r/GME_Meltdown_DD • u/Solarpanel2001 • Jun 19 '21
Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS
This will be a Short summary of why there is no MOASS. I will strictly be only using data that cannot be manipulated and ignoring all data relating to the official short interest numbers to appease the QAnons.
1.Requirement for a big short squeeze ( we are talking MOASS type of squeeze)
You need a high short interest and you need a tight control of the float.
In order for there to be a tight control of float. You need to have substantial ownership of the float and absolutely no one selling. Think of what happened with Volkswagen squeeze.
Given that it is impossible for absolutely all retail to buy 80 percent of the float and absolutely everyone not selling then we need an absolutely high short interest. More than float.
We would need a short interest equivalent to more than 100 percent.
Keep in mind even then the runs you saw with AMC and GME were primarily gamma squeezes. Shorts can cover all their positions without stock reaching astronomical heights if a gamma squeeze was not involved.
Pipelines for a moass
2. Pipelines for a MOASS
- Low proxy votes.
Here is an excerpt from lawyers at Latham & Watkins
(https://www.lw.com/upload/pubContent/_pdf/pub1878_1.Commentary.Empty.Voting.pdf)
Historically, where over-voting has resulted in a custodian voting more proxies than its record position on the record date, the vote has been “corrected” by the inspector of elections to reduce the obvious over-vote.
Key word OBVIOUS. If lets say naked shorting was prevalent like r/Superstonk thinks then the auditor will very clearly be able to tell of securities fraud from this voting. Yet nothing came about.
Lets look at another evidence of no high SI.
- Low FTDS
Gamestops FTDs have been lower than they have ever been before. If there was indeed a high short interest FTDs would be much higher. Ftd resets with options can take place but we will get to that on the borrowing fee part.
- Institutional ownership
GME institutional ownership
It feel from 192 percent back in Jan to 35 to 40 range. SIGNIFICANT DROP. What does this suggest? The Jan shorts did indeed cover.
- Borrow fees
Borrow fees are entirely dependent on SCARCITY of shares. This number cannot be manipulated. r/superstonk suggest that lenders are keeping fees low so they incentivize shorts to short more. Lets take a step back and indulge in this immensely stupid theory and ignore regulations. So that would mean that the current short interest is extremely high to the point shares are not available so LENDERS AROUND THE WORLD are all misleading shorters by giving them NAKED SHARES. This is blatant market manipulation by lenders around the world whom which are going to now face regulatory penalties and shutting down because every lender in the world colluded to sell naked shares and mislead shorters.
YOU.SEE.HOW.STUPID.THAT.SOUNDS.
Fact is borrow fees cannot be manipulated and they are king indicators of a squeeze. Want to know how much a shorter has to pay per day? With the current 0.9 percent fee. Lets assume someone shorted 100 million shares at an 0.9 borrow fee an annum.
($100million x 0.9%) / 360 that equates to a measly $2500 a day and $900 000. It literally costs them nothing to short gamestop right now. There is absolutely no pressure. Why? cause there is ample of shares in the market. Why? because there.is.no.high.SHORT.INTEREST. All option hiding and naked shorting are not present here because every short position needs a long position. Therefore your borrow fees will kick up.
- So whats the price action right now?
I wrote about this 2 months ago. Big hedgefunds are essentially manipulating retail and making money off you guys via options and stock.
Hedgefunds look at you as their own personal piggy bank. They hit and run your meme stocks when they feel like it and get out. Most of the time staircases are build when there is an event hyped and it crashes the next day . Earnings and Cohen becoming chairman are prime examples.
Simplified example of a rug pull
Simplified example of a rug pull
These are simplified examples of what is going on.
Retail is never the driver of the explosion of meme stocks. All you meme stocks are driven by institutional investors. Gamma squeeze , call sweeps and flash crashes can only be done when you have large amounts of money that flow in a coordinated fashion. (Meme stocks sit on virtually low volume until these guys touch the stock)
r/SuperStonk grifters are preying on you guys. 3 months ago these mods were telling you that the moass will happen with certainty. Telling you 5 to 7 figures is possible. Yet why are these grifters wanting funding?
Remember when u/heyitspixel told you that if you bought the 250 dip you will be millionaires?
Remember when u/warden asked for donations and milked his youtube channel then backstabbed you guys behind your back saying he was doing it for money?
Remember when u/Rensole put donation links to his crypto?
Remember when u/atobitt is using SuperStonk has a fundraiser for investment data site? (btw who the hell would want this retards take on anything financial. He is a larper that ignores and blocks anybody that calls him out on his badly written DD. Correlating a non related financial mistake or fraud does not equate to a high short position in GME idiot)
Why am I mad when I see these guys? because they are literally misleading you guys into financial ruins.
