investments    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CalPERS

 

And I'm telling you they did. My mandatory pension contribution and a new additional mandatory contribution to fund retiree healthcare costs went up/were added in July 2019. Additionally, it doesn't say taxpayer $s in that original SacBee article. Rather, it says taxes and fees collected by the State. 

Edited by The Evil Genius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...