The Biden administration (was: The NEW 2020 Election Thread)

[PermissionToLand]

market manipulation is illegal under the Securities and Exchange Act. I know you are not familiar with it, but look it up. From the SEC:

What is market manipulation?
• Intentional or willful conduct designed to deceive or defraud investors by controlling or artificially affecting the price of securities, or
• Intentional interference with the free forces of supply and demand

we can argue all day about RH's defense, but in the end the court will decide.

i know you CAN'T answer investing questions, cause you don't have the knowledge or experience. but that's ok. I made my points, and you are more knowledgeable because of them.

now move on to something you are angry about. something you are more capable of discussing.

I can see you're sore from being exposed. Touched a nerve, huh? No need to get catty.

You've not made an argument that market manipulation occurred here. Do you have a mind reading device to prove that the WSB buyers were not genuinely believers in the strength of GME? If you'd actually done any research (I know, not in your nature, you prefer shooting from the hip based on political assumptions) you might know that the posts on WSB leading up to this were quite earnestly laying out arguments why they felt GME was undervalued.

In the end, the court will decide what is plainly obvious to anyone who is not a political hack like you.

It is literally RIGHT IN THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE AGREEMENT that they reserve the right to restrict buying.   You are a joke. I know you CAN'T answer investing or legal questions, cause you don't have the knowledge or experience. but that's ok. I made my points, and you are more knowledgeable because of them.  

It's interesting that you started out by claiming Biden and Yellen were somehow involved but are now abandoning that and changing your argument entirely because you can't actually back up your claims. Classic "just asking questions" partisan political hackery.

The unearned arrogance of somebody who just pushed several conspiracy theories about stuff like hedge funds colluding with Robinhood, trying to call others uninformed is hilarious.

Now move on to something you are angry about. Something you are more capable of discussing.

[PermissionToLand]

The courts will decide, but.....it doesn't look like anything.

1) RH have a right to suspend trading to cover their margins and shorts. The were short on capital coverage.  The SEC tells them that's exactly what they should do.

2) Their TOS actually specifically tells their users they may suspend certain securities FOR ANY REASON, AT ITS DISCRETION.  The SEC actually outlines these same sort of practices as being acceptable.

3) People suing are basically suing RH for being undercapitalized, and not being clairvoyant enough to determine this type of retail trading spike was going to suddenly happen.  They didn't predict they would have the kind of capital needs that they did and it took them 3 days to raise the additional capital they needed (which I think shows they have a lack of big funding options and commitment options).  Argue that's poor business all you want...but being bad at business (if you think they were) isn't illegal.

Retail investors tried the short squeeze, chose a platform, en masse, that couldn't support the capital requirements for it, and got left in the lurch.

It sucks. 100%.  And maybe there is some improvements of transparency for trade outlets revolving around capitalization and available resources that could help prevent it in the future.

But I just don't see any illegality.  I see conspiracy theories about RH working with hedge funds, to kill the squeeze, but I don't see any actual evidence of it other than accusations. Citadel denies it, and has offered to turn over communications with RH and it's founder to prove it.  And RH explained why they placed the limits, and apparently have the books to prove it.  If that's the case, thats the only defense they need to shit on any other accusations.

I'm a huge supporter of what the retail investors just did to the hedge funds, FYI.  I would have loved to see it continue and for RH (because of the irony) to have been the platform to support it.  It sucks that didn't happen.

Bingo. In summary; Sandy is an uninformed partisan hack who has no clue what he's talking about and is pushing baseless conspiracies just like his preferred political party.

Which reminds me:

Poll: Republicans favor Marjorie Taylor Greene over McConnell, Cheney

https://www.axios.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-liz-cheney-a8f966eb-2a4b-452c-a1f4-61922bd07980.html

She even has a POSITIVE net favorability of +10.

There is no longer any pretending that Republicans in America aren't extremists who have completely divorced themselves from reality. And we are seeing evidence of it right here in this thread.

[PermissionToLand]

it smells of market manipulation. we'd have to believe that at a time when some of the most powerful people on Wall Street were losing BILLIONS in their hedge fund, that it was just a COMPLETE COINCIDENCE that RH shut down trading of certain stocks to the enormous benefit of said hedge fund. 

[jarmo]

Yes, but those terms of agreement are frequently interpreted in different ways by the courts.

Also, ever hear of contra proferentem? if not, look it up.

They should be clear enough that you don't need a court to decide what it means.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Robin Hood (the app) is in the business of making themselves money by (hopefully) making its users money. Just like the companies selling lottery tickets or online casinos. They're not in the business to first and foremost make everyone else rich.

So it's not that weird to think that their main interests are the same as others in the finance business... And you don't even need a conspiracy theory to come to that assumption.






/jarmo

[sandman]

Yes, but those terms of agreement are frequently interpreted in different ways by the courts.

