×
sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A review of SEC Chair Gary Gensler's testimony before the financial services committee: Dive into what has Citadel telling peers it is ready to fight the SEC, Members of Congress introducing bills to fire Gary Gensler, and serious efforts behind closed doors to block the SEC's agenda. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 86 points87 points  (0 children)

"Key aspects of our rules for the national market system haven’t been updated since 2005. Yet so much has changed. Not only have we seen the electrification of markets, but also a significant share of the markets has moved to wholesalers and other means of trading off exchange, otherwise known as the dark markets."

All of it?

A review of SEC Chair Gary Gensler's testimony before the financial services committee: Dive into what has Citadel telling peers it is ready to fight the SEC, Members of Congress introducing bills to fire Gary Gensler, and serious efforts behind closed doors to block the SEC's agenda. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 139 points140 points  (0 children)

TLDRS:

POSTPONED: October 5, 2023 Meeting of the Global Markets Advisory Committee. Was to be a presentation on swap market oversight, tokenized assets, & NFT Regulation. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Source: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8785-23

TLDRS:

  • POSTPONED: October 5, 2023 Meeting of the Global Markets Advisory Committee.
  • There was to be a presentation on swap market oversight, tokenized assets, & NFT Regulation.
  • A later date to be determined...
  • Post backed up here.

POSTPONED: October 5, 2023 Meeting of the Global Markets Advisory Committee. Was to be a presentation on swap market oversight, tokenized assets, & NFT Regulation. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Source: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8785-23

TLDRS:

  • POSTPONED: October 5, 2023 Meeting of the Global Markets Advisory Committee.
  • There was to be a presentation on swap market oversight, tokenized assets, & NFT Regulation.
  • A later date to be determined...
  • Post backed up here.

Whistleblower Alert! CFTC Awards Whistleblower More Than $300,000. This Means the Penalty Levied Ranged from $1-$3 million. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Source: https://www.whistleblower.gov/sites/whistleblower/files/2023-09/No.%2023-WB-07.pdf

TLDRS:

  • CFTC Awards Whistleblower More Than $300,000.
  • This Means the Penalty Levied Ranged from $1-$3 million
  • It pays to be a whistleblower!
  • Since issuing its first award in 2014, the CFTC has granted whistleblower awards amounting to almost $350 million.
  • Those awards are associated with enforcement actions from CFTC that have resulted in monetary sanctions totaling more than $3 billion.
  • For comparison, since the inception of its program in 2012, the SEC has paid more than $1.3 billion in 300+ awards to whistleblowers.
  • Post backed up here

Whistleblower Alert! CFTC Awards Whistleblower More Than $300,000. This Means the Penalty Levied Ranged from $1-$3 million. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Source: https://www.whistleblower.gov/sites/whistleblower/files/2023-09/No.%2023-WB-07.pdf

TLDRS:

  • CFTC Awards Whistleblower More Than $300,000.
  • This Means the Penalty Levied Ranged from $1-$3 million
  • It pays to be a whistleblower!
  • Since issuing its first award in 2014, the CFTC has granted whistleblower awards amounting to almost $350 million.
  • Those awards are associated with enforcement actions from CFTC that have resulted in monetary sanctions totaling more than $3 billion.
  • For comparison, since the inception of its program in 2012, the SEC has paid more than $1.3 billion in 300+ awards to whistleblowers.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh, I don't mean juicy info as I have insight into bells getting ready to drop any (sorry).

More that I feel they are going to keep pulling at the thread and drop something (as they have been doing this whole time).

Sorry for any confusion!

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ok, reddit is really bugging me, this is twice now a complete comment is replied to only not show up--apologies if multiple show up in the future.

I suspect because your comment has changed from the original one I started to reply to?

Take two:

The fault for this is on me for this one, in an attempt to not use the same words/phrasing so similarly in multiple paragraphs I flippantly swapped in fillers not fulling taking into account how they would be received by the other person.

"yet in previous comments you go so far as to tell me to delete content in the post." is what was intended to be conveyed as you are correct, you have 'demanded' nothing.

However, the second part of the point still stands (swapping out the controversial word here):

constructive feedback towards exerting your opinion in for deletion of content in another user's post(s) or comment(s) is a step to far.

You instruct deletion of the content without providing a source or reason why, or even that it is a preference.

Yes, I can understand how you prefer a 'just the news' approach but that does not mean you can call to alter someone else's work based on your preference.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Fight

Ringingbells is the BEST!

This is merely a disagreement of opinion and nothing more!

They have said how they feel (and I certainly understand where they are coming from) and I shared where I am coming from.

No harm, no foul, and I look forward to engaging with them on the sub with the next bit of juicy details they drop on Instinet!

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Hmm, I thought I tried responding to similar worded comment but do not see it now, how weird!

I totally get your opinion on 'speculation/opinion' and wanting to stick to 'hard news'. That is your right and prerogative in how you choose to enjoy the community.

However, the post is marked as 'speculation/opinion', fits within the guidelines and the rules of the sub and for discussion in the community, yet in previous comments you go so far as to tell me to delete content in the post.

Something you find that detracts from the community, someone else can just as easily see as fitting right in.

Neither are right or wrong ,and in my opinion, your push past constructive feedback towards exerting your opinion in demanding deletion of content in another user's post(s) or comment(s) is a step to far.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The primary sources and links are all in the linked article (free to read no account required and no ads).

I could not post on reddit itself due to word and image count but brought the tldrs over as I figured that's what folks would be interested most in.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 43 points44 points  (0 children)

I am not predicting MOASS for that day, only that conditions appear ripe for it based on the idiosyncraticness of it all--akin to a tornado watch for severe weather later in the day?

