r/wallstreetbets set to private after increased media coverage
https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/
Some unverified Twitter chatter talking about unwanted legal attention after pumping up GameStop stock:
Some unverified Twitter chatter talking about unwanted legal attention after pumping up GameStop stock:
34 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 75.7 ms ] threadTLDR: Apparently the recent GME play upset/hurt some institutional investors, and they decided to hit back.
https://old.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/l2guoc/wall...
So institutional investors have steered the market for years and if you lost your hat because of them, well, that's investing. You clearly played it to you personal risk tolerance.
The momemt they get burned by someone else moving markets... Oh, how the tune changes.
Kind of would have expected HN to look for a higher barrier of proof than that. Sounds more like WSB got a bit too big, started to draw some degree of actual scrutiny (partially through their own actions in tweeting out egotistical statements from their Twitter) and now are blaming it on some vague conspiracy?
I've no doubt that lots of institutional investors would be happy to keep things like WSB out. But it would be a strange and convenient coincidence that there happens to be an international conspiracy involving investors, media and financial regulators that just so happens to fit perfectly with the 'underdog' PR story WSB is trying to build itself on.
WSB believes that there's a short squeeze imminent for $GME, and they've been hyping up/calling for people to buy and hold its shares.
As OP points out, some members of the media have indeed taken notice: https://twitter.com/jimcramer/status/1352368321212145674
I'm no expert on this stuff by any means--I'm just a casual trader who lurks on WSB sometimes for the latest memes--so instead of trying to (badly) provide more details about this myself, I'll just link to some of the discussions that are spilling over to WSB's sister subreddits:
https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/l21gpz/infinite_sho...
https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/l2ehsg/lets_talk...
EDIT: The Out of the Loop thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/l2gkpe/whats_...
The catalyst event happening is apparently an impending "short squeeze" for GameStop (GME) stock. The underlying issue is being painted as a power struggle between individuals ("retail investors") and hedge funds / institutional investors.
The idea of the short squeeze is that institutional investors short-sold GME, meaning they took money in exchange for a promise to deliver shares later. This seemed safe because they thought it would be easy to buy cheap shares later and deliver as they are supposed to.
However, the share price started going up. People know the holders of shorts will need to buy back shares, so people (wallstreetsbets people?) buy the shares first. This drives up the price even more, increasing the potential desperation of the shorts-holders, and this cycle can theoretically get really vicious really fast, leading to a "squeeze". So retail investors are hoping to make a bunch of money off the institutional investors holding the shorts. In theory, if everyone bought Gamestop shares and refused to sell, the holders of shorts would be failing to fulfill their contract and be in huge trouble (but they will pay big prices first).
This leads to the David-and-Goliath story. The claim is that institutional investors are actively trying to paint reddit as market manipulators, in an attempt (either short or long term) to get regulators to shut down individual investing and tilt the field more to institutions. This narrative is aided by WSB trends to invest as a block in "meme stocks".
On the other hand, redditors are painting the institutions as serial entrenched market manipulators who got caught with their pants down in this instance, and who are trying dirty tricks to get out of a sticky situation.
Did I get it right?
I think some serious unintended consequences will occur today.
I think this is a crowded short trade and the institutional guys are not as smart as they think they are. When they lose, they get pouty and start complaining to regulators.
Imagine a company with 1 share outstanding. I borrow a share from Person A, and I sell it to Person B. Person A and Person B now both own 1 share, and I own -1 shares. The total shares outstanding is still 1 share (2 + -1), but the float has increased. The short interest, as commonly reported, will be -100%. But it's actually only 50% of the shares that could trade. The effective float has increased by the size of the short interest.