Stocks and Trading Thread - Channeling your inner Mono

[Admiral Yi]

Unless you have been keeping a pretty low profile here, I'll assume your winnings are not to the scale that all them other clients losing won't balance them out.

Squeeze said "any" customer.  You seemed to agree with him.  If you want to withdraw that thesis and propose a new one, please feel free.  The thesis I disagreed with is nonsense.

[Josquius]

I wasn't being literal.  They're not actually going to physically hurt him either.

I was using a casino analogy.
Like the casinos I don't expect they pick on everyone making moderate profits or who strikes lucky.

It's when someone figures out a perfectly legal and within the rules technique to make huge money, like card counting, that they decide to arbitrarily change the rules.

Back when the gme business was blowing up I remember reading a lot of the trading firms were pulling this kind of shit with people.

[Tamas]

Unless you have been keeping a pretty low profile here, I'll assume your winnings are not to the scale that all them other clients losing won't balance them out.

Squeeze said "any" customer.  You seemed to agree with him.  If you want to withdraw that thesis and propose a new one, please feel free.  The thesis I disagreed with is nonsense.

I don't have to withdraw something I never said. That a brokerage firm would not seek to reneg on each and every customer making a profit is so self-evident it did not require a disclaimer.

[Admiral Yi]

I wasn't being literal.  They're not actually going to physically hurt him either.

I was using a casino analogy.
Like the casinos I don't expect they pick on everyone making moderate profits or who strikes lucky.

It's when someone figures out a perfectly legal and within the rules technique to make huge money, like card counting, that they decide to arbitrarily change the rules.

Back when the gme business was blowing up I remember reading a lot of the trading firms were pulling this kind of shit with people.

Market manipulation has been against the rules as long as I can remember.

Let me ask you a question that I think you have not considered.  Why should Etrade, or any broker, be upset if one of their customers makes a ton of money in a legal way?

[Admiral Yi]

I don't have to withdraw something I never said. That a brokerage firm would not seek to reneg on each and every customer making a profit is so self-evident it did not require a disclaimer.

Then Squeeze's original statement was self evidently false, as he has graciously conceded.

[Josquius]

I've conceded that the clearly non literal statement wasn't literal?

I wasn't being literal.  They're not actually going to physically hurt him either.

I was using a casino analogy.
Like the casinos I don't expect they pick on everyone making moderate profits or who strikes lucky.

It's when someone figures out a perfectly legal and within the rules technique to make huge money, like card counting, that they decide to arbitrarily change the rules.

Back when the gme business was blowing up I remember reading a lot of the trading firms were pulling this kind of shit with people.

Market manipulation has been against the rules as long as I can remember.

Let me ask you a question that I think you have not considered.  Why should Etrade, or any broker, be upset if one of their customers makes a ton of money in a legal way?

As you said its placing heavy demands on them.
I also recall reading a lot of these neo brokerages have links with major trading firms who were the ones losing from the short squeeze.
I don't recall the details of it but it was certainly the case the gme stuff caused huge problems when it went off with brokerages restricting buy orders.

[Admiral Yi]

Which of the other things you've said so far are clearly non literal?  And can you please give me the literal meaning so I can know what your literal position is?

If you agree that online brokerages might not want a large number of customers who are making coordinated options plays on meme stocks because of clearing requirements, that is different than saying every time a customer makes a lot of money they get beat up.

Your information on links is incorrect.  Brokerages have relationships with market makers, who give the brokerages a cut of the bid offer spread.  That's how brokerages can afford to charge nothing for their services.  Market makers are different entities from hedge funds that short stocks AFAIK.

[Josquius]

Which of the other things you've said so far are clearly non literal?  And can you please give me the literal meaning so I can know what your literal position is?

As I've said. I was using an analogy of a mob casino taking a winner to a back room to beat them.
There shall be no physical beatings and of course not every single person in the green gets the treatment, only those who win big in unexpected ways.

   

[Admiral Yi]

As I've said. I was using an analogy of a mob casino taking a winner to a back room to beat them.
There shall be no physical beatings and of course not every single person in the green gets the treatment, only those who win big in unexpected ways.

Awesome.  How many investors are you aware of that have won big in unexpected ways and have as a result received a figurative beating?

[HVC]

As I've said. I was using an analogy of a mob casino taking a winner to a back room to beat them.
There shall be no physical beatings and of course not every single person in the green gets the treatment, only those who win big in unexpected ways.

Awesome.  How many investors are you aware of that have won big in unexpected ways and have as a result received a figurative beating?

At least one

[Admiral Yi]

At least one

He hasn't received a beating yet.

[Admiral Yi]

And his GME options might not be in the money. 

[Admiral Yi]

Nope.  He bought $20 calls.

[Tonitrus]

Isn't saying "mob casino" redundant?

[HVC]

Isn't saying "mob casino" redundant?

Is the triad considered the mob too, or is it only Italians?