Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

FoolioDisplasius t1_jbkd2g7 wrote

They have $60B net short position, and being that they are also the biggest market maker in wallstreet, it is suspected that they internalize trades that go against their shorts in a market manipulation scam that is truly awe inspiring. Just 2 years ago, 3 stocks were shorted at over 100% of the float. And when the squeeze was about to happen, Citadel ordered Robinhood, the largest retail stoke broker, to disable the GME buy button.

Or to put it simply: it is currently impossible to know if the $60B worht of shorts are on stocks that simply *do not exist*.

18

flash654 t1_jbkwwq7 wrote

There is nothing illegal about shorting over 100% float. We could argue about whether it should be illegal (probably should) but there's nothing saying they couldn't do it right now. Option volume on many stocks also adds up to more than the sum of the shares they promise. Should that be illegal?

If anyone is to blame, it's probably Robinhood. They should not have disabled buying.

That being said, again they didn't do anything illegal. They're allowed to change their offerings at any time and for any reason, and people using them agreed to that when signing up for the service. If you want a broker that doesn't fuck you over, then you're going to be paying commissions.

I say all this as someone who was there for the whole GME debacle and pulled a significant amount of money out of RH as a result. There very likely is nothing illegal going on here. Why cheat when you can make money without cheating?

−5

things_U_choose_2_b t1_jbm3cou wrote

It goes a little deeper than Robinhood, or even Citadel. IIRC it was DTCC who made the order to set multiple different tickers to 'position close only'. Someone made some really big, bad bets and the clearing house had to step in.

It's crazy that this happened, but discussing it is painted as conspiracy theory.

3