Gamification: Why Do We Care About Robinhood? What Could the SEC Realistically Do?
Trading was once pursued by retail investors as a means to wealth creation (or, at least, enhanced retirement savings). Today, it seems for many, more a form of recreation and entertainment. This transition has consequences.
November 17, 2021 at 12:45 PM
9 minute read
Investments and Investment AdvisoryOnce upon a time, trading was pursued by retail investors as a means to wealth creation (or, at least, enhanced retirement savings). Today, it seems for many, more a form of recreation and entertainment. This transition has consequences: (1) it may lead to excessive and wasteful trading, in which retail traders systematically lose; (2) it confuses and delays price discovery, as uninformed traders band together to resist inevitable price changes; and (3) it may discourage other retail investors from viewing the stock market as a safe place in which to invest retirement savings.
But this transition did not occur accidentally. In overview, the pattern was predictable: New entrants into the brokerage industry found their path blocked by established discount brokers (for example, Charles Schwab), who dominated discount brokerage. To compete, they had to innovate—and they did. Led by Robinhood Markets, Inc., they developed zero-commission brokerage. This depended upon the willingness of high frequency traders (also known as "wholesale dealers," such as Citadel Securities or VIRTU Financial), to buy their order flow through a technique known as "payments for order flow"). These "wholesale dealers" were delighted to buy the uninformed trading of retail investors, which carried no threat that these investors had informational advantages. It was a "no-brainer," and the resulting linkage between high frequency traders and retail traders quickly revolutionized the industry—for better or worse.
Driving this transition was the entrepreneurial ability of these new entrants (most notably, Robinhood) to market trading as digital entertainment. A variety of marketing innovations quickly developed: "push notifications" aimed at the individual investor, securities lotteries in which prizes were awarded for client referrals, daily (even hourly) lists of the most actively traded stocks among their clients, and lists of client holdings. This all created a herd mentality among young investors that solidified their identity and also hinted where the herd was likely to move next. So informed, many young investors eagerly followed the herd and did as they were told. But the more important force was that this new digital engagement made trading an attractive user experience; Robinhood's real rivals were more the casinos of Las Vegas than the "establishment" advice of Merrill Lynch or Morgan Stanley.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Mulls Big Changes to Banking Regulation, Unsettling the Industry
Trump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250