Mdawgs Investments

Do you own or trade Disney? I have some and it is best of the day for me. If it can hit a home run during the pandemic, shouldn’t it keep climbing once they can fill their parks again?

Worst today but still a 10 bagger is NIO. Do you think it is tied to TSLA forever? They are competitors but generally seem to follow each other, stock wise.

Do you own any casino stocks?

Quote: SOOPOO

Anyway, we both must be making a boatload today as the market is green!

You must not have been watching closely. AMZN and TSLA went red a bit ago.

My main accounts are still all green, but about ninety grand less green than they were about a half hour ago. AAPL is holding things up a lot though, thankfully. CMG is way up, and that helps too! BAC is up, which is good.

Time to trade additional shares. Trying to buy TSLA on its dip right now.

Rebound, in progress (among the FANG stocks and TSLA I mean). Well off the lows.

That's the thing, more often than not, an early sell off in the day is a buying opportunity. But of course there is that day when it ends up closing even lower. Today is not such a day.

AMZN holding up pretty well so far after yesterday's monster run. Still looking for 3285 in the pre-. Getting there.

Just filled at 3285. That's a hunskadoodle overnight. Probably sold too soon, but there's always the long term shares!

Now I may go back to sleep.



And Poker Grinder.

Market going crazy today. I bot AMZN at 3315 - got hammered. I could barely even login. I actually couldn't for a long time, not on my iPhone only on the web.


Anyway, I bot more at 3255, which brought my average on that trade to 3285 and dumped at 3287. Booyah! It's hard to keep MDawg down. And this is why you must be able to average in more shares when trading. Never buy all of what you intend or are able to buy at once.



Just to give you an idea of how overloaded they are...over an hour just to talk to a rep, and I'm an ultra high level account assigned to a special team, and STILL no one available.


I sold too soon, but still, I was down like five grand on just a tiny 100 share lot! at one point more than that when it dipped below 3255. Just as long as you book a profit is all that matters. And these are extra trading shares anyway, on top of my long term AMZN.

Be careful out there today, if you're trading. Just logging in today is a chore.

Do you take advantage of any of the silliness around these Reddit pumped up stocks? I'm sure there are new millionaires based on GameStop alone.... (not me!)

Stepdaughter (who gave me NIO and SNAP, both big winners) recommended I buy GSE. It was at ridiculous price of $80, already having had 30+% runup the day before. I told her we missed by a day.... I should have listened....

Hi Soopoo.

You and I may count on all our fingers and toes and then some, all the stock tips we got that were good. For example I was given Peloton in March and ignored the idea. But then I'm sure you and I have received just as many bad tips too.

Can't act on them all....

Never look back other than to learn from the past, look only forward, right?

Quote: MDawg

Hi Soopoo.

You and I may count on all our fingers and toes and then some, all the stock tips we got that were good. For example I was given Peloton in March and ignored the idea. But then I'm sure you and I have received just as many bad tips too.

Can't act on them all....

Never look back other than to learn from the past, look only forward, right?

But I didn't.... she was a perfect 2 for 2..... she may have even got the tip on Reddit.... I guess my 'learning' will have me buy whatever she recommends next.... last night she mentioned a specific crypto I had barely heard of, I don't even remember it now, ...... If I could buy in my TD account i would..... I just don't want to open a CoinBase account.... maybe just lazy....

Here's some live video of today's AMZN trades
AMZN 1/27/2021.

The basic idea...for me, as far as trading, is BOTTOM FISHING. When I set this at 3265 AMZN was trading about ten points higher. And 3265 represented, in my mind, a safe entry point given the prior action. Sometimes I will set it for a point below the lowest print of the day, but today I didn't anticipate quite a double bottom.

Anyway it worked out fine - Eventually filled, and I sold quickly at 3270. Too soon, but with the market the way it is today, a quick five points is better than risking ten or twenty.

Also, I am trading only 100 share lots lately, not my usual 300. Just in case I need to average in a lot more shares, that way I end up with say, a few hundred total extra trading AMZN shares, versus 900 extra.

Did another quick 3234 to 3239.

GET READY TO RUMBLE...TSLA reports at the bell, and AAPL at around 1:30pm PST. Funny how AAPL always reports a full half hour late.

