threedots

6 ms·

1.
by threedots 6y ago
Seconded. The last week has been actually quite unsettling and completely changed my perception of HN.
2.
by threedots 6y ago
Friction is the difference. Naked shorting removes the need to locate borrow. That need acts to prevent runaway supply expansion. Naked short selling also circumvents the rights of share owners as a class to decide whether to allow syntheti
3.
by threedots 6y ago
Short selling has both supply and demand effects. So while it 'soaks up investor money' it also creates demand for incremental money through lower prices.The laws right now basically exist to constrain the supply that can be broug
4.
by threedots 6y ago
Rules already exist around what you can and can't say as a short seller. What is it that you don't like about them? Do you think no one should be allowed to say negative things about companies? Shorts can't drive companies in
5.
by threedots 6y ago
What is the mechanism by which you think shortsellers cause companies to go bankrupt? Can you think of any examples of short sellers causing a bankruptcy?
6.
by threedots 6y ago
I read that reddit thread earlier when it was at the top of r/all and it is unhinged. How this went from vanilla pump and dump to this conspiratorial lunacy is beyond me and I hope it stops when GME comes back down to earth.
7.
by threedots 6y ago
It had lots to do with GME in that GME was the source of the risk (because of its through the roof volatility) that the DTCC was protecting against. But if your implication is that the DTCC has a dog in that fight you are way off base - the
8.
by threedots 6y ago
It's a good question. I can only speak for myself but I would only be interested in investing in a very small number of funds and they don't want my money (or sometimes anyone's money). Unless you are convinced a fund adds va
9.
by threedots 6y ago
No you're good. I'm a career hedge-fund/market guy and all of my investable assets (outside of my company and my house) are in vanguard trackers. I'd guess most of my friends who are professional investors are the same (
10.
by threedots 6y ago
There is a big difference between handing out light punishments and actively colluding. In the case of Cohen, his light punishment is because they were never able to find the smoking-gun evidence they needed to put him away properly on crim
11.
by threedots 6y ago
It's trivial for the SEC I don't know if you're implying the SEC is in cahoots with the hedge funds, and not just any hedge fund but one associated with SAC/Cohen whom the SEC went to war with. I'm sympathetic to
12.
by threedots 6y ago
The point is that without short selling option MMs couldn't hedge so no one would sell put options.
13.
by threedots 6y ago
It does reduce prices because it increases the supply of available shares, it's just that reducing prices isn't necessarily a bad thing. We want the prices of bad things (e.g. frauds) to go down and more generally we want prices t
14.
by threedots 6y ago
Secondary markets provide liquidity for primary investors which makes making primary investments much more attractive. A stock market is just a highly organized kind of secondary market. How many VC investors there would be if they could ne
15.
by threedots 6y ago
If they bought in at 10 and sold between 50-100 if they owned 14% of the free float they would have lost 0.5-1bn. That assumes they didn't increase exposure as the price went up and it ignores the borrow cost. They then lost a bunch of
16.
by threedots 6y ago
Protecting investors is literally the first part of the SEC's three part purpose statement. The SEC came into existence because retail investors lost huge amounts of money in the 20's in speculative bubbles. The same thing is goin
17.
by threedots 6y ago
I mean you can just do the maths, no? They probably had a few hundred million position (maybe larger) with an entry cost under <10$. There may be some puts in there too which will have been a total loss.
18.
by threedots 6y ago
The supply of shares for covering is not constrained by the number of actual shares in issue in the ordinary course of trading (you can create this condition artificially if you want to but people usually don't). There can always be mo
19.
by threedots 6y ago
I don't understand why people think Melvin would do this. Sure they might be prepared to flout SEC rules if they thought they could get away with it but whether they sold is trivially verifiable and they would be guaranteed to get caug
20.
by threedots 6y ago
The fact you're confusing option types is not helping your credibility. Writing put options is a bullish move. Melvin may have been writing CALL options (I doubt it to be honest but maybe).
21.
by threedots 6y ago
I'm well aware of how citadel is structured thanks, I used to work there. If you think options dealers go around taking massive unhedged directional bets then you are very misinformed. I don't have any inside knowledge but i'
22.
by threedots 6y ago
This reads like GPT-3 output, like what on earth are you talking about. I don't think you understand how options market making works and for the record citadel is not a prime broker. I'm no citadel fan but the descent of this sub
23.
by threedots 6y ago
I can tell you with some confidence that no partner at any of those funds could care less what some public market long/short outfit thinks and vice versa. Both of these groups of people invest money and that's about where the simi
24.
by threedots 6y ago
The 16" MBP is terrible with an external monitor (or at least mine is with my external monitor). Fans spin up like crazy and the case gets hot enough to fry an egg on. It's the one terrible weakness of an otherwise great machine.
25.
by threedots 6y ago
In Europe/UK an IP is PII. This link explains it: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...
26.
by threedots 6y ago
I am a cofounder of a non-VC backed startup. We work together because (1) we're friends (2) like working together (3) have complimentary skillsets. We split the equity 50/50 and receive the same salary. We've been doing it se
27.
by threedots 6y ago
I run a business in this space. Realistically your chances of having data that is useful to a HF (of any kind) is pretty low so I wouldn't bank on it as a revenue source unless you have a strong reason to believe (1) your data is predi
28.
by threedots 6y ago
Depends on the sport. The uplift from PED usage in certain sports is obscene. I would guess that most top level amateurs in strength sports are doping or have doped, and traditional doping indicators (e.g. FFMI >25) suggest the same. The
29.
by threedots 6y ago
I like David Lewis's description of philosophy as 'measuring the price'. The point being that every belief and theory commits you to others and that the goal of philosophy is to find out what the implications of a given posit
30.
by threedots 6y ago
I think the point being made is that Uber is externalising cost onto society by (among other things) hiring its drivers as gig workers and not as proper employees. That is quite separate from whether or not Uber is making money.

More ›