Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I will add to my position on any future weakness.
As today’s number show, future weakness for that fund is a pretty safe bet.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I will add to my position on any future weakness.
As today’s number show, future weakness for that fund is a pretty safe bet.
Sure Squid. I’ll take your advice. ?
seattle prattle wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Hussman down -2.85% today
maybe it will bounce back, since it has some gamestop stock, right?
Robinhood announces it will allow some trading on their mobile app tomorrow on Gamestop and AMC and they bounced somewhat in after hours trading as a result.
Small time brokers like Robinhood and Webull had to pull meme stocks because the clearinghouse forced them to. Those trades take a couple days to settle on the back-end and the clearinghouse was afraid of holding the most epic bag ever and told them they wouldn't fill orders because margin requirements were nearing like 100%. That also explains why Schwab and TD Ameritrade allowed it to go on - those are actual banks that can manage the margin reqs.
Honestly, I think people are getting way to emotionally invested in this and it's turning into Occupy Wall Street. I have still yet to see actual confirmation of any naked short selling and based on la gente's post earlier, if Melvin was only holding puts then it would be the market makers that oversold options based on their ability to delta hedge with shares.
Having been a long time WSB member, I think it's entirely possible someone (maybe even another market maker) found out about this over exposure and shilled the fvck out of it on WSB, which had already become mostly easily impressed upon teenagers. People are posting and re-posting absolutely embarrassing sh!t and eating up QAnon style fake news - it's obvious the level of basic understanding of even simple market mechanisms is lacking pretty hard. It's become less about GME and more about "market manipulation."
I think it's gonna be sad when it turns out that retail has been taken for a wild ride this whole time, but honestly I don't think they were ever in control to begin with.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Sure Squid. I’ll take your advice. ?
I gave no advice.
Dr. Racket wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
maybe it will bounce back, since it has some gamestop stock, right?
Robinhood announces it will allow some trading on their mobile app tomorrow on Gamestop and AMC and they bounced somewhat in after hours trading as a result.
Small time brokers like Robinhood and Webull had to pull meme stocks because the clearinghouse forced them to. Those trades take a couple days to settle on the back-end and the clearinghouse was afraid of holding the most epic bag ever and told them they wouldn't fill orders because margin requirements were nearing like 100%. That also explains why Schwab and TD Ameritrade allowed it to go on - those are actual banks that can manage the margin reqs.
Honestly, I think people are getting way to emotionally invested in this and it's turning into Occupy Wall Street. I have still yet to see actual confirmation of any naked short selling and based on la gente's post earlier, if Melvin was only holding puts then it would be the market makers that oversold options based on their ability to delta hedge with shares.
Having been a long time WSB member, I think it's entirely possible someone (maybe even another market maker) found out about this over exposure and shilled the fvck out of it on WSB, which had already become mostly easily impressed upon teenagers. People are posting and re-posting absolutely embarrassing sh!t and eating up QAnon style fake news - it's obvious the level of basic understanding of even simple market mechanisms is lacking pretty hard. It's become less about GME and more about "market manipulation."
I think it's gonna be sad when it turns out that retail has been taken for a wild ride this whole time, but honestly I don't think they were ever in control to begin with.
I couldn't agree more.
WHat's kind of disgusting is also how the mainstream press is playing this up along the same angle, mostly because it's a dumb-down easy to understand narrative.
That stuff posted by 'la gente...' last night was fascinating.
It's clearly more complicated than it is being made out to be.
It is interesting though on this debate if this is market manipulation/collusion or pump & dump, and therein being a violation of trading rules, and of course, it's another story if they could do anything about it.
I know on the trading message boards. it is a constant refrain about concerted efforts to bury the shorts.
There's just so freakin' much that isn't known behind the scenes in the markets.
Anyway, things like la gente saying that market makers push up a stock price pre-open after good overnight news because they know no one is going to sell - stuff like that is an eye-opener.
Other than that, the next couple of weeks should be really interesting.
System itself is corrupt, no one should be surprised. Case in point, naturally released on New Year’s Eve:
“On New Year’s Eve, the US Office of Government and Ethics posted the financial disclosure forms submitted by the incoming Biden administration from secretary of state nominee Antony Blinken, director of national intelligence pick Avril Haines, and Yellen. They cover the past two years of their activities. Yellen’s form — rightly or wrongly — raised some eyebrows: It revealed that the former Federal Reserve chair made more than $7 million in speaking fees over that time. The list of those looking for a Yellen appearance includes Wall Street names such as Citi and Citadel and corporations such as Google and Salesforce.”
Peter Boockvar on the topic gets to the heart of the problem:
He partly blames the Federal Reserve’s easy money policies for the spike in speculative activity. Boockvar acknowledges the Fed never intended to help investors get drunk on dangerous trades, but he sees a link between retail investors’ mass migration into the market and the speculative craze created on Reddit and other chat rooms.
“We have to understand that the purpose of essentially free money via zero rates and QE is to encourage risk taking,” Boockvar wrote in his note out. “It is meant to scare money out of a savings account, a CD and/or T-bill and into riskier assets. It thus encourages riskier behavior on purpose.”
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“We have to understand that the purpose of essentially free money via zero rates and QE is to encourage risk taking,” Boockvar wrote in his note out. “It is meant to scare money out of a savings account, a CD and/or T-bill and into riskier assets. It thus encourages riskier behavior on purpose.”
That’s been obvious from the beginning. Economics 101.