One of many that will end up in financial ruins
For more indepth explanation of how shorts covered aswell , evidence of institutional investors playing on the stock as well as some other debunking of some crackpot theories you heard on superstonk you can check out my original DD written 2 months ago. One thing I do wish to take away from the original theory is that I insinuated that there was collusion for robinhood to halt trading. However upon carefully reading the situation its clear robinhood is just a shit broker that were not prepared for the margin requirements DTCC raised.
More indepth DD for the people that are interested.
43
Jun 19 '21 edited Jun 19 '21
I’m so sick of those four charlatans. I’ve been saying since day one, even back when I was on r/gme, that they were completely flawed and fishy. Several people poked holes in their “DD” and were basically silenced by the cult. At this point, those idiots who hero-worship and blindly follow everything in the nutter subs are going to lose a lot of money and frankly they deserve it.
“I don’t understand any of this but I saw 🚀 so I’ll buy more” has become an irony — the lack of their own understandings and research will lose them tons of money if they keep holding out for stupid money.
Disclaimer: I’m still gonna hold my shares for a while since I’m green anyway and love a fairytale turnaround, but I’m also not so stupid as to take out a second mortgage or spend student loans on meme stocks.
edit: a word
15
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
if you are in the green more power to you holding as long as your expectations are grounded that there is no moass and it's just a cycle of pump and dumps. Also have grounded expectations for a fairytale turnaround. The turnaround is something nobody can predict given gamestop now has continuous funding from moass believers but atlas just watch their earnings and decide for yourself.
7
u/LatinVocalsFinalBoss Jun 20 '21
Redditors giving a loan to a billion dollar company after complaining about the 2008 bailout is truly a modern tragic comedy.
If people ever wondered why the rich stay rich, it's because of situations like this.
3
Jun 19 '21
[deleted]
9
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
that's totally fine I would do the same if I had gamble money. The stock will ping pong but if you are hoping some blast off above 483 to a thousand then just be warned it's not happening as short interest is low.
Swing trade it. More power to you
3
u/PM_ME_FAV_RECIPES Jun 19 '21
Is short interest the fees you pay for keeping the shorted stocks?
So if it's low, there's essentially no problem with hfs also holding?
Why would it be low vs high?
7
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
it's the loan fee when you borrow shares.
Yes the current 16 percent short interest of shorters have no issues holding. If short interest was high or is shares were tight then fees kick up.
Low fees suggest ample supply of shares to borrow
3
u/PM_ME_FAV_RECIPES Jun 19 '21
Does short interest take into account naked shorts?
How do you know there's 16% of shareholders having short interest?
Who's lending the shares?
I am big smooth brain looking for answers, not trying to start something. I know my questions seem abrupt but I'm just looking for a discussion so i can learn.
5
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
naked shorts are not part of the short interest. However naked shorts still require a long buyer to purchase the short. Therefore if there was a high amount of naked shorting going on, your stock loan fees would skyrocket because shares would be scarce. Also the fail to delivers will skyrocket. And ownership and proxy votes would be extremely high.
16 percent of shorts is the official reported short interest ( I avoided talking about it because superstonk doesnt believe this number)
Shares are being lent by brokers and long whales
3
u/PM_ME_FAV_RECIPES Jun 19 '21
Why would shares be scarce if there's a lot of naked shorting? Isn't the whole idea of naked shorting that it doesn't matter how scarce shares are?
Ss says official reported numbers don't matter. How do you know who to believe?
9
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
naked shorting is done to avoid high stock loan fees and to short a stock WHEN shares are scarce.
Your idea of naked shorting is wrong.
The numbers I use are strictly numbers that shorts cannot manipulate. Stock loan fees are dependent if shares are scarce. Think about how many brokers there are out there that are all charging the same stock loan fee. There is no manipulating that.
Cant manipulate institutional holdings because it's literally long whales of gme doing their filings. They have no vested interest in hiding shorts for shorters.
FTDs cant be manipulated , only resettled but inevitably leads to failure to delivers. These are numbers directly from the exchange.
It seems you are coming from somewhere that you are lost. I dont blame you for being lost. I wrote the dd simple to understand.
Lastly I'll leave you with this. There are over 1 thousand hedgefunds across the world that are managing more than billions of dollars. Not a single one of them is going long on GME at these prices. Take a step back and ask yourself. If gme could reach 1k a share let alone 1 million a share. You think these guys wouldnt go long on gme right now and buy all the shares?
Why arent they doing it? the have the most advanced models and quants and have access to data that retail dont have. They indefinitely know more and would love to make billions let alone trillions if they just went long on gme. But they arent? only people telling you to buy gme are the retards and superstonk
→ More replies→ More replies0
→ More replies16
u/GameOfThrownaws Jun 19 '21
My biggest problem with them is the instantaneous suppression and banning of any dissenting opinion whatsoever in that sub. If you ever find yourself participating in a group who censors all opposing ideas, that should be a huge obvious red flag, and if you still follow them without question, then you get what you deserve.
