Robinhood trading without commissions - page 6
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I don't think the "reputational damage" readers of this forum have any interest in hedge funds at all
What you think has little effect at all.
What you think has little effect at all.
Why am I writing then?
Why should I write then?
Only to back up my words with pruphs.
Hedge fund losses have been documented and reported in the media.
You wrote that "Most of the losses have been suffered by private traders". I asked for some proof.
You wrote that "Most of the losses were suffered by private traders". I asked for proof.
so it's obvious. most got in over a hundred and now the price is 60. yes, hedge funds have suffered as well.
so it's obvious. most went in at over a hundred and now the price is 60. yes, hedge funds have suffered too.
It's not obvious to me. Someone has lost, I have no doubt, but it is the relative numbers compared to the losses of the funds that are interesting. They were forced to fix the old shorts and the loss figures were announced.
And who bought low-liquid securities on a heated market, when there are almost no shorts in the market, I have doubts, that the figures are comparable,
It is possible that the colossus in the form of funds was brought down by a relatively weak blow on the clay feet.
it is possible that the colossus in the form of funds was brought down with a relatively weak blow to the clay feet.
Is there any pruf about hedge funds going bankrupt?
Is there a pruf about hedge funds going bankrupt?
Who told you about hedge funds going bankrupt?
Ask him or her, I'm curious too.)
And who told you about hedge funds going bankrupt?
Ask him or her, I'm curious too)
Ahhhh, the word 'maybe' is wet fantasy there....
Ahhhh, there the word 'maybe' is a wet fantasy....
I do not know what kind of fantasy you have, if you think the word "bankruptcy" where it does not exist))
Especially for these masters of speculation and fantasy I explain the meaning of "take the colossus down" - means that in a given instrument to create such volumes to buy, which forced the funds to close their shorts with a loss (whether consciously or through stop-orders or margin call), as you see it does not talk about bankruptcy, only about fixing the losses.
Well, those who think with their brains and do not just look for synonymous words, they know what is meant - the volumes spent by buyers (and their losses) may be much less than the losses of funds, due to the low liquidity of the instrument.
I do not know what your fantasies are, since the word 'bankruptcy' appears to you where it does not exist))
Especially for these masters of speculation and fantasy I explain the meaning of "take the colossus down" - it means to create such volumes on a given instrument, which forced the funds to close their shorts with a loss (whether consciously or by stop-orders or margin call), as you see, it does not talk about bankruptcy, only about fixing the losses.
Well, those who think with their brains, not only looking for synonymous words, they know what is meant - the volumes spent by buyers (and their losses) may be much less than losses of funds due to the instrument's low liquidity.
If the instrument is "illiquid", why are there large fund losses?