[svcrunch]

> But that doesn't change the core action here: let's conspire to corner the market and force an artificially high price.

First, I recommend you look up the meaning of conspiracy in the dictionary: "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful."

Tell me, where was the secret plan? Everything on WSB happened in the open, in plain view of millions of people.

Second, the market is not even what's cornered here. It's the hedge fund owners who shorted gamestop (fully understanding the risks this entailed), who are cornered. They are the ones who are driving the price up as they try to cover their short positions.

[LatteLazy]

>Conspiracy has been defined in the United States as an agreement of two or more people to commit a crime, or to accomplish a legal end through illegal actions. A conspiracy does not need to have been planned in secret to meet the definition of the crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(criminal)#United_S...

One of the dodgiest things in English Common law is the low low bar for conspiracy (see also Joint Venture).

I think we actually agree about the cornering part don't we? I say the shares are cornered, you say the hedge funds but it amounts to the same thing. I definitely agree the hedge funds are looking fucked and deservedly so.

[svcrunch]

> I think we actually agree about the cornering part don't we? I say the shares are cornered, you say the hedge funds but it amounts to the same thing. I definitely agree the hedge funds are looking fucked and deservedly so.

I think we agree on this.

> an agreement of two or more people to commit a crime, or to accomplish a legal end through illegal actions.

Are you saying, though, that publishing advice or suggestions on a forum to buy a certain stock is a crime, or is illegal? That kind of stuff happens all the time in newspapers and television shows. Wall Street insiders have coordinated buying and selling for generations.

So did giving the advice become a crime by virtue of the fact that so many people decided to act on it?

[LatteLazy]

I would say Yes AND then some to the question about the legality of advice.

Offering financial advice is a regulated activity. You should have a license and qualifications and insurance and whole crap of other stuff. You may need to declare conflicts of interest.

Advising others to buy a share you hold in the hope the price will go up (or to sell something you're short etc) is a crime. This is why you'll see or hear disclaimers from all sorts of outlets either stating the comments are not advice or declaring holdings etc. The A16Z podcast is a good source of this.

So advising people is not in any way a safe, legal activity for random commenter. "it was advice" isn't a defense here unless you're registered, qualified, insured and declared your holdings and intent to trade.

I'm not saying people don't do it anyway, or that the sec actively hunts ever reddit account that says "I like tesla". They don't. But the SEC gets to choose what it pursues so if it wants to make an example of this or to quash WSB influence or to help its friends in hedge funds, who knows?

Such is the murky nature of financial regulation.

That was the "yes" part. I would add this as "and then some":

Advise or comentory is saying "we should buy GME because its a good company, well run, profitable, undervalued, due for a change in fortune" etc. That's just an opinion or a statement of certain facts.

Saying "if we all buy it, we can break the market and force the price up" goes beyond advise. It is explicitly intended to change the price. In this case, the commenter isn't discussing whether the company is good or not. The company the shares are in doesn't matter. Instead, they're using their size to bully others and drive the price in the direction they choose rather than on reflecting the companies prospects.

That's what WSB (or rather some of its users) explicitly said they were doing. That's what they then congratulated each other on doing. We even sort of agree on this point: they cornered it. It didn't happen by accident, people didn't say "GME is a great buy". They were explicit from day 1: "GME doesn't matter, but we can form a group and coordinate to change its price and make a profit".

Now again, maybe the SEC don't care. Maybe they're too lazy to pursue it or they also think hedge funds do it (much more covertly) so fair is fair. Maybe they don't want the political blowback that comes with this. I don't really care to be honest with you, good luck to the little guy.

But it seems pretty easy to me to make the case at least that this is market manipulation, that it succeeded, that it was intentional etc

When 1 big hedge fund does this, or a few work together, it's just as bad. But they're at least quite about it. They'll discuss it offline in unrecorded meetings. They do it slowly. They're careful not to do it too often. WSB have posted about it and blasting the market. That makes it harder to ignore.

The core concept here is that you should buy or sell stock because you believe the company will succeed or fail going forwards. Doing it to drive the price is an abuse of size. It doesn't matter really who you are, how many you are, or whether someone else is shorting the stock etc.

It also doesn't matter if others are manipulating the price, you don't get to "manipute it back".

Again, I think it's hilarious they did this. I admire it in a dumb way. I'm not calling for prosecutions. I think it's very concerning that execution only brokers took it upon themselves to step in (I'd like an inquiry there).

Im just saying, they did conspire and they did manipulate the stock price. <shrugs>

Thanks for reading this and the other comment. I hope I haven't ranted too much. It's been a pleasure reading your comments!