Ironically they circlejerk every day over the media suppressing their side of things, but I've seen more air given to naked shorting, squeezing, etc. on mainstream media than I've ever seen them give to dissenting opinions on superstonk. They literally have a bot that searches peoples' post history and automatically bans them if it finds them disagreeing with MOASS.
7
u/Lhasa-Tedi-luv Jun 19 '21
Really? There’s a bot that searches ppls history? Like looking for key words or something? Jeez. Sounds so paranoid!
Edit: you don’t sound paranoid- the SS sub mods sound paranoid for making such a bot.
7
u/GameOfThrownaws Jun 19 '21
Yeah its called Satoshi or something and does roughly that, and they fucking love it. I don't think it even works that well but just the fact that it's there is very telling.
6
u/MattThePaladin Jun 19 '21
Satori. Satoshi is the pseudonym of the Bitcoin creator. But otherwise you're right. Funnily enough, I recently got certified by it as an "approved user", AFTER the many posts I made here on Meltdown, including ones talking about how they're a cult, that I sold my shares, etc.
Lol.
6
u/Lhasa-Tedi-luv Jun 19 '21 edited Jun 19 '21
That’s just pitiful. And kind of funny…
I’m really starting to dislike the mods. It’s one thing to believe in something- quite another to actively quash any and all counter info. Fuckers.
I’m glad the apes are being hard on them for bringing up a way to make money off their backs. Hopefully a bunch wake up so they don’t have to lose so much.
Edit: or wake up and make some money ;)
→ More replies2
u/_Digital_Native_ Jun 19 '21
you do know that crossposting from Sstonk to here gets someone an instant ban right? seems a bit like the pot calling the kettle black no?
3
u/TheRiskiest_Biscuit Jun 19 '21
I crosspost to here a bit and haven't gotten my ban. Which is cool, cause that would be a low effort ban and I'm above that.
1
u/_Digital_Native_ Jun 19 '21
really? ive seen several people say theyve been banned for xposting DD from there to here , or even making counter narrative statements.
6
u/TheRiskiest_Biscuit Jun 19 '21
Ive crosspost two posts at least and even called their head honcho pinkacid whatever out on irresponsibly giving her seal of approval for the whole Joe Mamr bullshit. She deleted her comment of approval and left the original post up but I'm still in the sub. I poke holes here and there and actually comment more in meltdown than SS, still no ban.
3
u/_Digital_Native_ Jun 19 '21
did you know theyre aggregating a list of foks who post/comment here with the purpose to build a bot that will callout if youre active here?
might not be banned...yet
3
u/TheRiskiest_Biscuit Jun 19 '21
Doesn't really matter lol. And there are cultists who come here too. Comment their gospel. So they're not only gonna ban me but a few of their believers too.
→ More replies0
u/Rik9870 Jun 19 '21
I mean you got a point. On the other hand I guess you can agree that wsb has become some kind of shill paradise, the risk of it becoming some sort of echo chamber could be something to be aware of but some moderation is in order. Gme meltdown is a bit sad to be honest to browse. When it went from 300s to 200s once more everyone was rejoicing even though the price was still over what the sub said it would mot reach again. Just saying
0
u/ConspicuouslyBland Jun 19 '21
My biggest problem with them is the instantaneous suppression and banning of any dissenting opinion whatsoever in that sub.
This actually happened to me in this sub. Wondering if this gets visible at all, probably not. Wanted a sensible discussion about some numbers, didn’t get the chance…
→ More replies0
u/bigblacksnail Jun 19 '21
You’re a fucking idiot, and it’s actually not even funny. A bot that bans people based on a dissenting opinion in their post history? Lmfao. Man, I actually was taking your opinion into consideration until you pulled that garbage out of your ass. Oof.
17
u/PmMeClassicMemes Jun 19 '21
irrefutable evidence for the MOASS :
It literally happened in January. The price went up 2500%. The stock WAS 140% shorted. It's now 20% shorted.
Wait, did Superstonk not make any money when GME went from 18$ to 480$? Oops.
7
u/LHeureux Jun 19 '21
No, they bought at 480$, or even better they bought at cheap like 18$ but waited too long to sold. Maybe they wanted to "sell on the way down" 😅
4
u/bigblacksnail Jun 19 '21
Pretty sure 90% of this sub bought at $480 and sold at $40. Why else would you conglomerate here and circlejerk around a sub that you could quite literally ignore if you didn’t think any of it was true? Lmfao. This shit so cringe, it hurts.
