Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Redditors vs the hedge funds

Seeing this stuff written down in relatively simple terms really brings home how absolutely fucking insane it all is.
The basic concept of derivatives serve a useful function — in principle, they allow for prudent financial management by allowing institutions to instantly rebalance a position and then gradually adjust their underlying holdings on a more sensible timetable. The monster it has become isn’t worth this one use case though. The whole lot needs binning.
 
One thing I don't understand is what's in it for the lenders? They get a hire fee, but if the shorting is successful they also get back a load of worthless shares - how does that side work?

Couple of other things with this:

1) Some owners (pension funds especially) are not buying shares to gain profits from increased prices, they are buying shares to get an income from dividends. They will usually be doing this in something like a FTSE 100 share index which means that the only time they look to sell shares is when a company drops off the bottom of the top 100 companies, and the only time they buy shares is when a company enters the top 100 companies. What this means is that they will always buy/sell at the lowest price in that bracket. As the price of the stock market rises over long term periods, they are anticipating always being able to sell shares at about the same or a slightly higher price than they bought them for - essentially they are just swapping shares from one company to another. I assume that their rental agreement allows them to demand the return of shares that they want to sell, I know this is possible.
Short sellers may well be looking at short term price changes and trying to do whatever the short selling version of "buy the dip" is. They think the price is going to fall in the short term - doesn't mean they think the company will go bust or the shares will become worthless. They just see something which makes them think there'll be a price drop in the near future. They might even think that long term the price will rise but it doesn't matter because they are in it for the short term.

2) The owner might disagree with the short seller and think the share price is going to rise, not fall. In this case renting out the shares is just pure profit from them. Perhaps they get it right, perhaps they get it wrong. In any case, if they are wrong they'd be losing money on the sale of the shares anyway, this way they get to hedge their bet and earn some money if the share price collapses.
 
Just to add to Tom’s excellent explanation:

One reason that the redditors are so pissed off is that once you have naked shorted a stock — ie rented it with the promise to buy it later at market price and immediately sell it for a given price — you have an incentive to try to actively drive down the price of that stock. This isn’t illegal.

So if I short the GameStop share, I then start loads of rumours about how GameStop are useless and failures and about to go out of business. This lowers the price of the share and I win. It also, however, can kill GameStop, even though they’ve done nothing. If there is enough perception that you are unviable as a business, you become unviable.

That’s the source of the anger— hedge funds shorting stock and then actively trying to destroy the shorted companies in order to yield profit.
Are there any hedge funds doing this for the common good, or are they all just assholes? (e.g shorting big oil conglomerates and then starting 'rumours' of an impending climate disaster and how oil companies are useless etc.)
 
Are there any hedge funds doing this for the common good, or are they all just assholes? (e.g shorting big oil conglomerates and then starting 'rumours' of an impending climate disaster and how oil companies are useless etc.)
I certainly don’t think any are doing it for the common good. At best, there is some common good served by accident.
 
The smartest people on the planet come up with these mechanisms.imagine if that intelligence could be put to good use

Funny you should say this, because the finance and banking sectors actually really have been poaching talent from STEM fields, leveraging the fact that big commercial banks can afford to pay better than universities or even commercial R&D.

Cancerous.
 
Funny you should say this, because the finance and banking sectors actually really have been poaching talent from STEM fields, leveraging the fact that big commercial banks can afford to pay better than universities or even commercial R&D.
Cancerous.
yup happened to my cousin - he's by far the most academic person in my family, he got to teaching string theory in an eastern european university. his pay covered a bedsit, which wasnt going to fly when he had kids. he had to quit his passion (physics) and now does "something" in banking, god knows what. he's great at maths.
its a vampire business on every level
 
I can’t think of anybody who did a maths degree and then got sucked into the finance industry.
 
Funny you should say this, because the finance and banking sectors actually really have been poaching talent from STEM fields, leveraging the fact that big commercial banks can afford to pay better than universities or even commercial R&D.

