Someone just put a big short in the metals market - enough to make the news

According to the news, someone just put a $5.6mil bet on seeing a 35% drop in Metals and Mining on the S&P.

Based on the jobs report, the fear of the election and general unrest - I'm betting he's wrong. Of course I'm not putting $5mil in to back my bet - I'm just sticking to my plan.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/trader-bets-5-6-million-162125575.html

In a sizable trade on Thursday, someone bet more than $5 million on a nearly 35 percent decline in the S&P Metals and Mining ETF, the XME (NYSE Arca: XME). In the specific wager, the trader bought more than 50,000 of the September 20/15 put spreads for $1.12 each. Since each put option accounts for 100 shares of stock, this is a $5.6 million bet that the ETF will fall as low as $15 by September. The ETF is currently trading around $23.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It was only cost 58k though.

 

to place the sell.


But, if wrong, he has to cover the loss.

 

I think markets are manipulated. "Everybody" thinks world is in trouble and countries/banks, people buying gold. I believe metals will crash big time as no one will have money to buy anything even falling metals EXCEPT the insiders. Then the price will jump to new highs as the world currencies reset. Get your guns, water and food - we are in for it.

 

Curious to me is this...are they an insider or outsider... this might give an explanation of who is who

http://www.greenhobbymodel.com/rnp-subscribers-7.html

 

Someone putting in a short like that doesn't necessarily have "inside information," a Nostradamus-type ability to predict the future -- or even a brain in their head.

All they need is a margin account. And if they're wrong, they could lose everything they have. The investment landscape is littered with the corpses of such delusional investors.

 

In terms of the overall market a punt of this size is the equivalent of losing a quarter through a hole in your pocket or picking one up off the sidewalk.

 

My sentiments exactly.

 

The election in November will play a role in metal prices, Vote for Hilliary Clinton you will make some money, Vote for Donald there might not be no Wall Street. This is my opinion only, not telling people how to vote.

 

Hi folks,

First of fall, folks have been doing this for centuries - taking the contrary bet. feh.

You need to follow the technical signs (Captain Price) and not ever, ever, ever, let someone 'talk' you out of a winning play. Do NOT listen to the chatter. There will be 'talking heads' touting every aspect of the market. Ignore them. They are all speaking 'from position'. Pay attention to YOUR goals and objectives and to Captain Price.
Stay on the right side of history - Fundamental analysis, if you will. You may occasionally win on the wrong side, but it's dicey at best and suicidal at worst. Regardless of how we feel about Bruce Jenner taking a walk on the wild side, it is suicidal to bet against him/her/she/it. Never, ever let you emotions get in the way of making money. Yeppers, at times, we just have to grit our teeth and pull the lever. feh.

Lastly, let's hammer this clown by continuing to go and stay long.

and so it goes,

peace,

rono

 

Strikes me as a small trade by wall street standards! It's the hidden agenda behind the media promotion that I find interesting.

 

By Wall Street standards, even though it is mind boggling to us, it is a small trade. There are two things that make all markets difficult for the retail investor: shorting and high frequency trading. The Securities and Exchange Commission is aware of both, has the authority to restrict both but has apparently no intention of doing anything.

 

On which instruments do you believe short selling restrictions should exist? I have shorted any number stocks and ETF's and can't think of a single reason why I (or anyone else) should not be able to do so as long as the owner of the security consents to it.

 

I was against elimination of the "uptick rule" in 2007 and favor its reinstatement today. I suspect, World Colonial, that you and I probably disagree on that point. It is a point of debate in investment circles, as you probably know well.

 

Looks like they were right for the short term. Nice sell off this morning.

 

No, it cost $5.6M. It was 50,000 contracts at $1.12 ($112.00 per contract).

This is considered a large bet on the options market.

 

Hey, if you lose your shirt, just open up a GoFundMe account LOL
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tr...or-help-with-10644556-e-trade-debt-2015-11-20

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/he...hed-and-now-i-owe-e-trade-10644556-2015-11-19

 

You are right, I do have a different point of view. I had to refresh my memory on the definition on don't see why exchange rules should be biased in favor of "long positions" over "short positions" which is exactly what the "uptick rule" does. This is the equivalent of requiring every "long purchase" to be made only at lower price over the prior trade. I cannot imagine anyone being in favor of that and I am not either.

 

The uptick rule was placed to prevent wall Street psychopaths from destroying legitimate businesses that employed thousands or more workers in the name of personal greed or profits. In the age of Walmart, home depot, etc. The gvmnt has obviously been bought off by wall street and other corporate persons who have no worries for food, shelter, heat, medicine etc

 

You mean by spreading false or supposedly false rumors? If this is the reason, apparently this doesn't apply to perma bulls schilling the market which is 99% of Wall Street making equally unsubstantiated and exaggerated claims benefiting the long side.

Ultimately, psychology will catch up with the real fundamentals. The actual fundamentals today certainly are not accurately reflected in today's disproportionately absurdly inflated values. Because if the fundamentals were so great or even decent, ZIRP wouldn't have been necessary for the last 90 months - and this is just for starters.