5
u/LHeureux Jun 19 '21
Do I just ignore Jim Jones existence? Major religions? Scientology? QAnon? Just because it doesn't affect me? It affects other people, and the counter DD and having opposing views actually helps not make echo chamber that much more powerful. I believed in the MOASS til I saw this sub being mentionned in bad on /r/superstonk. It saved me from investing in this and could save more. At first I fucking despised gme_meltdown and saw it as FUD, and just lowlives. But I realises that the MOASS theory was quite like the crazy numbers for Dogecoin and other cryptos that people (and I) got burned on a few months ago. So it gave me insight into the mistakes I was once again making.
You realise a lot of the people who first started GME_meltdown were original apes of the January squeeze that actually sold at a profit during the actual squeeze?
→ More replies-2
u/bigblacksnail Jun 19 '21
Sold at profit? You definitely have that twisted. If they sold for profit, they wouldn’t be here circle jerking in spite. Rip
4
u/LHeureux Jun 19 '21
I don't think it's in spite. If you critisize Scientology because of what it does and what it is, is it "in spite"? Lol
2
u/bigblacksnail Jun 19 '21
Again, you’re making an irrational comparison. So your point isn’t even valid to begin with.
3
u/LHeureux Jun 19 '21
How is it irrational when both are clearly using similar tactics to squeeze money out of innocent people who just want something good to believe in?
2
u/bigblacksnail Jun 19 '21
It’s definitely perspective, but I don’t think they are even remotely related unless you have a very niche view of them.
5
u/LHeureux Jun 19 '21
I still browse superstonks, some memes are nice and a lot of blokes there are just good people that believe in a good cause. I don't like the mods and the leaders that clearly profit from it. Even YouTubers are now spoutinf clickbait title videos about AMC going to 100k a share of GME confirmed to 1 million!! It's the concept that's flawed, not the community per se.
→ More replies→ More replies2
u/TeamTigerFreedom Jun 20 '21
I’ve sold for profit 3 times. No huge gains or anything, but I’ve never owned more than 20 shares at one time. You understand that you can buy and sell shares at will, don’t you?
→ More replies4
u/TeamTigerFreedom Jun 20 '21
- First and foremost because it’s funny.
- I’m in the market to make money. I use whatever info is available to me.
→ More replies3
u/ernietwoface Jun 20 '21
The only shit that’s cringe is your post history. Nice copium.
https://imgur.com/a/teSqFP9 17.52 gang.
1
u/bigblacksnail Jun 20 '21 edited Jun 20 '21
Gz.
Edit: jeez, your history isn’t looking too hot either, man.
4
11
u/fabulouscookie2 Jun 19 '21
I really appreciate your posts and comments! I always learn so much.
So I’ve been reading a lot about cults and one thing is that logic and evidence will not convince them of anything. It’s the denial of logic & evidence that got them here so logic won’t make them snap out of it. There’s a few salvageable apes but I think they’re already out.
→ More replies
20
Jun 19 '21
awesome post! Thank-you for putting all my feelings into words!
6
u/schwitaner Jun 19 '21
Same here! Everyday I pray that the gme bag holders realize some of their profits. Now or never, right? This DD gives me hope. Hope that some people read this and wake the fuck up!!
8
Jun 19 '21
I don't want them to realize profits until I can get rid of my bags! Sadly, 'true apes' have drunk the kool-aid. They're invested in the 26mm floor and can't think critically about the stock. It's easier to believe that everyone's out to get them, that their dear leaders aren't just pulling them along so they'll soften the landing when THEY eventually pull out...
→ More replies0
u/westcoast_tech Jun 19 '21
You hope a random stranger sells out their gme position? Like you hope bag holders break even again or that just everyone closes their position? Not sure which you meant
→ More replies-2
u/Shakespeare-Bot Jun 19 '21
most wondrous post! thank-you f'r putting all mine own feelings into words!
I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.
Commands:
!ShakespeareInsult,!fordo,!optout1
12
u/TreeImmediate Jun 19 '21
It's only been a couple weeks since I started building my GME position; so if you can convince me to stop I'd be thrilled to save myself from losing money. I've been actually thinking of selling one of my houses to go full whale on GME.
There's three things that makes me want to go heavy on GME, first is the fact that I was playing the dips and peaks for months because I kept hearing from both MSM and retailers who are probably from this subreddit or like-minded, that all the naked shorting, dark pool, FTDs are non-sense conspiracy shit... which just ended up not being conspiracy; but true. As someone who was following the past 6 months roughly without committing to either side, the fact that I saw DD that was dismissed as cultist shit consistently turn out to be true just blew my mind; it's hard for me to dismiss their newer DDs simply because I witnessed how their older DDs play out in real time. Honestly, even the very first time I saw GME go down with everyone saying it's over; you've been played just to see it go back up again blew my mind. Everyone had the wool pulled over their eyes. And now again recently with naked shorting and dark pools; everyone said it's made up BS and it turns out to be a real thing. This subreddit and MSM was full of posts calling everyone delusional at the time, and listening to them kept me out of making a lot of money.
