Robinhood banned GameStop buying. Now Webull has, too.

Much like Twitter and Facebook, Robinhood seems to have found itself out of options.

Robinhood app

Robinhood lets anyone trade — but they can't trade the stocks they want to right now.

Photo: Robinhood

On Thursday morning, Robinhood started blocking users from buying stock in GameStop, AMC, BlackBerry, Nokia and other stocks at the epicenter of wild market volatility. "In light of recent volatility, we are restricting transactions for certain securities to position closing only," the company said. Other trading apps were soon forced to follow suit, when clearing house Apex said it would no longer accept buy orders of some of the volatile stocks.

On its face, Robinhood's decision doesn't quite make sense. Robinhood has seemingly benefited from the retail investor-fueled boom: The long-time favorite of Reddit's WallStreetBets community has rapidly gained traction in the wider world, surging to the top of the U.S. App Store charts on Wednesday.

By blocking the most popular stocks from being traded, Robinhood instantly ignited fury from some of its users. "This is market manipulation" was the headline of one top Reddit post this morning, while another proposed a class action lawsuit against the company. These people know how to hold a grudge, remember: They've spent the past week boosting GameStop stock partly because they're mad at a hedge fund.

Robinhood's not the only brokerage to take action. Others, including Interactive Brokers, TD Ameritrade and Charles Schwab have introduced certain restrictions, such as raising margin requirements. But Robinhood appears to be the only U.S. brokerage to have voluntarily banned purchases — and as the poster child of democratized retail investing, the decision feels both more important and unexpected than the others'.

So why did Robinhood do it? It seems to be betting that it's the least bad of the available options. While Redditors might know what they're doing with these stocks, the bulk of the people downloading the app on Thursday morning probably couldn't explain how the GameStop short squeeze works. If the stock crashes — which many think is inevitable — those new, inexperienced users will likely be very, very mad. Looking for someone to blame, they might pick Robinhood for failing to protect them.

It's not just users Robinhood has to worry about, either. Last month, regulators in Massachusetts filed a complaint against the company for exposing investors to "unnecessary trading risks." They accused it of "falling far short of its fiduciary standard" to investors, arguing that the company has gamified stock trading to an unhealthy degree. Stepping in today is one way for the company to show that it is willing to protect investors when they're at risk, potentially keeping regulators at bay.

Earlier in the day, Robinhood users appeared to be abandoning ship in favor of other apps, including Webull and Public. But the party ended for both of them, too, when Apex said it would no longer accept buy orders for the stocks. Still, by pulling the plug later than Robinhood, and by blaming a third party for the decision, Webull and Public might be able to save face.In the same way that Twitter and Facebook's Trump ban boosted moderation-light apps like Parler, Telegram and Gab, Robinhood's difficult decision could light a fuse under its competition.

This story is developing and has been continually updated.

Policy

Google is wooing a coalition of civil rights allies. It’s working.

The tech giant is adept at winning friends even when it’s not trying to immediately influence people.

A map display of Washington lines the floor next to the elevators at the Google office in Washington, D.C.

Photo: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

As Google has faced intensifying pressure from policymakers in recent years, it’s founded trade associations, hired a roster of former top government officials and sometimes spent more than $20 million annually on federal lobbying.

But the company has also become famous in Washington for nurturing less clearly mercenary ties. It has long funded the work of laissez-faire economists who now defend it against antitrust charges, for instance. It’s making inroads with traditional business associations that once pummeled it on policy, and also supports think tanks and advocacy groups.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

Sustainability. It can be a charged word in the context of blockchain and crypto – whether from outsiders with a limited view of the technology or from insiders using it for competitive advantage. But as a CEO in the industry, I don’t think either of those approaches helps us move forward. We should all be able to agree that using less energy to get a task done is a good thing and that there is room for improvement in the amount of energy that is consumed to power different blockchain technologies.

So, what if we put the enormous industry talent and minds that have created and developed blockchain to the task of building in a more energy-efficient manner? Can we not just solve the issues but also set the standard for other industries to develop technology in a future-proof way?

Keep Reading Show less
Denelle Dixon, CEO of SDF

Denelle Dixon is CEO and Executive Director of the Stellar Development Foundation, a non-profit using blockchain to unlock economic potential by making money more fluid, markets more open, and people more empowered. Previously, Dixon served as COO of Mozilla. Leading the business, revenue and policy teams, she fought for Net Neutrality and consumer privacy protections and was responsible for commercial partnerships. Denelle also served as general counsel and legal advisor in private equity and technology.

Workplace

Everything you need to know about tech layoffs and hiring slowdowns

Will tech companies and startups continue to have layoffs?

It’s not just early-stage startups that are feeling the burn.

Photo: Kirsty O'Connor/PA Images via Getty Images

What goes up must come down.

High-flying startups with record valuations, huge hiring goals and ambitious expansion plans are now announcing hiring slowdowns, freezes and in some cases widespread layoffs. It’s the dot-com bust all over again — this time, without the cute sock puppet and in the midst of a global pandemic we just can’t seem to shake.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

Entertainment

Sink into ‘Love, Death & Robots’ and more weekend recs

Don’t know what to do this weekend? We’ve got you covered.

Our favorite picks for your weekend pleasure.

Image: A24; 11 bit studios; Getty Images

We could all use a bit of a break. This weekend we’re diving into Netflix’s beautifully animated sci-fi “Love, Death & Robots,” losing ourselves in surreal “Men” and loving Zelda-like Moonlighter.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt

Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.

Workplace

This machine would like to interview you for a job

Companies are embracing automated video interviews to filter through floods of job applicants. But interviews with a computer screen raise big ethical questions and might scare off candidates.

Although automated interview companies claim to reduce bias in hiring, the researchers and advocates who study AI bias are these companies’ most frequent critics.

Photo: Johner Images via Getty Images

Applying for a job these days is starting to feel a lot like online dating. Job-seekers send their resume into portal after portal and a silent abyss waits on the other side.

That abyss is silent for a reason and it has little to do with the still-tight job market or the quality of your particular resume. On the other side of the portal, hiring managers watch the hundreds and even thousands of resumes pile up. It’s an infinite mountain of digital profiles, most of them from people completely unqualified. Going through them all would be a virtually fruitless task.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email: akramer@protocol.com), where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

Latest Stories
Bulletins