Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Trading: Primarily Energy but also a little Equities, Fixed Income, Metals and Crypto.
Frequency: Many times daily
Duration: Never
Posts: 5,049 since Dec 2013
Thanks Given: 4,388
Thanks Received: 10,207
Sorry to use caps and big letters (I wish I could also make it flash!), but PEOPLE SHOULD REALLY READ THIS TWEET THREAD. If your going spend time reading (probably) baseless conspiracy theories from people who (probably) have no idea what they are talking about (not aimed at futures.io but some of the other cesspits out there), and sometimes have as little as $20 at risk, why not read something educational, While I can't guarantee it's 100% accurate this definitely matches my understanding of how it all works and the role of the National Securities Clearing Corporation (and not APEX) in all of this. Of course there still could be inappropriate dealings between Citadel/RH/Apex etc but I do believe this does explain RHs actions this week.
It's a long thread. Note the bit where he explains that the margin calls have to met with firm capital NOT customer funds. This is important in understanding why they would also restrict non-margin trading.
^Counter question. If you, yourself are admitting that the 'material' you provided may not be 100% true, then how can you claim ALL others are just baseless theories?
I am trying to not make any assumptions, just relaying information. For the "thing" now, I don't think so, because it would really be targeting short sellers and once a pattern is seen by the SEC I am sure something will be done. With that being said, people have always looked at short interest and float to help determine how a stock might react.
Victor Jones and Ryan Grace interviewed a former SEC lawyer. Good info.
Trading: Primarily Energy but also a little Equities, Fixed Income, Metals and Crypto.
Frequency: Many times daily
Duration: Never
Posts: 5,049 since Dec 2013
Thanks Given: 4,388
Thanks Received: 10,207
Assumed this is addressed to me. Great question, and your right there is no way to 100% know. In fact 99% of what I said could be true but there could be a tiny detail I'm not aware of that makes the rest of it immaterial. I am more than willing to (and obviously have already) admit that. (Unlike a lot of people who would never admit that anything they believe is ever wrong - not addressed at you).
But if we look at the points being made. NSCC does exist. They do margin clearing houses. Clearing houses do have capital requirements based upon customer positions and deposits. Customer deposits and firm capital do have to be segregated. RH did draw down credit lines and raise Capital. Brokers do have the legal right to change margining requirements at their will. Points like that are not theoretical they are factual. Additionally this argument is out there - a lot - if you read and follow people who have a good understanding of how the 'piping' really works. If it was conjecture, or incorrect, or there was a tiny missing detail that invalidated, somebody would have said so, and as far as I know nobody has. Interesting @ninjus posted a very similar explanation of what happened in the next post in the thread. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1355274739351248898.html. Doesn't make it right I know.
If nothing else, the thing that separates me from many (most) others regurgitating theories, is that I do have a decent understanding of how much of this works, I've been through a situation with a broker who temporarily went negative regulatory capital, so I'm not just repeating something, somebody else said, that I have no idea about its factualness.
Were you asking because you were curious (it was a good question) or were you asking because you disagree with some or all of it?