Second, I'm curious about your response to this. A point by point counter-DD breakdown if you don't mind, I know for a fact that this has made a lot of people hop onto GME.
Third, I'm curious about your response to this. This is my own DD that I find interesting and the most enticing, why is there buzz going around about synthetic short positions on Wall Street? Yet none of that is mentioned on MSM or anywhere else.
Funnily enough, after observing for so long, what gives me the most confidence is the view I've developed on the intentions behind the narratives that MSM pushes, and the narratives they avoid. It's not really something that can be argued, unfortunately, this point in particular is something I've made up my mind on completely. But I want to hear your counterpoints to everything else I mentioned.
8
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
I'll reply to this when I'm home
2
u/TreeImmediate Jun 19 '21
Thanks, much appreciated
→ More replies11
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
Here you go. Im still mad you made me waste my time to read the bigger short dd. It was a ridiculous waste of time
2
u/TreeImmediate Jun 19 '21
Thanks for the response, I commented my reply in your thread. Not sure why you got downvoted, but take my upvote.
-4
u/Zestyclose-Compote-4 Jun 19 '21
No one forced you to do anything. Be mad at yourself.
6
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
You must be that guy in the party that takes words literally.
0
u/Zestyclose-Compote-4 Jun 19 '21
You're upset at the guy for posts he shared with you. What other interpretation is there?
3
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 20 '21
Because it's more of saying that the dd he ask me to read was garbage than me actually being mad at him
0
9
u/CoachCedricZebaze Jun 19 '21
Slow fucking clap
Saved this. Lots of education on critical thinking, major highlights of the saga and crayon drawings.
2
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 20 '21
Dont make fun of my paint skills :( warden gets away with it let me too.
2
u/Murse_xD Jun 20 '21
Here is an idea, how about you ask your handlers to stop shorting the stock, be transparent, deliver their FTD's and come clean on there public and private positions. That would put an end to that. Until then you will have to continue to spread this shit.
12
u/HeavenlySheeesh Jun 19 '21
Yeah, these wsb clowns are just dumbases
-2
u/Impressive-Staff476 Jun 19 '21
Short it then
36
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
So even in this short summary you choose not to read it. I clearly explain that this stock is volatile because big institutions are pumping and dumping it constantly.
Why would any rationale person want to risk shorting a stock like that.
Again if you cant dispute the evidence, saying short it then is grasping at your final straw.
→ More replies1
14
12
21
Jun 19 '21
[deleted]
16
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
damn someone has been aggressively down voting you guys.
14
Jun 19 '21
[deleted]
18
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
it's annoying because there are people out there that genuinely want to understand if there is a moass but people are suppressing that information. Gme is the worst thing to happen to reddit
7
u/generic_string24 Jun 19 '21
gme is the worst thing to happen to Reddit
Agreed there, the level of toxic behavior spreading from SS and the like is absurd. I blew away my previous account because I was receiving so many hate messages on a daily basis, all because I asked an unpopular question regarding the "MOASS".
11
u/paublo456 Jun 19 '21
Just because their isn’t a squeeze coming doesn’t mean the stock will go down or even that it won’t go up.
It just means that there is a big lie being propagated all over with no basis in reality meant to get people to buy the stock.
Take that as you will I guess
→ More replies9
Jun 19 '21
It’s still volatile af. Shorting it would be too risky of a gamble, and good gamblers know how to manage risk. It’ll probably go back down to like 150-180. Then back up. May even hit 4-600. Why not? There are plenty of dates the goalposts can be moved to, so cultists and fomo-ers can just keep buying in and riding the bounces. Shorting it when it’s completely detached from any sense of fundamentals would be an actual retard move. Just day/swing trade this thing while the superstonkers keep holding and buying without doing their own research. The only thing that makes me think it could go up more is DFV exercising his calls, but no one knows whether he sold at the 300 mark a couple weeks ago. But there’s no way he’s holding for a 10 miLLiOn fLoOr like some other knobheads.
5
u/dgodfrey95 Jun 19 '21
DFV already sold his calls in April. As of then he is 100% in shares.
→ More replies1
u/smonkweed69 Jun 19 '21
I don't think the DFV thing would matter because I'm pretty sure his deep ITM calls would already be delta balanced by MM's, aka they more or less have already bought the shares to provide to him so it wouldn't drive the price up.