Cancerous.
Yep, it's a big problem.
 
I know lots of software engineers that go and work for banks, which is not surprising since they pay about double what I get. Most of them don't stick at it for very long though because it's not a nice place to be - horrible culture but also boring, highly restrictive work. Look at the ancient computer but do not touch it.
 
Couple of other things with this:

1) Some owners (pension funds especially) are not buying shares to gain profits from increased prices, they are buying shares to get an income from dividends. They will usually be doing this in something like a FTSE 100 share index which means that the only time they look to sell shares is when a company drops off the bottom of the top 100 companies, and the only time they buy shares is when a company enters the top 100 companies. What this means is that they will always buy/sell at the lowest price in that bracket. As the price of the stock market rises over long term periods, they are anticipating always being able to sell shares at about the same or a slightly higher price than they bought them for - essentially they are just swapping shares from one company to another. I assume that their rental agreement allows them to demand the return of shares that they want to sell, I know this is possible.
Short sellers may well be looking at short term price changes and trying to do whatever the short selling version of "buy the dip" is. They think the price is going to fall in the short term - doesn't mean they think the company will go bust or the shares will become worthless. They just see something which makes them think there'll be a price drop in the near future. They might even think that long term the price will rise but it doesn't matter because they are in it for the short term.

2) The owner might disagree with the short seller and think the share price is going to rise, not fall. In this case renting out the shares is just pure profit from them. Perhaps they get it right, perhaps they get it wrong. In any case, if they are wrong they'd be losing money on the sale of the shares anyway, this way they get to hedge their bet and earn some money if the share price collapses.

One thing I don't understand is what's in it for the lenders? They get a hire fee, but if the shorting is successful they also get back a load of worthless shares - how does that side work?

I suppose that if a company held too many shares to sell at one time, and expected the price to fall, they could lend some to short sellers, sell as much as possible and take the rental fees against the loss on the remaining shares?
 
Funny you should say this, because the finance and banking sectors actually really have been poaching talent from STEM fields, leveraging the fact that big commercial banks can afford to pay better than universities or even commercial R&D.

Cancerous.
Then again the whole structure of university research ensures that the vast majority of PhD graduates will not be able to make a career of it. Simply look at the number of STEM PhD graduates vs number of faculty positions. And while I agree that no rationally organized society would plow resources into the finance industry, the existence of high paid finance jobs as a fallback is also a reason that some people will be prepared to take a punt at a PhD + research career.
 
Then again the whole structure of university research ensures that the vast majority of PhD graduates will not be able to make a career of it. Simply look at the number of STEM PhD graduates vs number of faculty positions. And while I agree that no rationally organized society would plow resources into the finance industry, the existence of high paid finance jobs as a fallback is also a reason that some people will be prepared to take a punt at a PhD + research career.

I think commercial STEM research and development also suffers because of this kind of shit. I think designing better machinery and industrial processes does a whole lot more good for society than any amount of banking shenanigans.
 
I picked up a GME share in February after watching the initial January spike, cost me about £60, leaving it untouched to see what happens.

I'd have only put that and more in a fruit machine at the pub, by comparison this provides days/weeks/months of entertainment vs 10 mins.
 
big week last week and went ballistic today


Opera Snapshot_2021-03-10_194005_www.google.com.png

zoom in though and it hit $350 today - thats where it hit in the original newsworthy peak

Opera Snapshot_2021-03-10_194414_www.google.com.png


I don't know the details but it sounds like trading was stopped multiple times today?
The crash from 350 to 200 was described by some as a desperate manipulation by hedges?
I havent looked closely into that - only just had a peak.
If anyone has more details please post.
 
The AMC one has gone up too but BB hasn't. Both of these were the reddit fallback options last time but I'm not following the subreddit to know what's going on this time. I remember they were less interested in Blackberry than AMC and by the end some people were suspecting the BB hype had been a ruse (like the attempts to hype up silver on the subreddit)
 
Back
Top Bottom