Also, ever hear of contra proferentem? if not, look it up.

They should be clear enough that you don't need a court to decide what it means.

Agree 100%. But as I noted in the actual TOS, it is not clear. and if a court decides they broke their TOS, they will lose. that's what this will come down to. if i had to bet, RH will not lose because this will be tough to prove. but i think there is a chance based on my interpretation of the TOS. we'll see how far this goes.   

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Robin Hood (the app) is in the business of making themselves money by (hopefully) making its users money. Just like the companies selling lottery tickets or online casinos. They're not in the business to first and foremost make everyone else rich.

RH is in the business of providing the best and cheapest access to our free market system. if their users make money, it's better for them for the long term.

companies selling lottery tix? i guess that's an ok analogy. Casinos is not a good one. Casinos need people to lose money. that IS their business. and business is good. 

So it's not that weird to think that their main interests are the same as others in the finance business... And you don't even need a conspiracy theory to come to that assumption.

they don't really have the same interests, and their interests actually conflict at times.

[jarmo]

RH is in the business of providing the best and cheapest access to our free market system. if their users make money, it's better for them for the long term.

I think that's an idealistic way of seeing it. Do they charge you for proving this best and cheapest access?

They wanna provide a service for people while making the biggest possible profit for themselves. Happy customers, more costumers, more income. That's how most business operate right?

companies selling lottery tix? i guess that's an ok analogy. Casinos is not a good one. Casinos need people to lose money. that IS their business. and business is good. 

All of them want to make themselves as much money as possible while offering the customer an idea that you they can/will make a profit/win.... That was the point.

they don't really have the same interests, and their interests actually conflict at times.

Sure, some might make a loss, and they aren't. But it's the same with everyone in the business. Any business. For example, Ford doesn't necessarily make decisions that will benefit GM. But both are in the business of selling as many vehicles as possible. Often a decision that's good for GM, is also good for Ford....

What I mean is that they're somehow all connected, more or less.




/jarmo

[sandman]

RH is in the business of providing the best and cheapest access to our free market system. if their users make money, it's better for them for the long term.

I think that's an idealistic way of seeing it. Do they charge you for proving this best and cheapest access?

NOPE.

[tim_m]

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/biden-will-announce-end-of-us-support-for-offensive-operations-in-yemen.html

'This war has to end' — Biden halts U.S. support for offensive military operations in Yemen

So much for Biden the warmonger.

[jarmo]

NOPE.

You download the app, register, start buying and they take no fee at all from you?

What are they making money on? Ads?

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/biden-will-announce-end-of-us-support-for-offensive-operations-in-yemen.html

'This war has to end' — Biden halts U.S. support for offensive military operations in Yemen

So much for Biden the warmonger.

It's easy to forget the peace loving #45 and what part he played in all that:


The Saudi-led intervention in Yemen had previously enjoyed the backing of former President Donald Trump’s administration.

Trump vetoed a measure in 2019 aimed at ending U.S. military assistance and involvement in Yemen.



/jarmo

[pilferk]

Bingo. In summary; Sandy is an uninformed partisan hack who has no clue what he's talking about and is pushing baseless conspiracies just like his preferred political party.

Again, I ignore the trolls, so.....

But you're right. It's right there in the TOS.  You agree to it in order to use their app and service.  Clearly, "at their discretion" means just that.  Since TOS are individual contracts, they can apply those rules as they see fit.  

Software as a Service (and MMORPGs, for example) have done this since the beginning and it's accepted case law. In fact, TOS and software licensing agreements have been viewed this way in general, in the courts. These types of provisions are individually crafted and universally applied.

And, again, the under capitalization provides pretty good justification for their use of their discretion.

The courts will ultimately decide, but given established IT case law surrounding TOS, I'm pretty sure how they're going to rule.  And you have to really stretch to try to see something illegal, here.  I don't think you're going to find many (any?) courts that are going to make that kind of stretch.  It would establish terrible precedent because it would invalidate years of TOS interpretation in the courts.

[pilferk]

What are they making money on? Ads?

Few different ways.  First of all, they use stagnant/idle cash in customer accounts and lend it out...so interest on that.  They let you trade on margins (aka up to $1k above your account balance, at the lowest level) and I'm pretty sure they charge you interest on the margins (especially at the higher margin levels). They also offer different tiers of access (monthly fee) which increase your margin. Finally, they get kickbacks/rebates from the floor and "market makers" (this is where the Citadel conspiracy theory comes from) that actually execute the trades.  Those small little kickbacks (it's an incredibly small fraction of a penny per dollar traded) rack up on volume.

But here's the thing that will really get you (and makes them a good chunk of their money):   They sell their order flow (and thus customer data) to the 3rd party companies that are actually executing the trades.

https://fortune.com/2020/07/08/robinhood-makes-millions-selling-your-stock-trades-is-that-so-wrong/

It's the social media revenue model, applied to investing.

