Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Gamestop stock situation - anyone else in on this?


KSpan
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Happy Panther said:

My question is is it sustainable? It doesn't seem like it but this could represent a watershed event in how trading is done. 

I think once the mob realizes paper gains are paper gains until you sell this will crash. 

That's the beauty of the WSB degenerates...they already know this and the majority of them don't care. To many of them this is a kamikaze mission. 

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Khyber53 said:

Stocks outside of buy and hold is just a big monetary game of hot potato. Sooner or later the music stops and you get burned. 

Maybe this is really a good thing to happen to the market.

This is definitely a trip to the stock casino. At the moment though we're winning big and the house isn't happy about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, KSpan said:

And back up to over 300 a bit ago.. this is crazy. Also major BS that brokers were (are still?) shutting off buying.

I am reading that Robinhood essentially rents space from Citadel and Citadel said they won't allow buying of GME.

Also I bought a share of GME on Ameritrade today when it was reported they were blocking GME buys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KSpan said:

This is definitely a trip to the stock casino. At the moment though we're winning big and the house isn't happy about it.

The house always wins in the end. Vegas wasn't built on winners.

 

In all honesty, though, this is a good thing. A group of minor, wee minor, players got involved together to push the game in their favor and the big money players never saw it coming and didn't understand it when it did. Here's why it is good: Our system isn't rigged.

That's right, our system isn't rigged. It does, however, have a byzantine set of rules, opportunities and pitfalls that have come to be exploited by those who have the money to fund massive research not just in companies and investment vehicles, but to research the underlying math, laws and game theory (heck even chaos theory) to get every edge possible. They then have the funding at hand to make massive investments where their profits are just pennies per unit, but create ongoing profits. Those moves and manipulations use billions to make millions every day creating virtual money machines.

Moves like the Gamestop/AMC one can put a quake in the market. Nothing as financially devastating as the mortgage meltdown (and yeah, those big funds were the movers behind that), but something to make them take stock (no pun intended).

Shake 'em up. Run a couple of the bad ones into the ground. It's sometimes important to harpoon a whale or two.

 

Edited by Khyber53
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Happy Panther said:

I am reading that Robinhood essentially rents space from Citadel and Citadel said they won't allow buying of GME.

Also I bought a share of GME on Ameritrade today when it was reported they were blocking GME buys.

Hold until Tuesday or Wednesday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
    • adamantium? adam? adam thielen super bowl game winning catch ?
×
×
  • Create New...