I hold substantial long term shares of both but might trade additional shares after the bell...gotta be nimble, gotta be quick.

Interesting observation about MDawg's stock trading: Just like at baccarat, HE NEVER LOSES. Never a mention of a single loss. Can't wait until he starts sharing his sports betting picks. :/

I don't know man. It seems like it's a full time job you and some of the others have found for yourselves commenting on what others are doing. Fine. I'm tired of responding, and will no longer to you, or to certain others.

As far as stock trading, I actually could teach what I do. But, why? I'm too busy doing it. TSLA missed on earnings, but not on revenue. Predictably, there was a knee jerk initial reaction. I've seen this tens of thousands of times, I know the market. So I put in a quick 815 buy, filled, immediate sell to 825. It actually dropped below 800 for a moment, but I wasn't worried. 100 lousy shares. Quick grand. Really, more for fun than anything else, but these tiny little trades I did today added up to $2400. If the market weren't so iffy, I would have been doing it with 3-5X more shares per lot, and made more like seven or eight grand today. Over time, doing it daily, it adds up to a fair amount. I actually don't even pull the money - I just leave it in there. I don't view it as income per se, I depend on my career and other businesses to support us.

After the 815 to 825, I put in a take it or leave 795, and it never filled.


AAPL didn't do much of anything, so I left it alone.

Long term wise, as far as my long term TSLA and AAPL, they have been way out of the park for some time. Not worried.

Some days, like today, I might have just one hearing a telephonic one, so I am busy with the market. Other days, I might not have time for anything else, and no time to trade. But even sitting in the courtroom halls waiting for the department to open in the pre-coronavirus days I have been known to day trade.

I'm not the only one that trades stocks. I may be better at it than most, but that might be because I have good instincts and have been doing this for a long time. There is a sort of natural selection that comes with stock trading. If someone is still doing it years after starting, it means he is very very good at it, because most people either get blown out or give up not so long after starting.

To suggest a second radical idea, besides the one the Wizard has posted time and again ("don't read it if you don't like it"), I could suggest opening your ears and eyes, and following along, maybe even asking questions, if you are interested in stock trading.
Such as, Darn MDawg, why did you think to enter a purchase or sale price then? What led you to pick those prices? Why those stocks? What did you see?
I am not trying to sell a system, I am not asking for anything. Believe me, there are people who charge tens of thousands of dollars to impart less stock trading info than I post on here freely.
If not interested in learning, have a nice day!

Quote: kewlj

Interesting observation about MDawg's stock trading: Just like at baccarat, HE NEVER LOSES. Never a mention of a single loss. Can't wait until he starts sharing his sports betting picks. :/

This documented evidence shows that he is very good at both baccarat and stock trading.

This is just my experience with GME, reposted below:

Just to see what would happen, I tried to short it. I tried for 1000 shares short just on one of my stock trading accounts, didn't bother to try on the others. No shares available. This is typical, not just for this stock but others, but for this one it might have to do with a straight block on shorting it, at the brokerage.



Then I tried to go long - the first time I tried, it was halted. I tried again just now for 1000 shares long and the order went through, then I cancelled it. I had placed it well below market anyway it was just a test to see if the brokerage would accept the order, which it did.



There's no need to trade risky stocks like this though. With just 50 shares, I booked an easy $500. on AMZN in the pre- early this morning, and if I had let it ride just twenty minutes longer, I could have made $2500., as it hit 3253 just minutes after I sold at 3213. However, after I got the fill at 3203, it dropped to as low as 3198 I think it was - and there's where you separate the amateurs from the pros. I knew it would come back, and put in an order to sell for 10 points higher and held to it. An amateur would have panicked and either sold at a loss, or lowered his sell order.

Again, as far as trading: When I put in an order I know it's a good price. I don't waiver. At most, if it plummets, I will average in more shares, and sooner or later, I always make money. Every time. Part of it has to do with picking the right stocks, and the rest is timing, patience, and knowledge of what price to set for the buy and the sell. Sufficient buying power and not getting greedy are key too.

I have a bottom fishing order in for trading shares of TSLA at 805, if it dips that low. I will cancel it now, as the lowest it hit after I placed it was around 810, and now it's all the way up to 837 or so.

