Almost everybody does it. There is an official report from every broker. (Maybe, SEC 605/606 report). There is no fine for selling order flow.
You mean like MainStreetMedia's fake news? https://markets.businessinsider.com...shows-risk-investing-game-2019-11-1028685860#
Payment for order flow Bloomberg News reported in October 2018 that Robinhood had received almost half of its revenue from payment for order flow.[49] The company later confirmed this on its corporate website when asked by CNBC.[50] The Wall Street Journal found that Robinhood "appears to be taking more cash for orders than rivals," by up to a 60-to-1 ratio, according to its regulatory filings.[51] FINRA fined Robinhood $1.25M in December 2019 for failing to ensure that its customers received the best price for orders. All of Robinhood's trades between October 2016 and November 2017 were routed to companies that paid for order flow, and the company did not consider the price improvement which may have been obtained through other market makers.[52] -Wikipedia but you can verify all the sources! So, what are your sources?
Read it again. The fine was for the routing decision to the paying MM even when there was a better price with the non-paying MM's. What I said still stands: There is no fine for selling order flow. It is common practice and generally legal. Sources? For one, I recommended an SEC document.
Robinhood reportedly installed bulletproof glass after frustrated traders kept showing up at its office Frustrated traders occasionally show up at Robinhood's California headquarters, The New York Times reported. According to the paper, things got so bad that Robinhood eventually installed bulletproof glass near the entrance. The app pioneered free stock trading, but its gamelike interface and availability of highly risky products have put it under intense scrutiny. So many frustrated traders have showed up at Robinhood's Silicon Valley headquarters that the stock-trading app installed bulletproof glass, The New York Times reported this week. An explosion of stock-market volatility as the global economy grapples with a pandemic, coupled with record unemployment, has caused a surge in interest for the app, which pioneered commission-free stock trading for a much younger audience than traditional brokerages. But as Robinhood grew, it added more complex products that are inherently risky. Those products, combined with Robinhood's gamelike interface and relative lack of educational features that are prominent on older platforms, mean there's real risk of massive losses for the platform's traders, who are about 31 years old on average. The company declined to comment about the defenses when asked by Business Insider. It declined to share user-performance statistics with The New York Times. High security is commonplace among well-known tech firms. https://www.businessinsider.com/rob...fter-frustrated-traders-visited-report-2020-7
RH did not "gamify" trading. They turned their customers into a game. The customer thinks he is a trader, RH thinks he is the product.
Both Interactive brokers and Robin Hood have catalyzed the rest of the brokerage industry to upgrade their service to the retail trader. Two areas that need improvement are a more competitive arena to lower margin interest rates and the ability to do create short sales in a timely manner.
"I use it because in my minimum research to trade options, RH required no review. They will happily let me lose money."
Agreed, fake news as usual living in our pixy dust twitter reddit world. SEC would have basically shut them down. Its not a mcdonalds kiosk with the free 1/4 pounder software glitch.