southsider2k5

Just looked it up, looks like Citadel also put some cash up. They get an equity stake for letting these guys have some cash.

Is the government bailing them out? That doesn't sound likely to me.

Yeah, unless you are short calls, you don't see the unlimited risk scenarios like you do with stock. Stocks can only go to zero, so if you are long risk side your risk is either stock goes to zero, or you have to fill an option and your lose the difference between what you sold the option for minus the difference between strike and zero. Short side risk is a whole other story. Theoretically your risk is infinite. In a case like GME if you were short at $15, and it is now sitting at $350, you are liable for the whole difference. If you had borrowed on margin to finance the trade, they would have let you go as long as you were properly leveraged with enough cash to cover losses, but odds are you wouldn't have had enough to cover a loss like that and would have been blown out. Hedge funds like this are probably loaded with enough cash to crush most short squeezes, though this one is something else. If you sold a 20 call for $5, you have to sell someone the stock at $20, but collected $500 for the right to do so. Long puts are better down side scenarios because you own the option to force someone to sell you stock at a fixed price, with the idea that it would go down. If these guys loaded up on 15 Puts instead of shorting stock, the Puts just go out worthless as no one wants to sell stock at $15 when they can just go the market and sell at $350. The risk there is just what you paid for the option. Missed the 1929 part, but that was kind of two fold. #1, there were no limits to short selling. You didn't have to borrow the stock, or any of the other more recent innovations to limit short selling, such as the uptick rule. Margin was also WAY more allowable. The leverage they gave out then was in multiples. Today is basically 50% leverage with Reg T. People in 1929 were trading 10:1

I am 100% on board with none of that list getting in.

Odds are pretty high that it wouldn't even a major league deal to start with so they could save a roster spot.

The Sox aren't going to promise him a starting rotation spot all year. That instantly puts the Sox as playing from behind.

Again, my premise is that is where he wants to be anyway.,

Ultimately, yes. They owe you your stock, no matter what. If they over-extend someone on the other side of a transaction, and they can't pay, they are ultimately response for those funds as well as the stock. You are only responsible for your gains and losses, and margin if you trade on it.

Well there are two kinds of shorts. Legitimate borrowed stock, and synthetics through options trading.

To the first part, yes. Absolutely. Happens every day. While you are the "owner" of the stock, whoever clears trades for your brokerage firm is the "custodian" of those holdings and has some leeway in what they do with it. My guess as to the second part is that the hedge fund almost certainly not a custodian or clearing firm, so they don't really have the authorization to do those negotiations.

This is literally my backyard. If the hedge blows up, whoever is holding the positions is ultimately responsible. When it comes to shorts, they have to locate the stock to borrow from someone. No idea who this groups custodian is, but essentially whoever is authorizing the shorts as borrowed would be the person liable if they over extend the hedge fund. Honestly, it isn't very easy to do, and they are probably pretty well capitalized even with the losses. Typically it would be a clearing firm though.

Definitely, but it will also probably jam up the ballot again with guys who get significant amounts of vote, but not enough to get elected.

He was probably going to sign there anyways, but if they can force the price up, and force them to add a year, yes it is a win.

Arod and Ortiz are going to run into the same thing that lots of the other steroid guys ran into.

Uh Derrick Rose?

Yeah, hopefully people are taking their gains if they were on the long side of this because when it goes... look out. There is no technical bottom until at least the original highs.

Judging by Stone's reaction, I am not sure that one of substance actually exists.

Without knowing what the NL situation looks like, this seems right on.

You could almost read this as the White Sox trying to cost the Twins some money and another year on a deal.

Schwab has had problems all day today too.

Its wild. Been doing this since 1998, and can't recall anything like this.

My compensation package thanks them.

For my two cents, barring injury Vaughn is a sure bet to be on the roster at some point in 2021. Even if they sign Cruz, they will work him in with a bench role at some point.

Hopefully he considers it. I wonder if he also realizes that his job in 2021 could depend on it. I would bet dollars to donuts that a lack of an extension in 21 makes it more likely the Sox spend on a starting DH.

And there was talk they thought about calling him up last year.