I failed with my screenshot.
4 Likes
Don’t worry, we going to 1000 minium here 
2 Likes
Godspeed!
Regarding RobinHood, the “free” service is actually paid by one of the largest hedge funds…
1 Like
And you are so certain of this number because… 
we like the stock 
5 Likes
Citadel, who bailed out Melvin, who got bankrupted by WSB…
1 Like
I’d give you gold but we aren’t on reddit xD.
1 Like
I’m just writing nonsense.
It’s a bit sad TBH.
We can’t do anything if they can blatantly rig the game this way.
I don’t understand stuff like this, but don’t they do this to protect IB and in turn protect us who use it as a broker?
If someone shorts GME & there is not enough cash in their account, IB would need to “pay up” if the account holder can’t or disappears.
Like in April when Oil futures went negative, IB (& other Brokers) lost money, because positions weren’t covered sufficiently.
Shorts covered by “only300%” is actually not enough for special situations like GME.
Like when Oil went negative or now GME shorts are >100% of possible shares, sufficient “cover” (and possible losses) goes infinite.
3 Likes
that is fair yes. the opposite not (which IB doesn’t do? Right?) If you can’t buy on IB it’s sad. I mean, place a trade, not sure if someone is willing to sell
It’s more the Citadel/Robinhood thing that’s sad.
I wonder also if it won’t trigger some civil unrests with wealth inequality in the background?
1 Like
1 Like
Well, this is interesting 
Yeah I’m glad IB does some risk management, didn’t they already have a few time where they had some losses due to those trades?
1 Like
What about long without margin? No reason to disable this - except manipulation!
it is that obvious isn’t it? I am wondering if this will have any legal consequences on top of eternal shaming from the wsb community.
Nope, buying shares did not work / does not work: “Transactions in this instrument are limited to closing-only trades”
edit: without margin ofc
1 Like