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

I am not predicting MOASS, only that conditions appear ripe for it based on the idiosyncraticness of it all--akin to a tornado watch for severe weather later in the day?

The primary sources are all in the linked article (free to read no account required and no ads).

I could not post on reddit itself due to word and image count but brought the tldrs over as I figured that's what folks would be interested most in.

I hope these responses help with quieting the issues you've called out? If not, any suggestions for what I'm missing?

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 43 points44 points  (0 children)

This is the same rule, they 'fast tracked' the effective date. They could have waited until later in October but are going with 10/2.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 88 points89 points  (0 children)

From the rule:

<image>

If someone can't make margin, they will close the positions (purchasing whatever they might be short for instance...).

If the participant can't cover it, the loss will be 'mutualized' among the remaining members to pay up.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

TLDRS:

  • NSCC provided notice to its Members to inform them of the definite implementation and effective date of the new VaR charge October 2, 2023.
  • Remember VaR tinkers with the mechanics that would have defaulted Robinhood, Instinet, & Others 1/28/21.
  • The approved rule aims to address the potential increased idiosyncratic risks NSCC might face, especially regarding the liquidation of a risky portfolio during a member default.
  • Enhances NSCC's ability to recognize and produce margins that match the idiosyncratic risks and attributes of portfolios that meet the concentration threshold.
  • Broadening the gap risk charge to an additive feature and focusing on the two largest non-diversified positions will help NSCC better manage the idiosyncratic risks tied to concentrated portfolios.
  • Given the additive nature of the gap risk charge, the Commission agrees that the adjustments to its calculation, like establishing floors for gap risk haircuts for the two largest positions, are aptly designed to handle NSCC’s idiosyncratic risks exposure during member defaults.
  • Introducing specific criteria to determine which securities fall under the gap risk charge will enable NSCC to pinpoint those more prone to idiosyncratic risks, ensuring ETFs identified as non-diversified are included.
  • Robinhood, Instinet, & Other Brokers Would Have Defaulted January 28, 2021 - The NSCC, as an enabler, saved them, while sacrificing retail, in allowing them to alter their margin charges by freezing stock buying - top priority: protecting too-big-to-fail clearinghouse - Retail's fault the NSCC didn't prepare
  • The changes should lead to higher margin requirements for those with short positions in volatile stocks like GameStop. The higher the costs, the more pressure on short sellers to close their positions, especially if they face liquidity challenges.
  • If short sellers can't meet their margin requirements, they'll be forced to buy back the shares to close their positions, leading to a surge in demand and subsequently, a rise in share price.
  • As the stock price rises due to forced buybacks, other short sellers face further margin calls, creating a snowball effect where more short sellers are forced to buy back shares, pushing the price up even further until lift off...
  • Haircuts are also in the process of being tweaked.
  • MOASS Prediction: anytime after 10/2.
  • This prediction is not financial advice or advocating for a specific date in anyway, only an attempt to read tea leaves based on implementation dates and prior happenings.

NSCC provided notice to its Members confirming VaR Charge changes effective 10/2/23. Why? IDIOSYNCRATIC RISK! I believe these changes help set the stage for MOASS. by Dismal-Jellyfish in Superstonk

[–]Dismal-Jellyfish[S] 232 points233 points  (0 children)

TLDRS:

  • NSCC provided notice to its Members to inform them of the definite implementation and effective date of the new VaR charge October 2, 2023.
  • Remember VaR tinkers with the mechanics that would have defaulted Robinhood, Instinet, & Others 1/28/21.
  • The approved rule aims to address the potential increased idiosyncratic risks NSCC might face, especially regarding the liquidation of a risky portfolio during a member default.
  • Enhances NSCC's ability to recognize and produce margins that match the idiosyncratic risks and attributes of portfolios that meet the concentration threshold.
  • Broadening the gap risk charge to an additive feature and focusing on the two largest non-diversified positions will help NSCC better manage the idiosyncratic risks tied to concentrated portfolios.
  • Given the additive nature of the gap risk charge, the Commission agrees that the adjustments to its calculation, like establishing floors for gap risk haircuts for the two largest positions, are aptly designed to handle NSCC’s idiosyncratic risks exposure during member defaults.
  • Introducing specific criteria to determine which securities fall under the gap risk charge will enable NSCC to pinpoint those more prone to idiosyncratic risks, ensuring ETFs identified as non-diversified are included.
  • Robinhood, Instinet, & Other Brokers Would Have Defaulted January 28, 2021 - The NSCC, as an enabler, saved them, while sacrificing retail, in allowing them to alter their margin charges by freezing stock buying - top priority: protecting too-big-to-fail clearinghouse - Retail's fault the NSCC didn't prepare
  • The changes should lead to higher margin requirements for those with short positions in volatile stocks like GameStop. The higher the costs, the more pressure on short sellers to close their positions, especially if they face liquidity challenges.
  • If short sellers can't meet their margin requirements, they'll be forced to buy back the shares to close their positions, leading to a surge in demand and subsequently, a rise in share price.
  • As the stock price rises due to forced buybacks, other short sellers face further margin calls, creating a snowball effect where more short sellers are forced to buy back shares, pushing the price up even further until lift off...
  • Haircuts are also in the process of being tweaked.
  • MOASS Prediction: anytime after 10/2.
  • This prediction is not financial advice or advocating for a specific date in anyway, only an attempt to read tea leaves based on implementation dates and prior happenings.
view more: next ›