Meantime, I am confident that my long term AMZN and TSLA will continue to rise. Just stick with blue chip tech stocks, or blue chip other stocks, whether for investing, or trading. Stay away from crap like GME, AMC, CYDY and the like. I try to avoid negative -EPS companies, period, let alone hyped crap like this.

Timberrrrrrrrrr!



Dropped -120 just since I posted the above about trying to short it.

Let the theme continue!

Can you imagine, if my short order had been accepted?? GME was at 378 when I tried.

1000 shares.

 🤦🏻‍♂️

Quote: MDawg

Timberrrrrrrrrr!



Dropped -120 just since I posted the above about trying to short it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/robinhood-app-td-ameritrade-restrict-trading-of-gamestop-amc-stock/

Let the investigations begin

Bounced back up from a low of about 112.



And that's the thing though - this kind of UNPREDICTABLE volatility could lead people to lose money on BOTH sides today, long and short.

I don't think anyone is going down for this though in terms of criminal prosecution. I mean these Reddit kids all they did was just tell each other to, BUY! right? They didn't make up any lies about the stock, as far as I know. Just a group of people who banded together to try to support a stock. As long as whoever instigated it disclosed that he held a position, I don't see a violation of law.

Groups of people band together all the time to buy stocks, with varying success. During the first days of the crash of 1929, that is exactly what groups tried to do, prop up the failing market with pockets of buying, but...it didn't work, at least not for longer than a very short time.

Quote: MDawg

Bounced back up from a low of about 112.



And that's the thing though - this kind of UNPREDICTABLE volatility could lead people to lose money on BOTH sides today, long and short.

I don't think anyone is going down for this though in terms of criminal prosecution. I mean these Reddit kids all they did was just tell each other to, BUY! right? They didn't make up any lies about the stock, as far as I know. Just a group of people who banded together to try to support a stock. As long as whoever instigated it disclosed that he held a position, I don't see a violation of law.

Groups of people band together all the time to buy stocks, with varying success. During the first days of the crash of 1929, that is exactly what groups tried to do, prop up the failing market with pockets of buying, but...it didn't work, at least not for longer than a very short time.

Lol, the investigation is into whether Robinhood and TD broke the law.

They basically manipulated the stock by closing trades to buy BUT allowing sells.

Gee what's gonna happen when no one can buy but only sell?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/mark-cuban-dave-portnoy-aoc-and-others-react-to-robinhood-restricting-trades-on-gamestop-and-amc-11611855658

Just for the h. of it I decided, okay, let me see.

I bit (bot? 😁) at 230 (it had just dropped form 250 so I felt safe). Just a 100 shays. Put in the sell order at 235.

Dropped to 206 before you knew it. Entered an order to buy another 100 at 198, to average in, it never got quite that low. Decided, f. (as in forget) that, changed to 231, sold, got out. So I made a $100. More than many who have lost their arses today, I am sure.

Of course it went above 235 once I sold, though. Now it's 261! And that's how they get you. On a stock like this where anything currently goes, it is much harder to hold your resolve, though.

It was somewhat fun anyway.

I am just not savvy enough to understand how a platform will sell the stock.... but no one can buy it? So who is it being sold to?

I am not exactly sure who broke what law, but I hope someone goes to jail over this!

What? Yes Soopoo I read something about how Robin Hood and such locked their trading platforms to any GME trades for a period of time. But that locked both buys and sells. My trading account that I used for this is obviously good to go for GME, just not for shorting. I haven't looked into my other platforms for this.

Down from 261 to 245 now.

RobinHood is for strictly for squares anyway. Never touch the stuff. They deserve what they get.

All trading platforms are now commissionless anyway, why would anyone go with RH? All you have to pay are the SEC fees on sale, and that's the same everywhere.

Quote: MDawg

What? Yes Soopoo I read something about how Robin Hood and such locked their trading platforms to any GME trades for a period of time. But that locked both buys and sells. My trading account that I used for this is obviously good to go for GME, just not for shorting. I haven't looked into my other platforms for this.

I suggest you fully read the articles I posted.

They froze buying but not selling

Tested my other stock account - worked fine - allowed me to place an order.

If you may recognize the two screens you'll know which platforms these are. If not, I'm probably not interested much in talking to you, or you might be on my "list."