You should have bought GME six months ago smarty.
yesterday's conference with Jerome Powell of the Fed was particularly instructive at explaining that keeping interest rates low was primarily targeted at helping main street and those suffering financial and employment hardships, as well as the struggling small businesses, during the downturn in the economy due to the covid virus. I believe the Fed is absolutely right in making this their primary focus and i can only suggest to you that what may or may not be going on with some speculative investing is just a side-show, to the extent that that is even attributable to keeping interest rates low.
He does also comment about the reputed 'bubble' as we said before and you broadly dismissed so i am not about to make that mistake again. :)
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
You should have bought GME six months ago smarty.
Not me.
Powell flat out lies about a variety of topics. Come on, the Fed was on auto pilot to raise rates well before Covid and the economy tanked. It is a phony economy to the core. Cannot handle market interest rates, and this is just the latest example of the negative consequences of Fed policies.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Powell flat out lies about a variety of topics. Come on, the Fed was on auto pilot to raise rates well before Covid and the economy tanked. It is a phony economy to the core. Cannot handle market interest rates, and this is just the latest example of the negative consequences of Fed policies.
Hey, we each gotta get our narrative somewhere, right?
I get mine from the Chair of the Federal Reserve.
You apparently are want to turn to a historically underperforming fund manager who is pinning his hopes on salvation through a Gamestop investment.
Good talking to you, Igy.
I would think you would be concerned about income inequality. Hussmman is, Powell isn’t.
seattle prattle wrote:
yesterday's conference with Jerome Powell of the Fed was particularly instructive at explaining that keeping interest rates low was primarily targeted at helping main street and those suffering financial and employment hardships, as well as the struggling small businesses, during the downturn in the economy due to the covid virus. I believe the Fed is absolutely right in making this their primary focus and i can only suggest to you that what may or may not be going on with some speculative investing is just a side-show, to the extent that that is even attributable to keeping interest rates low.
He does also comment about the reputed 'bubble' as we said before and you broadly dismissed so i am not about to make that mistake again. :)
The problem is that it doesn't really help the portions of Main Street that need help.
It's good for people who own homes because they can re-finance and lower their payment. It helps people who qualify for credit get it cheaper. It helps people take more risks and spend money since it's cheap, and it may help inflation.
The problem is in the widening gap between people who have homes and qualify for credit and those who don't. The past 10 years of ultra low interest rates showed that wealth tended to consolidate around the top and lost velocity before it could get to the lower class.
And what has Hussman done in regards to the issue of income inequality?
I mean besides making his investors a lot poorer?
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I would think you would be concerned about income inequality. Hussmman is, Powell isn’t.
https://i.redd.it/ozzh6wv9d5e61.jpg
Robert Reich is one of the most prolific alt-left fake econ news shills of all time.
Dr. Racket wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
yesterday's conference with Jerome Powell of the Fed was particularly instructive at explaining that keeping interest rates low was primarily targeted at helping main street and those suffering financial and employment hardships, as well as the struggling small businesses, during the downturn in the economy due to the covid virus. I believe the Fed is absolutely right in making this their primary focus and i can only suggest to you that what may or may not be going on with some speculative investing is just a side-show, to the extent that that is even attributable to keeping interest rates low.
He does also comment about the reputed 'bubble' as we said before and you broadly dismissed so i am not about to make that mistake again. :)
The problem is that it doesn't really help the portions of Main Street that need help.
It's good for people who own homes because they can re-finance and lower their payment. It helps people who qualify for credit get it cheaper. It helps people take more risks and spend money since it's cheap, and it may help inflation.
The problem is in the widening gap between people who have homes and qualify for credit and those who don't. The past 10 years of ultra low interest rates showed that wealth tended to consolidate around the top and lost velocity before it could get to the lower class.
The low interest rates help the small businesses and encourages investment and growth, which is clearly needed to breathe some life into a slowing economy, benefitting all, at least for the near term. And the Fed has been preaching loud and clear for many months that it is turning to the congress for further relief packages, and their policies can only do so much.
seattle prattle wrote:
Dr. Racket wrote:
The problem is that it doesn't really help the portions of Main Street that need help.
It's good for people who own homes because they can re-finance and lower their payment. It helps people who qualify for credit get it cheaper. It helps people take more risks and spend money since it's cheap, and it may help inflation.
The problem is in the widening gap between people who have homes and qualify for credit and those who don't. The past 10 years of ultra low interest rates showed that wealth tended to consolidate around the top and lost velocity before it could get to the lower class.
The low interest rates help the small businesses and encourages investment and growth, which is clearly needed to breathe some life into a slowing economy, benefitting all, at least for the near term. And the Fed has been preaching loud and clear for many months that it is turning to the congress for further relief packages, and their policies can only do so much.
The trillion dollars of PPP funds were for small businesses. The loans are laughably easy to get.
Rates are low because there's no reason for them to be high until inflation gets out of control
Dr. Racket wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
The low interest rates help the small businesses and encourages investment and growth, which is clearly needed to breathe some life into a slowing economy, benefitting all, at least for the near term. And the Fed has been preaching loud and clear for many months that it is turning to the congress for further relief packages, and their policies can only do so much.
The trillion dollars of PPP funds were for small businesses. The loans are laughably easy to get.
Rates are low because there's no reason for them to be high until inflation gets out of control
There seems to be widespread acceptance that as much PPP as has already been advanced, yet even more will need to be necessary.
And other different management, the Fed could quite readily be raising interest rates if they thought there wasn't a need to keep them artificially low. In a better economy, that would surely be advisable and prudent.
