Posted on 01/28/2021 8:13:12 PM PST by SeekAndFind
“This, simple conversation narrative that even a moron like me understands.”
Thanks, but most likely your are very intelligent. You’ve just been treated “like a mushroom” in regards to how it really happened.
So, we're on the same page, just maybe not on the same paragraph.
The term "creative destruction" gets thrown around a lot (always as a good thing), but maybe we should take a closer look to determine if it is ALWAYS good.
GameStop was not on its last leg. Just because the game market is moving from physical media to downloads doesn't mean GameStop couldn't have pivoted also. After all, Netflix went from a renter of DVDs to a streaming service.
But, once GameStop got shorted, the die was cast. They were going out of business, the shorters would make sure of that.
And that's my problem. When investors have a vested interest in the business failing, something's wrong with the system.
“ So, we’re on the same page, just maybe not on the same paragraph.”
An excellent observation.
So long as the stock market does not materially interfere in standard, long-term stock investments, it is pretty much doing what it was designed to do.
If you evaluate a company, and think it has good prospects, and are correct, and buy the stock, and hold it, nothing done by short-sellers, reddit anarchists, or idiot day-traders will really matter.
The key is to never get in a position where you are forced to buy or sell.
THe “sell and disparagement” campaign is illegal, and the SEC has, and does, and always will, go after that with vengeance.
Assuming the disparagement is false. If it is truthful statements, that is called “people warning owners of a company that the company sucks and is not worth what they think it is”.
FOr an analogy, imagine going after and prosecuting people who told their friends and family to stop spending hundreds of dollars for beanie babies, because the whole thing was a giant scam?
Would you also make it illegal for people who own a stock to sell it at a loss if they think it is going to tank?
Or are you only mad if someone else who doesn’t own the stock does it?
Because it is basically the same thing. And everybody can ignore the short sellers if they want — the Gamestop thing shows that.
THe reason short sellers often “succeed” is that people are idiots who hang onto stocks they already own way past the time they should sell — often because institutions encourage them to do so, because it helps rich people.
Short selling is one of the few ways informed people can tell the market “you are all a bunch of idiots, and this stock is a dog”.
I’m all for regulating it, making sure people don’t lie about a company to make it’s stock drop. We should be watching carefully for example for short sellers using social media to either pump up, or talk down, a stock with false narratives.
Interestingly, I read that it is extremely difficult to do short selling with stock you own, because it is a way to avoid taxes. If you own a stock for 5 months, and think it is ready to tank, but you don’t want to pay short-term capital gains, you borrow someone else’s stock, and short-sell it. IN a couple of months, you can deliver your shares to them, and you’ve got long-term gains instead of short-term.
See: “Covered puts and calls”.
That should not be legal.
Is there some site that will still let you buy GameStop and the others?
I quoted this article in a post I made on another board.
http://www.ballparkguys.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=615030#Post615030
I read that robinhood let people buy again. Idk about etrade and the others
What happened in the recent GA runoff election? Did Kelly believe the Dominion machines would pick her over the dems or did the dems have several other avenues of cheating that overtook Dominion.
No one ever said the people who own and run hedge funds are stupid or fail to get top of the line legal advice. However how much imagination does it take to identify some issue with a company and then begin surretitpously an opinion narrative that is retold and exargerated in the form of tips anf “If I were you” advice from “knowlegable” brokers and investment counsellors to nervous investors. Its not that hard to start a snowball rolling down a hill, but its very hard to legally prove that the avalanche was started by people who planned to maliciously drive the market for their own purposes. Initially the people who sold their stock are grateful to the brokers and investment counsellors who advised themto sell a stock that declined. They don’t even know that they were fleeced.
My WAG is that “their elite interests” were better served with the Democrats in power so she took one for the team.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.