It's absolutely paternalism, IMO. I'm less sure whether I think it's a good thing or not (because I think people buying new positions in GME at this point are unlikely to end up happy about that in mid-Feb.)

I'm all for "let 'em play" in general but this is not going to end well for a lot of folks...

I ended up buying a couple stocks late in the game, fully expecting to lose the money. First, it's not my retirement or long-term cash, more of a hobby. And that hobby quickly turned into sending a message after watching those rich SOBs literally cry about being hurt by the free market, and then try and end/manipulate it to their advantage.

I missed the boat, but I'm cheering all of this on from the sidelines.

You are probably an outlier. Look at the average newbie on WSB. Look at the upvoted posts and comments. It is pure mania at this point.

I promise a ton of people are convinced this is their ticket and throwing in far more than play money.

I keep hearing this argument, but Robinhood's actions will directly cause those people to lose money. By only allowing to sell the stock, most people will hop out or hedge which will tank the price. If they let it play out, then they can blame the market for the outcome.

i wish i could triple up vote this. This morning it seemed to be mostly rising (I saw up to like $470 when I was selling) right until I saw tweets about the blocking of buying and it tanked.

And the same people Robinhood was trying to "save from themselves" weren't able to buy the dips, but the hedge funds could recoup the losses from the shorts in that time frame.

I have seen a lot of people throw in fractions of a share or less than 10 shares. What you might have observed is the law of large numbers. When you have 4 million people putting in fuckyou money some of them actually have a few hundred thousand to spare and those get voted up.

Why are you so quick to assume that people don’t know what they are doing?

Is it so hard to believe that at this point buying GME is more about activism than making profit?

“When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose”

> Why are you so quick to assume that people don’t know what they are doing?

Screenshot lists floating around the internet yesterday pointing out exactly what buttons in your app to hit in order to buy GME options is the first piece of evidence that makes me that thing, perhaps, a large number of people don't know (or understand) what they're actually doing.

OP means even among those who have never invested before, there are a lot of people who want to buy GME to support the cause, not caring if they lose a bit of money in the end.

People who believe that they can only buy GME via specifically Robinhood, I'm not sure I see them as sophisticated investors or even "understand what they're doing".

I think that people should be able to spend their money however they want. I also don't mind when regulators say "liquor stores are blocked from having one-day specials the day that welfare benefits are paid."

If Robinhood believes that their customers are better served by blocking certain transactions, I trust Robinhood to make that call (and suffer the goodwill or ill-will that results).

Of course the motivation of Robinhood is to "better serve their customers". However, their customers are not retail investors.

Timing. I looked into getting into this game to see if I could make some cash day trading (at the level of one unit of stock -- NOT my life savings).

My investment firm required time to set things up, and it won't be ready in time for this game.

If Robinhood can shut down trades for 24 hours, that's enough to have a huge impact, not just on the market, but on people's individual finances, as they move elsewhere.

Footnote: If I had been successful, I'd be up $200 right now based on the strategy I planned. But I'm not naive enough to think that's anything beyond luck and volatility.

This hit mainstream this week. There are people out there now buying stock based on a Reddit thread because they think it will get them some quick cash.

I am pretty much in like with the OP in that this is definitely paternalism, and I have no idea if it's good or bad. People were going to get screwed because of this, but I don't think Robinhood or other online trading apps stopped buy's to protect these people.

> Is it so hard to believe that at this point buying GME is more about activism than making profit?

Go read the top comments in the top WSB threads and tell me which it is.

This is all about getting rich quick with a thin veneer of activism slapped on top.

That might not have been the case a few days ago, I don’t know because I only got into the loop yesterday... but if it was 90% activism on Monday... is probably 10% activism today.

I wouldn’t touch that stock using “for real” money with a 50 foot pole.

When Melvin Capital sold a metric ton of naked shorts on GameStop, no one was there to tell them it wouldn't end up well. It was certainly a risk, but not really a bad one going on fundamentals. They just failed to predict the mob mentality of retail investors.

Of course, those retail investors who got in on Thursday, Friday, or Monday; that seemed like a bad purchase. So bad that Melvin double-downed on their naked short position. There's no way the stock could go up. The fundamentals aren't there. But it did. A lot. And those retail investors made a ton of money.

So, we're at today, where you're saying that it would be a bad time to invest because it won't end well. You, and to some degree Robinhood, are making a prediction on the stock market. You may be right; you may be wrong; but you're definitely not certainly right or certainly wrong. You're making the same mistake anyone who tries to pick stocks does; you're just doing it in reverse.

