This isn't a political thing, its effecting people on both sides of the aisle. A simple "i told you so" and a warm welcome to anyone looking for more information on similar things like this and there connections to past dealings will do better than scorn and ridicule.
I can't accept it's true that they are selling people's shares w/o permission. there is just no way you could do that. I believe the elite are untouchable, but they have to at least pretend
There are people posting lots of shots from their phones which show their accounts in certain stocks "closed" "due to volatility" "for their own protection"... by robinhood. They are taking / stealing back the stocks... whatever one wants to call that.
People on WSB are saying that if you bought the shares with margins(have no idea wtf that means), then you open yourself up to this kind of bullshit. People who knew better were trying to tell everyone not to buy with margins.
So shiity? Yeah
Illegal? No
Then again, illegality has gone out the fucking window so wtf does it matter anyhow?
Buying stock on margin means buying it partly with borrowed money, normally borrowed from the broker (in this case Robinhood). The maximum amount the broker (or any lender using the shares as collateral) can legally lend the buyer is 50% of the purchase price. So for example if you buy 100 shares of GME at $200/share, for a total purchase price of $20,000, the broker can lend you up to $10,000 so you only have to put up $10,000 of your own money.
Whenever the loan-to-market value goes above 60%, the broker is legally required to sell enough shares to bring the loan-to-market value back to 50%. This regulation was put in place after the stock market crash of 1929, in which many people both wealthy and of ordinary means, were wiped out and the nation was plunged into the Great Depression. The unregulated buying on margin had caused a buying frenzy which had driven stock prices up to many times their actual economic value, and it was wisely determined that a repeat of this scenario needed to be prevented, since it causes tremendous harm to society across the entire wealth-poverty spectrum.
So there's nothing "shitty" about people getting their shares sold automatically, if their margin portfolio with Robinhood has exceeded 60% loan-to-market value. They knew these were the terms of the loan when they took out the loan. A lot of amateur investors are doing a lot of colossally stupid things because they're all excited about the wild claims that they're finally "beating the big guys" and thinking they're going to make loads of money. They're ignoring the eternal wisdom of the saying "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true."
Everything Robinhood is doing is wrong, but the reason they are closing these positions is they are over leveraged and Robinhood too is a afraid they will never recoup the money if the investor goes millions in debt.
Af far as I know they haven’t sold anyones actual shares, just closed over leveraged positions. Still wring to do it but being able to levarage investments goes in the same book as a short in my opinion, though it doesn’t have a negative side to the company’s ownership like a short might
Thats highly, highly illegal. Massive theft.
There'd better be more than the usual meek saber rattling on this.
Robinhood is the sacrificial goat to protect the elites.
Let me guess: They are going to tell us to “start our own trading company if we don’t like Robinhood”...
Better start your own stonk exchange and SEC and government for that matter.
The us will declare war on you if it isn't owned by a Rothschild. Ask afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya.
Oh I know that 100%. I thought my statement was self-evidently ridiculous 😂
Ok.
This isn't a political thing, its effecting people on both sides of the aisle. A simple "i told you so" and a warm welcome to anyone looking for more information on similar things like this and there connections to past dealings will do better than scorn and ridicule.
That's a lawsuit then. A BIG one.
That's literally theft.
Of course they are. Your vote was stolen without a whimper. There is nothing they can't do now.
I can't accept it's true that they are selling people's shares w/o permission. there is just no way you could do that. I believe the elite are untouchable, but they have to at least pretend
There are people posting lots of shots from their phones which show their accounts in certain stocks "closed" "due to volatility" "for their own protection"... by robinhood. They are taking / stealing back the stocks... whatever one wants to call that.
They were unfulfilled orders. Still bull shit but not quite the same thing
No, not just unfulfilled orders. Actually selling recently bought shares. And they were sold at todays dip @ $120.
That's not theft, that's suspending the trading.
It is impossible for me to believe even today that people's stocks are being sold involuntarily.
Having said that, it wouldn't surprise me very much if it actually were true.
No, closing the position. That means selling it
God, I know! I just cannot believe this. Honestly, if you'd told me that my stocks would be sold FOR me?
Good night in the morning.
Imagine thinking this after November 3rd.
Lol fair
proof?
Robinhood stealing from the poor to give to the rich.
Welcome to what happened to my ballot 😏👍
People on WSB are saying that if you bought the shares with margins(have no idea wtf that means), then you open yourself up to this kind of bullshit. People who knew better were trying to tell everyone not to buy with margins.
So shiity? Yeah
Illegal? No
Then again, illegality has gone out the fucking window so wtf does it matter anyhow?
The issue is that they can't even close their own positions at Market Price.
Margins, acceptable. Buying actual shares, that's fuckery. Apparently per their TOS it's legal. But I'm going to bet they are going to get sued.
Basically the stock was at some level like $300+, and they force sold it at ~ $120.
Buying stock on margin means buying it partly with borrowed money, normally borrowed from the broker (in this case Robinhood). The maximum amount the broker (or any lender using the shares as collateral) can legally lend the buyer is 50% of the purchase price. So for example if you buy 100 shares of GME at $200/share, for a total purchase price of $20,000, the broker can lend you up to $10,000 so you only have to put up $10,000 of your own money.
Whenever the loan-to-market value goes above 60%, the broker is legally required to sell enough shares to bring the loan-to-market value back to 50%. This regulation was put in place after the stock market crash of 1929, in which many people both wealthy and of ordinary means, were wiped out and the nation was plunged into the Great Depression. The unregulated buying on margin had caused a buying frenzy which had driven stock prices up to many times their actual economic value, and it was wisely determined that a repeat of this scenario needed to be prevented, since it causes tremendous harm to society across the entire wealth-poverty spectrum.
So there's nothing "shitty" about people getting their shares sold automatically, if their margin portfolio with Robinhood has exceeded 60% loan-to-market value. They knew these were the terms of the loan when they took out the loan. A lot of amateur investors are doing a lot of colossally stupid things because they're all excited about the wild claims that they're finally "beating the big guys" and thinking they're going to make loads of money. They're ignoring the eternal wisdom of the saying "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true."
Explains why it went down to 118
😲
Theoretically it's in their TOS. Watch them get their asses sued.
That sounds like a lawsuit.
Everything Robinhood is doing is wrong, but the reason they are closing these positions is they are over leveraged and Robinhood too is a afraid they will never recoup the money if the investor goes millions in debt.
Af far as I know they haven’t sold anyones actual shares, just closed over leveraged positions. Still wring to do it but being able to levarage investments goes in the same book as a short in my opinion, though it doesn’t have a negative side to the company’s ownership like a short might
THAT'S A FIGHT!