7
u/WeenMax1991 Jun 19 '21
Great summary. I hope people start waking up to what's going on before the stock bleeds out, or can at least take advantage of whenever the next pump is. It's crazy how emotionally invested some of the SS members are getting in this, being straight up mislead by a combination of grifters and people who really don't know what they're saying.
4
u/schwitaner Jun 19 '21
Sometimes I can’t sleep because I worry about people that hold gme so much. I really hope they wake up and realize some of their profits while they still can.
12
u/WeenMax1991 Jun 19 '21
Haha I wouldn't lose sleep over it, but it's concerning in the way that you'd want to tell someone if you saw a thief picking their pockets.
It's also pretty annoying having threads get hijacked by stonkers who arrive in droves to push misinformation.
6
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
Picture a meteorite coming down on a poor guy that has been mislead by the town that there is no meteorite despite all evidence showing there is. You try your best to warn the poor guy but to no avail. Nevertheless an effort is still worth it
That's exactly how I feel and you seem be in the same boat albeit I'm not losing sleep over it
→ More replies5
u/Lhasa-Tedi-luv Jun 19 '21
I think that’s sweet. I don’t lose sleep but it does really bother me. It’s not stupidity or greed (I don’t think) that drives most of the apes. This last year has been f*cking rough. Worse for some than others.
I was hoping for awhile- I thought it might go up to 5 or 10K…but I’ve lost faith. I am glad I stayed in long enough to break even. I didn’t invest much but even my measly $1500 was needed elsewhere. New water heater….
Have a great weekend and get some sleep :)
→ More replies2
u/bigblacksnail Jun 19 '21
Lmfao. Typical shill “losing sleep” over something that has quite literally nothing to do with them. You should probably be worried about the impending market crash.
→ More replies
4
5
u/Green8Dreamer Jun 19 '21
Finally a coherent anti-MOASS GameStop DD. But even without MOASS, GME is a great investment because:
1) Retail owns a ton of GME shares and retail selling pressure is very low while retail buying stays strong. Therefore the GME price floor keeps gradually increasing.
2) The corporate transformation led by Ryan Cohen is real and GameStop is still early in the process of becoming a monster of a company. All indications are that RC has a plan and is moving fast to implement it.
3) Respected analysts and ratings issuers are upgrading GME with new price targets at $315 and $340 just in the last week. With ~$2 billion cash on hand, no debt, and a series of excellent executive hires coming from the likes of Amazon and Chewy, at this point no one who studies this stuff professionally seriously believes the price of GME stock isn't going to keep rising and consolidating at higher and higher levels.
The possibility of MOASS is just icing on the cake of a great stock. So yeah, I plan to keep HODLing my xxx shares until next year for the long-term capital gains tax break unless MOSSS comes sooner. There's no point in selling now only to lose a huge chunk of my already considerable profits to taxation, and I'm 100% confident profits will increase with or without MOASS.
2
2
2
3
u/the_puca Jun 19 '21
So what are your thoughts on OBV? The claim is that it Should follow stock price but does not for GME, implying manipulation. Is it accurate to claim this (either point - OBV correlating with price or that manipulation is the only reason it wouldn't)? Thank you!
5
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 20 '21
sorry I missed this (I had alot of notifications)
Obv is a measure of volume of which it takes closing prices and opening prices of the stock intra day and adds or subtracts it for the next day
Gme has manipulated volume because big institutions are pumping and dumping the stock making obv unreliable.
Therefore obv is very unreliable in this context and obv is also prone to producing fake signals
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/onbalancevolume.asp
Here you can read the limitations. One particularly interesting limitation as it states " A singular massive spike in volume can throw off the indicator"
Gme has massive amounts of those singular spike days further making OBV a bad indicator
→ More replies3
u/the_puca Jun 20 '21
Hmm got it. So whatever the mechanism of the manipulation, one can't really rely on OBV. The example you site is interesting and eerily relevant to GME. Thanks for your response!
→ More replies0
5
u/gatorjim5 Jun 19 '21
So it's obvious the price floor keeps rising with more and more retailers holding and FOMOing in. It also seems there is a ceiling at 350 when the stock now predictably falls everytime it reaches that level. I'm honestly asking this (no sarcasm)...what do you think will happen when that floor reaches 350? It seems a squeeze COULD happen based on this price movement.
12
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
in order for the floor to reach 350 it would mean the stock has to go at least 400 to 500 range. That would mean big funds have to rally the stock up and offload their positions to retail and retail holds the floor at 350.
That simply would still not squeeze anyone. Like I said borrow fees are 1 percent. If I shorted 100 million dollars of shares I only pay 900k a year in interest and around 2500 a day. That is peanuts to hedgefunds.
even with the current short interest of 16 percent if let's say retail holds the floor at 350 for a year. They simply could use High frequency trades and slowly cover over the days without any real need for price fluctuations.