If I were running Robinhood, I'd be inclined to continue to allow trading*, but perhaps with a popup message with language that legal approved to suggest that people should be certain of what they were doing when creating new positions in high-vol securities and would have 100% margin requirements on high-vol securities now. So, I agree with you that I'd, on balance, prefer to see trading open in these names. I think people should do what they want with their money, even if I think it's stupid and likely to end badly.

At the same time, parabolic moves like this have never once in the history of markets been sustained over a long period of time. It's possible that this will be the first one ever, but I am indeed making a prediction that it will not be. You are correct that I might be wrong about that.

* - All this assumes that my clearing firm would continue clearing the orders, which is uncertain at the moment. If my clearing firm won't book the orders, I literally can't do anything except cajol, plead, or sue them.

> And those retail investors made a ton of money.

A few that got in early and have liquidated their position made a ton of money.

Those HODLers? They might have paper profits now, but long term not so sure.

I'm not sure an app that allows you to put your entire account balance into options trades is engaging in good-faith paternalism by preventing people from buying a particular stock.

It’s pretty hypocritical for a casino to say that you are welcome to keep playing our table games and lose your money to us slowly but you aren’t allowed to sit down at that table full of poker sharks because we are worried you’ll lose your shirt.

Casinos LITERALLY do this though, with segregated/exclusive higher stakes games. You only get to play the ultra high stakes poker if you set it up yourself or get invited

That is fine, if it is done before the play begins. What's happening here is being kicked out of the game when you're winning.

Your take is so wrong. There is friction in opening accounts, funding it, etc. If all your investment money is in RH, it takes a week to move money out.

And the simple fact that millions of people on RH are locked out of buying totally fucks the people holding the stock. "You can sell but not buy"?

Who is buying? The institutions.

Do not attempt to justify this.

RH is a business and can make their own decisions. If you are not happy with how they service you as a client, you can take them to court. They do not owe you anything more than what's in the contract you have with them.

What about people that already lost money because of this movement? On the other side, on the sell side there might be lots of people who were holding waiting for a higher price that was driven down by the blocking of new purchases, cratering their gains. Is that right by the rules of the game?

Well in this case I think the gamblers are going to take all their business elsewhere if the casino doesn't change its ways.

I don’t think that’s the case, but even if it is for the stock markets broadly it isn’t for Robinhood. It’s not vanguard.

how about for paying gold customers who specifically want to engage int PM/AH trading? i know robinhood isn't a pro level platform but come on, this feels exactly like blatant manipulation.

They have blocked 7/10 most mentioned stocks in r/wallstreetbets from being purchased. It isn't just Robinhood, also Revolut and others. Then they launched a short attack, with nobody willing to buy besides themselves, they tanked the stock.

It doesn't get more obvious than this.

It's absolutely market manipulation. RH gets sells order flow to Citadel, who bailed out Melvin Capital.

Someone high up at RH got their arm twisted to help their buddies close their shorts.

Lost this customer! They canceled my literal 4$ but in gme, which was more of a statement than an investment on my part.

Dude it's my fuckin' money. I don't need or want protection. Maybe I want to buy a couple hundred dollars of meme stonks solely because it's funny. Is that not allowed?

It's a ponzi scheme where early stage investors are forced to buy the products of late stage investors.

It’s their fucking trading platform if they want to defend people from investing in a Ponzi scheme is that not allowed.

I just wish they'd say that they have a vested interest in the ponzi scheme failing rather than telling me I'm not smart enough to make the decision to throw my money away.

And that's really what this is all about.

It's probably a liability concern on their part, but they also want people to have money to trade in the future too. If Robinhood users had any chance of actually making a bunch of money on this it would only be in Robhinhoods interest to allow people to continue buying. (if their users have more money in the future they will trade more)

really? really?

this is stock investing 101. don’t invest what you cannot afford to lose. i find it condescending and insulting that they are claiming to protect the users.

Informing your customers is one thing. Blocking them in "their" own interest is a ridiculous overstep. We make platforms and tools to empower users, not to force them down whatever path we deem best for them.

But there are tons of overpriced stocks out there. Where do you draw the line? TSLA? AAPL? S&P 500?

It's not about making money, it's about sending a message, and we can send a message with our money. Not their business how we burn it.

It isn't. People buy it to laugh, not to make money.