I placed it, then later cancelled it.

This other trading account did not allow me to short either though. Which is interesting, because from past experience this one is more able to find the shares to borrow of a given security, than my other account.

Quote: MDawg

Tested my other stock account - worked fine - allowed me to place an order.

If you may recognize the two screens you'll know which platforms these are. If not, I'm probably not interested much in talking to you, or you might be on my "list."

I placed it, then later cancelled it.

I mean the price went up because they lifted the restrictions.

You are mad late to this party

The stock market goes up and down based on supply and demand of course, but behind that are the emotions of hundreds of thousands of people sitting behind those trading desks or at home. Even the programmed traders are following the programmed emotions of their programmers, in a sense, and anyway algos follow humans not the other way around.

If you want to call emotions multiplied by vast numbers of people, manipulation, so be it, but it's really not manipulation in the true sense of the word. People say ignorant things like "the market makers manipulate the market" but other than perhaps some minor tricks like holding up an order or pulling it for a second, all they do is pass along the orders as they come in.

As you get better and better at this game, it becomes easier to gauge where a given stock will go, but it's of course easier to trade quality stocks that are in demand and tend to hit new ATHs.

I see that GME dropped to 193 but jumped some +150 in the A.H. lol So if I'd held my shares from yesterday I'd have made over $10,000. or so instead of $100. on that particular trade.

Quote: MDawg

The stock market goes up and down based on supply and demand of course, but behind that are the emotions of hundreds of thousands of people sitting behind those trading desks or at home. Even the programmed traders are following the programmed emotions of their programmers, in a sense, and anyway algos follow humans not the other way around.

If you want to call emotions multiplied by vast numbers of people, manipulation, so be it, but it's really not manipulation in the true sense of the word. People say ignorant things like "the market makers manipulate the market" but other than perhaps some minor tricks like holding up an order or pulling it for a second, all they do is pass along the orders as they come in.

As you get better and better at this game, it becomes easier to gauge where a given stock will go, but it's of course easier to trade quality stocks that are in demand and tend to hit new ATHs.

I see that GME dropped to 193 but jumped some +150 in the A.H. lol So if I'd held my shares from yesterday I'd have made over $10,000. or so instead of $100. on that particular trade.

If I had picked the right lottery numbers I would be a millionaire winner

If over the past day or two you would have had a ‘buy’ order at 290 and a ‘sell’ order at 310 I wonder how many $20 per share profit you could have made? 10? More? The only problem is if you buy at 290 and it goes back down to 20 or whatever the actual business should be valued at!

You do trade solid companies that you are willing to hold if there is a sharp drop. As long as you have the capital to tie up that is a plan that is reasonable.

With for example AMZN, I have traded it since the day it came on the market and owned it continuously for about seven years (took me a while to get smart). As Hunter S. Thompson mentioned in FALILV when he was staring at the neon lights outside his hotel room, I have have been able to "study its habits" for long enough to know how it behaves.

I had an order to buy extra AMZN at 3193, which was bottom fishing, but then I got busy on a phone call with a client and turned the order off - cancelled it. It would have filled, and by the end of the phone call AMZN was some thirty points higher. *Sigh.

But with a stock like GME, not only does what I mentioned above about stock prices being emotion driven apply more than double, but...there is no precedent. This stock has never before behaved like this. It could drop to 100, and NEVER come back, which is why it's easier to lose sight of the potential for rebound and just take the quick profit before you might get stuck.

Still, no matter what stock you are trading, it's more often that the bottom you pick to buy on a dip drops even lower before it rebounds much higher. That's how they get you - or at least how they get most traders. No stock behaves exactly predictably.


BTW people keep talking about shorting. Shorting is just borrowing shares, the act of shorting does not affect the price of the stock whatsoever. However, when a company like Citron Research enters a short position in a stock, given their track history of success with shorts and the negative (but generally truthful) press announcements they release once they enter the position, when that happens the stock generally goes down. But not always - many firms have declared short interests in TSLA only to lose their arses.

What does affect the price of a stock is massive buying to cover - this is what happened with GME, which shot its price up higher as the Reddit Kids pushed it beyond the comfort zone of the funds that were short.