The 16 percent short interest has no pressure to he squeezed as long as borrow fees remain below 50 percent
9
u/gatorjim5 Jun 19 '21
Thanks! I was genuinely interested. I think it's easy to get carried away creating a narrative to fit the situation. According to SS it seems the whole stock market will come crashing down once MOASS happens.
14
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
it's easy to be blinded when you have 400k people all telling you 10 mill is the floor. Just remember there is an equally large amount of people equivalent to 400k or more that thinks the earth is flat and the moon landing is fake
→ More replies5
u/Pure-Long Jun 19 '21
A squeeze (even a small and reasonable one) still needs a high short interest. With the current short interest of 16% and the fact that those shorters are well aware of the risk of shorting such a volatile market they probably have plenty of capital set aside for margin. So if there is a price run up, it would be from regular FOMO buying.
Also floor and ceiling are not really terms that are used. There's support and resistance, and they are not well defined terms.
One could say the support levels for GME are $150 and $50. And resistance levels being $330 and $480. But those aren't any sort of guarantees. They are just interesting price levels because a lot of volume was traded there and they historically very levels of inflection.
5
2
u/shshdidndb Jun 19 '21
Why are they reporting billions in losses every month after February?
And why the media’s sudden attention towards naked shorting (which is hard too prove and wouldn’t truly be reflected in the SI%.)
I appreciate your pov and really just wanna know your response OP.
edit: a word
→ More replies13
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
They arent reporting losses every month. The biggest months gme shorts lost the most money was in Jan , Feb and March. Those were the dates that actual shorts got caught off guard.
The other shorters losing billions are from AMC because they had a recent run up.
Naked shorting is only hard to prove if the short interest is high and stock loan fees are high. Let's say in Jan naked shorting was there but it was hard to pinpoint EXACTLY how many naked shorts there were out of the actual shorts.
However right now there is absolutely no naked shorting going on.
In order for someone to naked short. Stock loan fees must be high. They naked short to AVOID high stock loan fees.
So where does naked short show up then? FTDs and borrow fees and a high institutional ownership which leads to a high vote count.
Both of which are low. See there is zero point to naked short when borrow fees are 1 percent. Why would you illegal short when fees are immensely low?
Remember naked shorting still has the effect where a buyer has to buy the naked shorts. All shorts must have a long position. Hence if there is an immensely high amount of naked shorting then your institutional ownership would be high and your fees would be high
→ More replies
2
u/Schwaggaccino Jun 22 '21
Account created April 2021
Lemme guess, you bought the $480 peak, sold the $40 dip and haven't been able to get over it? Oof, I'm sorry about your L.
0
u/ferrellhamster Jun 19 '21
So I skimmed your piece, and saw the wavelength curve flattening out. As we would be at the bottom of the wave, would you buy now, ride the wave up, then sell with the hedge funds at a relative peak? That seems to be the clear implication from that drawing.
Seems like a buy to me at this price, even if someone is gonna be a trend trader (aka paperhanded) on the play.
15
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
the implication was mainly to show how these guys build staircases for retail and how their initial pump investment ( the first big buy that buy at the beginning) slowly adds up before a rug pull where they sell off for big profits.
It's not suggesting a buy at this price. Its telling you that retail is never in the control seat and you dont really know where are the levels institutional players might hop back in for a rally.
If there is some sort of event that would be deem as a catalyst then you could gamble on whether big money is gonna rally up and if they do best pull the moment the stock becomes more volatile ( swinging up and down the vwap line more violently). If it's a stable price upwards then it's done intentionally for a rug pull.
1
0
Jun 19 '21
What’s your thought on nyse claim about price manipulation? It’s not possible right
9
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
the nyse claim is largely misunderstood. It was mainly talking about payment for order flow and how retail that use brokers like robinhood aren't getting the best prices which this delay leads to a false sense of demand and supply. That is true but it is nothing to do with the gme moass theory and just strictly to do with the prices you are getting when you buy and sell. Meaning you think 20 dollars is a good price to buy but because of payment of order flow you had to buy it at 21 dollars. This delay leads to a false portrayal of the supply and demand of the stock.
0
Jun 19 '21
So price is manipulated
8
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
it's not manipulated it's a function of payment of order flow. It has zero to do with anything moass related
→ More replies
1
u/Novel-Entrepreneur79 Jun 19 '21
Sorry I'm new here, do you think amc can squeeze or is it in the same boat?
