Any one else's Questrade app just struggling lately? Taking forevor to sign in, freezing/crashing, charts not loading.... good thing im not a huge day trader or I would be shopping elsewhere.
The web-based version has been working fine for me.
This whole situation is bonkers. When you go onto reddit, I find it’s misinformation after misinformation, with WSB becoming such an echo chamber that it’s allowing social justice to run amok, when right now, there’s a few logically-sound reasons for Robinhood’s closings of certain stocks. To me, this feels a little similar to the online chatter of election-fraud, but time it’s affecting wallstreet. People are allowing their emotions to be throttled and amplified, and I think this is going to hurt a lot of people in the end. In order for there to be a “conspiracy”, the guilt of proof is on you to confirm the conspiracy; trying to tie loose ends doesn’t cut it.
Robinhood Markets, the trading app that’s popular with investors behind this month’s wildest stock swings, has drawn down some of its bank credit lines to ensure it has enough cash to clear trades, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
Last edited by TherapyforGlencross; 01-29-2021 at 07:28 AM.
This whole situation is bonkers. When you go onto reddit, I find it’s misinformation after misinformation, with WSB becoming such an echo chamber that it’s allowing social justice to run amok, when right now, there’s a few logically-sound reasons for Robinhood’s closings of certain stocks. To me, this feels a little similar to the online chatter of election-fraud, but time it’s affecting wallstreet. People are allowing their emotions to be throttled and amplified, and I think this is going to hurt a lot of people in the end. In order for there to be a “conspiracy”, the guilt of proof is on you to confirm the conspiracy; trying to tie loose ends doesn’t cut it.
How so? The clearing fund is affected by volatility and thus the DTC is requiring high collateral to buy shares of GME. Which, by the sounds of it, Robinhood might not have.
It could very well be Robinhood sticking it to the common man, but I don’t think we can’t make assumptions yet. And until there’s actual evidence of it, I’m unwilling to entertain it.
Edit: I might be missing a key point, please point it out if so, I’m always happy to learn something new
Edit: maybe my previous post was unclear. “As an example” was meant as: “Here’s an example of a logical possibility of why Robinhood denied the buying of gme.”
Last edited by TherapyforGlencross; 01-29-2021 at 08:06 AM.
They didn't have the cash to put up the fees to clear the trades. It makes perfect sense for RH to limit those trades to maintain their financial obligations.
Selling would not be subject to those fees and would allow their customers to recover their capital of they wanted it.
I don't think there is a massive conspiracy here.
Selling also reduces their net exposure, which reduces their risk position.
The entire process is risk management
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
In a non-WSB discussion, has a SPAC vote like AMCI ever failed? It seems like it'd be really counterproductive to shareholder value to reject this deal.
• 5 hockey sticks cost $100. The Edmonton Oilers have 5 hockey sticks. The Calgary Flames ask to borrow the 5 hockey sticks for a bit, but instead sell them. Thinking the price will go down, they plan to buy five hockey sticks back later for less, give them back to the Oilers, and make a profit.
• All the teams in the North Division notice what the Flames are doing, and decide to buy up all the hockey sticks on the market, driving up the price. Now the Flames have no choice but to buy back the sticks from the other teams in order to return what they borrowed. And if the other teams stick together, the Flames will be forced to pay a much higher price.
In a non-WSB discussion, has a SPAC vote like AMCI ever failed? It seems like it'd be really counterproductive to shareholder value to reject this deal.
Yes, SPAC deals regularly fail. Or at least they used to before say 3 months ago.
Not on the vote though. They fail because too many people redeem and there isn't enough money left in trust for the deal to be worth it for the target company.
So the number one predictor is what the share price of the spac is. Because if its greater than the trust value (usually $10 and change) then its not rational to redeem, you would just sell instead.
Historically predicting this has been down to the penny. Like, "based on current t bill rates trust value should be $10.27, it's holding at $10.28 so the deal should pass."
Now that $10 in cash minus fees is worth $14 or so, they'll all pass.
Predicting whether it will pass used to be lucrative for me, because you could buy cheap warrants if the deal was going to pass and the market thought it wouldn't. I'm basically out of SPACs now though other than some low risk options trades to capture unreasonable levels of volatility.
Last edited by bizaro86; 01-29-2021 at 08:39 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to bizaro86 For This Useful Post:
