this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
1767 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

59166 readers
2122 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 115 points 5 months ago (3 children)

If you don't know much about investing then you shouldn't short anything ever. People who know about investing will tell you that even when your logic is 100 percent sound, the market isn't that predictable and in general the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent.

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 28 points 5 months ago

Plus, the news of this would already be priced into the stock, so if anything the price is already low and these companies would need to pivot their business (which would increase the value again) or die (which would lower the price marginally, to zero). Either way, shorting is a bad strategy in this case.

[–] Rubanski@lemm.ee 9 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Isn't shorting theoretically able to put you in infinite debt?

[–] bamboo@lemm.ee 18 points 5 months ago

Theoretically, yes. A short is sorta a negative stock. When you hold a normal stock, the price can never go below zero. But when you hold a negative stock, there’s no maximum value that stock could rise to.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think you would be margin called and just have astronomical but not infinite debt.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Infinite and astronomical are used interchangeably here. Since you have to return a share to the person you borrowed it from, if you borrowed 1000 shares at $5 and sold them to make 5k, if the price jumps to something like $350 like gamestop, it would cost you $350,000 to cover them.

Making 5k to lose 350k might as well be an infinite loss ot that investor, even though its technically a "smallish" sum. At that scale, it would destroy most people.

You can also pay to keep a short going generally and try to wait out the madness, but you have to stay solvent to do it. The very stupid and very surprising "diamond handing" apes caused some hedge fund issues, although I think most just shrugged into other financial instruments.

[–] Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 months ago

I feel like shorting will always be riskier than normal investing. With stocks you have people at the company doing their best to raise that stock. With Shorts you are betting against a company that's trying to survive.

The chances of the CEO pulling something out of their ass, dubious or not, to maintain their profits is too high.