I have a simple question. If a private individual shorts a stock and it goes up in value, is there some point where he is forced to cover the short? What is to prevent the short seller from simply never covering the short if the stock goes up in value? Can it happen that the short seller is forced to cover a losing short and he doesn't have the money?

All I know is that in Trading Places the Dukes were told to settle up their short positions at the end of the trading day.

Trading Places was a movie.

Still, what the Dukes were engaging in would be something more like what's called naked calls, in the stock market, where you don't have any stock to back up your bet that the stock will go up, and you have practically unlimited up and down side. "Calls" (betting that a stock will go up) and "Puts" (betting that a stock will go down) are options, and the riskiest forms of options are "naked" where your loss is not just limited to the amount you pay for the options.

The Dukes were betting that the commodity would go UP, while Winthorpe and Valentine knew that it would not. So, the Dukes kept committing to buying and buying and driving the price up, and then after the news came out that the commodity availability not be going down (not affected by the winter), Winthorpe and Valentine just stood by as the price plummeted and then eventually stepped in to sell the commodity at a much lower price than what the Dukes had committed to buy at.

By the way, I think the implication was that Winthorpe and Valentine didn't have the sort of credit the Dukes did, so that they had to cough up some cash (such as Ophelia's and Coleman's life savings) to deposit against the commodity they were going to sell.

Also, what happened to the Dukes was more of a "margin call" where they ended up so out of the money that they had to pay up. They were committed to buying massive amounts at a certain price, which could not be sold at anywhere that price.

I have never traded commodities (Frozen Orange Juice) maybe someone who has could comment on this more.

Options aside - if I buy a stock my downside is limited to the stock's going to 0. Now, that could still be a tremendous loss, but it's still a hard limit. There is no limit to the downside on a short, because the stock could theoretically keep going up forever. However, if a short wipes a person's account out to zero, the brokerage will ask for for money in order for him to retain the short position. This is why Citron and others raised desperately needed cash quickly, or had to buy to cover.

From what I understand outfits like Citron will no longer publish when they go short
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/29/citron-research-short-seller-caught-up-in-gamestop-squeeze-pivoting-to-finding-long-opportunities.html
which is not so good for them because, as I mentioned above, in USUAL times, the mere news that someone like Citron is short will drive a stock's price down, which is what they want.

Quote: MDawg

Trading Places was a movie.

I had to refresh my memory what happened at the end of Trading Places, not that I ever really understood it.

This seems to explain it well: What Actually Happens At The End Of 'Trading Places'?.

Quote: Wizard

I have a simple question. If a private individual shorts a stock and it goes up in value, is there some point where he is forced to cover the short? What is to prevent the short seller from simply never covering the short if the stock goes up in value? Can it happen that the short seller is forced to cover a losing short and he doesn't have the money?

All I know is that in Trading Places the Dukes were told to settle up their short positions at the end of the trading day.

I believe shorts have an ending date where you have to buy the stock to cover the position.

Right, there were actually three parts to all this.

(1) The Dukes committing to buying before the crop report came out. This drove the price UP. This was like...naked calls.

(2) Winthorpe and Valentine, after the price got high enough, committed to selling at that inflated price. This was like...puts.

(3) After the crop report came out, there was panic selling because now everyone knew that the orange juice supply was not going to be scarce. After the price dropped low enough, Winthorpe and Valentine picked it up cheap.

So, Winthorpe and Valentine profited from the difference between what they SOLD at (high) and what they were able to BUY for later. In essence, Winthorpe and Valentine sold short, and bought to cover later. In the meantime the Dukes were committed to buying at much higher than market, and had to cough up the difference due to a margin call.
But whatever they were dealing with was more along the line of options (in this case, futures I believe), than the actual commodity.

Quote: MDawg

BTW people keep talking about shorting. Shorting is just borrowing shares, the act of shorting does not affect the price of the stock whatsoever. However, when a company like Citron Research enters a short position in a stock, given their track history of success with shorts and the negative (but generally truthful) press announcements they release once they enter the position, when that happens the stock generally goes down. But not always - many firms have declared short interests in TSLA only to lose their arses.

What does affect the price of a stock is massive buying to cover - this is what happened with GME, which shot its price up higher as the Reddit Kids pushed it beyond the comfort zone of the funds that were short.