[jarmo]

So like a bank making money on your money....





/jarmo

[pilferk]

So like a bank making money on your money....


/jarmo

Pretty much.

With a healthy dose of selling their customers data, as well.

[PermissionToLand]

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/04/biden-will-announce-end-of-us-support-for-offensive-operations-in-yemen.html

'This war has to end' — Biden halts U.S. support for offensive military operations in Yemen

So much for Biden the warmonger.

[PermissionToLand]

Bingo. In summary; Sandy is an uninformed partisan hack who has no clue what he's talking about and is pushing baseless conspiracies just like his preferred political party.

Again, I ignore the trolls, so.....

But you're right. It's right there in the TOS.  You agree to it in order to use their app and service.  Clearly, "at their discretion" means just that.  Since TOS are individual contracts, they can apply those rules as they see fit.  

Software as a Service (and MMORPGs, for example) have done this since the beginning and it's accepted case law. In fact, TOS and software licensing agreements have been viewed this way in general, in the courts. These types of provisions are individually crafted and universally applied.

And, again, the under capitalization provides pretty good justification for their use of their discretion.

The courts will ultimately decide, but given established IT case law surrounding TOS, I'm pretty sure how they're going to rule.  And you have to really stretch to try to see something illegal, here.  I don't think you're going to find many (any?) courts that are going to make that kind of stretch.  It would establish terrible precedent because it would invalidate years of TOS interpretation in the courts.

I mean, the idea that the lawyers who wrote up that contract did not know about contra preferentum is just hilariously naive. How easy would it be to just claim they were restricting the buying of a bunch of individuals instead of broadly? I bet you there's also an arbitration clause in that TOS, meaning judgement in the corporation's favor is practically guaranteed.

Edit: Yep, looked it up and sure enough, there's an arbitration clause.

So I believe that nullifies any attempt at class action, right?

[cineater]

3 people in my area have been Federally charged in vandalizing Pelosi's office during the capitol riots.  They've all gone in with their lawyers, turned themselves in and been released on their own recognizance.  Missouri is a republican state.  All the people are white.  Can't help but wonder how different this would have all went down if these folks were black.

[tim_m]

3 people in my area have been Federally charged in vandalizing Pelosi's office during the capitol riots.  They've all gone in with their lawyers, turned themselves in and been released on their own recognizance.  Missouri is a republican state.  All the people are white.  Can't help but wonder how different this would have all went down if these folks were black.

I think we all know the answer to that.

[cineater]

3 people in my area have been Federally charged in vandalizing Pelosi's office during the capitol riots.  They've all gone in with their lawyers, turned themselves in and been released on their own recognizance.  Missouri is a republican state.  All the people are white.  Can't help but wonder how different this would have all went down if these folks were black.

I think we all know the answer to that.

Do the Hispanic people get treated badly in Texas?  I was raised in southern California with "dirty Mexicans" being a popular phrase.  And when I've traveled to states with American Indian populations they were thought badly of.  We were shocked, Indians were extremely cool in our book.  I don't think I really had any contact with black populations until I was a young adult.

[PermissionToLand]

Marjorie Taylor Greene gets standing ovation at closed-door GOP meeting

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-standing-ovation-b1797361.html

Fox News suffers worst ratings in 20 years

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/fox-news-ratings-trump-newsmax-b1798081.html

Newsmax TV scores a ratings win over Fox News for the first time ever

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/08/media/newsmax-fox-news-ratings/index.html

What do these reports tell us? That the Republican party is the party of Qanon, not John McCain. When even Fox News is not extreme enough for them because (most of) their hosts won't outright say the election was rigged, and only go as far as making excuses for people who believe that... they have basically ceased to be a political party anymore. They're a dangerous cult. In order to be a member, you must suspend your disbelief and reject the reality of your eyes and ears. Anyone who steps out of line, as Liz Cheney did, is quickly turned on and pushed out. Hell, they even turned on Pence and chanted "HANG PENCE" at the insurrection.

And there is no pretending that the people who stormed the Capitol do not represent the party when every single signal we've gotten since then has been one of support for the traitors, as shown above, in addition to the explicit 45% support of the insurrection and 78% support of Trump in the aftermath. There has never been a greater threat to democracy, liberty and all that we hold dear in this republic than the current GOP.

I'm relieved to see the Biden administration and congressional dems learning from the Obama years that there is simply no compromising with these extremists. They only understand power and they will hold the country hostage to get what they want. They have no interest in good faith compromise. Their only suggestion in regard to the relief package was "give the struggling American people LESS". They stand for nothing except the enrichment of the owner class.

[jarmo]

Speaking of market manipulation?

Elon Musk tweets about something, and that something becomes more valuable.

What's that?




/jarmo