>>13262268

Are you saying that Robinhood was holding the sales of GME on it's own book as Principal and not as Agent, causing the Naked Short debacle?

A simple audit of their balance sheet and transactions in December/January will quickly clear that all up.

Not buying it, literally and figuratively. Robinhood does need to get it's act together though, that's for sure. A simple DISCLOSURE of the premium/discount per share earned from the Bid/Ask would go a long way to solving this problem. Who is front-running 10-Share orders?

In other news, GME longs are HODLing the bag thinking it's going to 1000. kek

>>13262300

>>13262307

>I would put the odds on such approval coming from the DOJ under A.G. designate Merrick Garland as

non-existent.

Uranium 1; USA 0

>>13262638

>Robinhood fronts the cash to make the transactions happen before it all settles

That implies Robinhood was letting customers trade without having the necessary funds in their accounts. Do you have proof they were "fronting" those funds inside that 3-5 business window? No, you do not. Find the under-funded accounts, then your argument has merit. I just made it easy for you.

>>13262623

>Robinhood was selling actual client order information to a third party bank from memory

Ys, that is their business model, via aggregation of trading blocks.

>>13262715

>Yeah actually I do. It’s called Robinhood instant deposit.

Those would be Money-good trades then, same as cash. Or did suddenly millions of uncleared instant deposits default inside of those 3-5 business days? Didn't hear about anything like that habbening.

>>13262723

Yeah, and that gayAF confetti when a trade was done. Lack of Impulse control validation.

>>13262762

>so Robinhood ran out of capital to facilitate the trades on instant deposits.

It was under-capitalized for over six-sigma events, huh?

Not Good.

>>13262804

>they probably didn't even do value-at-risk

That should be the Netted Minimum, at least.

>>13262777

>>13262823

>Well, I think the RH founders got their money from the usual suspects anyway,

>so there's plenty more to lose from where that came from.

The Madoff Model.

>>13262840