Quite clipped to relevant paragraphs.

I disagree with this. Shorting is borrowing and then selling the borrowed stock. The second part of the short position is selling, and the selling absolutely affects the price of the stock.

If one were unable to short, there would be less “sell demand.”

<<What does affect the price of a stock is massive buying to cover - this is what happened with GME, which shot its price up higher as the Reddit Kids pushed it beyond the comfort zone of the funds that were short.>>

Buying to cover definitely affects the price. Raises it.

Selling short doesn't affect it enough to guarantee success though, otherwise all anyone would do is sell short some massive position and then immediately buy to cover lower.

Compare to straight buying. If just buying were enough to raise the price then all you'd have to do is put in some massive order to buy and then sell it right afterwards at the higher price.

The reason these two parts of the equation more or less cancel out is that the amount of shares you enter the position with, are equal to the amount of shares you need to exit, and the combination of these two actions on the market should cancel out. So you need intervening events to affect / change the price of the stock, before whatever you did, buying or shorting, becomes profitable.

Also don't forget about the spread between the bid and the ask. That also prevents anyone from immediately turning a profit due to his own actions.

But yes, I agree with you, in principle, selling of any kind should lower the stock price.

Yup. We are back on the same page.

ETA: reportedly it was the buying by banks writing out of money calls that caused much of the price increase pressure.

Interesting.


By the way, as you probably know, one way to stop short sellers from borrowing your own shares is to keep a GTC sell order in place. While your shares have a sell order on them they cannot be lent out. The limit price could be set sky high to make sure they neither sell, nor are lent out.

And then, the other side of the coin, if you want to make money off lending out your shares, you may opt in to such a program at some brokerages, although they will pay you only for the use of some of the more scarcely available for borrowing stocks.

Quote: MDawg

Interesting.


By the way, as you probably know, one way to stop short sellers from borrowing your own shares is to keep a GTC sell order in place. While your shares have a sell order on them they cannot be lent out. The limit price could be set sky high to make sure they neither sell, nor are lent out.

Thank you, I did not know that.

Quote: MDawg

Interesting.


By the way, as you probably know, one way to stop short sellers from borrowing your own shares is to keep a GTC sell order in place. While your shares have a sell order on them they cannot be lent out. The limit price could be set sky high to make sure they neither sell, nor are lent out.

And then, the other side of the coin, if you want to make money off lending out your shares, you may opt in to such a program at some brokerages, although they will pay you only for the use of some of the more scarcely available for borrowing stocks.

So I have a friend who does that. One stock, small cap, he owns a lot of. He is bullish on the company for the long term. Apparently he 'lends' his shares out and gets a really high % return with seemingly no risk.... I think it was 1% a month which is a lot! Remember, the only thing he is losing is liquidity. If he plans on keeping the shares for the long haul I don't see a downside.

MD.... have you ever done this lending shares to a brokerage thing? If not, why not? Other than the lack of liquidity, what are other downsides?

It must have been some stock for which it is difficult to borrow the shares...I don't believe AMZN or AAPL qualify - TSLA might.

I never did it, I just recall seeing the email that allowed me to opt into the program years ago.

Quote: MDawg

It must have been some stock for which it is difficult to borrow the shares...I don't believe AMZN or AAPL qualify - TSLA might.

I never did it, I just recall seeing the email that allowed me to opt into the program years ago.

I think TSLA does. I recall reading that it is often difficult to short because of a lack of people willing to 'lend' those shares. If you have a bunch that you are keeping 'forever' it might be a program for you.....

Bad day for me! I should have HODL today!

I find these threads fun and scratch my FOMO itch. Due to restrictions that my job imposes, I only invest in ETFs and mutual funds. Plenty fine and diversified, but certainly boring when there are interesting times in the market.

Quote: unJon

I find these threads fun and scratch my FOMO itch. Due to restrictions that my job imposes, I only invest in ETFs and mutual funds. Plenty fine and diversified, but certainly boring when there are interesting times in the market.

If you are permitted.... what job does not allow individual stock ownership?

Quote: SOOPOO

If you are permitted.... what job does not allow individual stock ownership?

I’ll PM you. It’s permitted with heavy restrictions.