Also, as far as I gather, people who wrote a human-like text review to go with their rating didn't get their review removed.
It's not just an useless app now, it's an actively dangerous scam app.
They're likely close to hitting their collateral limits with the clearing house[0]. During yesterday's 5-minute interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo, RH's CEO mentioned their collateral obligations (plus unnamed regulatory requirements) as the reason for preventing new positions in GME. Every trade creates a collateral obligation with the clearing house for 2 days, so if RH goes bankrupt while the trades are being settled, nobody loses. The amount of this collateral obligation is a function of the volatility of the stock. Lots of high-volatility trades in the middle of the 2-day settlement process eat up collateral very quickly. If RH runs out of collateral, none of their customers can trade until some of the pending trades finish clearing.
The reason for still allowing people to close positions is presumably because people would scream bloody murder even harder if they were suddenly unable to exit these high-volatility positions.
Collusion to manipulate markets, particularly in such an incredibly high-profile situation, seems unlikely. Whatever RH does, they know there will likely be investigations, so they're almost certainly on their best behavior right now.
If you want to invest, use a real broker, but then you will have to pay commissions.
Also, have in mind that even if they say that they are commission free, you pay with higher spreads, so if the transaction price is 1, robinhood will sell it to you by 1.02 and bough by 0.98, getting a margin from you each time you make a transaction with them.
Is a rating system still a rating system if it detects cancel culture and ignores ratings?
Is a broker still a broker if they follow SEC guidelines for limiting consumers who haven't filled out the experience questionnaire? How about if they are a discount broker and don't even have additional service for those who are qualified to trade options, etc?
Really what we are seeing is more and more populist diatribe against the normal systems we have had for decades. Sure, some things will actually be improvable, but what is improvable and what is just the average expertise of a mob that responds with emotions being extremely low?
They rate 1 star based on their actual experience. The service provided by app is not the same as it used to be, new rules were applied on-the-fly. We could speculate if Google should remove those ratings from people that never used the app...
It’s a hard problem but Google doesn’t seem up to the task.
Let’s say you had a short position and then the app decided that those stocks can’t be traded with anymore. What do you do? Even the smallest act of downvoting the company is taken away from you.
I’m not disagreeing with Robinhoods position, but if I do I want to be able to make my voice heard with the tiniest fraction.
Raises a question also, if an app is the biggest front facing area, should reviews only be about technical prowess or do we want that simply because we are developers and it makes our life easier? Maybe tags? Categories?
edit unless they offered basically real money to review the app, I haven't used it.
One thing to consider: if they've provided leveraged finance to buy this stock then they're exposed by this massive move too. They therefore have to manage risk, and so limiting further exposure does make sense. If these people can't pay their bills (if leveraged), I don't know who takes on that risk. It might be RH or this could be passed on to others. Either way someone needs to take that risk on. Some have asked why not just stop the leveraged finance, and I don't know the answer.
Another thing to consider: is it legal to allow manipulation of prices? The folk are trying to hold the price up. This is a tricky subject to consider. As a professional there are various rules on what is manipulation. Presumably a broker has some responsibility here.
All in all, who knows if this is clearly justified. Folk are equally able to go and place orders via other brokers. Whining that broker X can't trade Y doesn't hold water as an argument. If they don't trade X, find a different broker (this is entirely standard practice. Not every broker can trade every instrument). You're not required to execute there.
I'm afraid that folk are going to have a really bad wake up call. These markets are really complex and the warnings that your capital is at risk is a really big warning to be heeded. Don't invest what you can't afford to lose. I'm sorry that people are losing here. :(
App didn’t allow me to buy shares
Delete app, 1* rating, false advertising
I appreciate they were following their guidelines and wouldn't like anyone to troll an app like this but I don't think google should have removed bad reviews. Unless court ordered maybe, based on FCC findings of market manipulation or something like that. Robinhood sells their client's data to financial institutions. These institutions then can use that to skim off Robinhood's clients. The GameStop fiasco puts all that at risk so they pull the plug. Like a casino kicking you out because you’re winning too much at poker and taking money from their high rollers, who pay a premium to peek at your cards.
https://blockworks.co/robinhood-sells-your-data-but-does-tha...
Without knowing the internal details of RH all of this is speculation. I think that what folk are saying is that Citadel pay for the information on order flow (they don't provide any liquidity?). it sounds like that pays RH bills who have to pay execution and exchange fees. If that's true then isn't the choice to pay the information cost to Citadel or pay some fees to another broker?
I suspect that your casino analogy would be more accurate if the gambler was borrowing money from another casino (i.e. leverage or buying options) and they said 'You've hit your limits in borrowing' or the main casino you're in said 'We don't take bets higher than X'.
From the POV of RH's users, the company and the app just pulled a fast one on them, costing individuals lots of money in both real costs and opportunity.
I can absolutely understand it for a political pile-on, or an unrelated protest, but this is a fundamental complaint with the service not following operating procedure.
If I were king, the app would be pulled until financial amends were made.
It's what every free speech advocate has been saying for years, or decades, or hundreds of years, yet people generally cheer on censorship when its for their own political side.
The Robinhood review bomb isn't that, it's a proper and serious complaint against the service.
And in events like this, even more.
What would normal behaviour look like in a hyped-up app that ended up disappointing?
even after restoring the previous ratings who would trust the score
https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail...
https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail...
https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail...