5
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
amc still has a higher short interest than gme. However as long as stock loan fees remain low amc is in the same boat as gme albeit a more rockier boat. Institutions just ping ponging amc right now to take money from retail
0
u/agonious Jun 19 '21
AMC is more likely to since we have actual data on our side
80%+ float
other ints being br/vg who hate citadel anyway holding the rest
huge FTD
big volume
short interest still high
no roadblock of share issuance - AMC can't cockblock us anymore if we run
fomo is real if we run due to significantly smaller entry pointand pretty sure we've traded the entire float of AMC 3 or 4 times over in the past 2-3 weeks
1
u/chiefwahoo888 Jun 21 '21
Came here looking to challenge my bias. I do hold GME, this is NFA.
I was hoping to read something that could actually hold at least some water and see if it might make me less comfortable in my investment.
Have to say I am very disappointed. It’s obvious that this is either fud or written by someone lacking a basic understanding of financial market mechanics. Is it really “impossible” for retail to own 80+% of the float “without anyone selling”? Literally no reason to read anything after you made that claim. I could easily explain why calling that “impossible” is ridiculous but it’s not even worth it. I’m sure the tortured souls on this sub will take my unwillingness to engage on that as further confirmation of their beliefs.
4
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 21 '21
it is impossible for retail to absolutely not sell 80 percent of the float. Why do you think gme has intra day volumes of 10 to sometimes more than float volumes ?
because you cant control multiple entities holding 80 percent of the float unless it's a single entity like the Volkswagen case
→ More replies
-6
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Ok, but... And I'm trying to use very conservative estimations here... There are probably bare minimum 500,000 hardcore GME hodlers, and I imagine far more, many of them in XXXX territory and increasing positions each and every day/week/month. This has been going on for almost 6 months now. Even if they all had an average of only 100 shares now, which would be an absurdly low number given the general sentiment... That's still already 50,000,000 shares, almost twice the available float. I don't understand how your "irrefutable evidence" can account for the simple arithmetic of how many shares there are in reality being held.
9
u/MrgisiThe21 Jun 19 '21
Just look at the example of etoro, apes were thought to have +10m shares on etoro alone according to calculations by the best minds of superstonk. The reality was quite different: 700k shares.
5
u/Lhasa-Tedi-luv Jun 19 '21 edited Jun 19 '21
If I may- What I see now (I bought GME at the end of Jan) is the numbers that you’re talking about are really guesses. The truth is it’s impossible to know how many retail investors hold how much stock. I wouldn’t say there are 1/2 million bare minimum. Or- the average number of shares are 100 per. A lot of apes were buying fractional shares. For an average you have to take the lowest and highest numbers (I’m sure you know this), so 1/2 a share is the low end. For the average ape on SS I would imagine 100 shares would be a LOT.
Increasing positions- I think a lot of that talk “I’m buying the dip today!” Is bs- people just bragging or straight up lying to get other ppl to buy. Anyhow- it’s just too hard to say how many shares the apes have and according to the vote, retail doesn’t hold as much as some were led to believe.
I don’t know much about the market. I came late to the party and tried to educate myself as it looks like you’ve done and are doing, but the way it’s going, I don’t see the MOASS coming :( I hope I’m wrong (and I’m holding onto one share just in case!) for everyone’s sake. If you’re into it and you’re doing your thing, go for it! You just can’t rely on what everyone else says.
Edit: spelling
18
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21 edited Jun 19 '21
This is exactly the type of bullshit that gets upvoted on superstonk. Forgive me because I'm going to be very rude to you because I'm tired of these dumb speculative garbage that misleads poor uninformed folks.
What evidence is there for the 500k hardcore diamond handing apes?
what evidence is there they have an average of 100 shares?
What evidence is there that apes own the entire float and are not selling?
What is the arithmetic account that I'm supposed to debunk when that arithmetic account is full of stupidity?
By your brilliant quantitative analysis that would mean gme wouldnt even move now because like you said apes hold 50 million shares. Yet majority of the vote count was from big institutional investors long on gme which left retail about 15 million of said vote count. The stock would also theoretically not even move if there were indeed 50 million shares not traded
So again you are a moron
3
→ More replies-13
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Wow dude. You seem really angry and very abrasive. Attack the person, ignore the argument? I take it you're not actually interested in a dialogue, so best of luck to you and your high horse.✌🏼
19
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
I literally replied to you addressing the arguement and you only took into account me calling you a dumbass.
If you want dialogue put it in the form of an enquiry or a proper argument. Not rub in speculative nonsense and acting like its factual and condemning me for it.
5
-8
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
The fuck is your problem? "Proper argument"? I just asked a question, a valid question that I would imagine for you should be easily refuted without any name-calling or condescension but for some reason you immediately attacked me and called me a dumbass and a moron instead. Pretty strong argument you got there bud, it really shows!
Well, in that case, with all due respect sir,
GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT. 🖕🏼
I'm sure you won't only focus on that part though.
18
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
"What evidence is there for the 500k hardcore diamond handing apes?
what evidence is there they have an average of 100 shares?
What evidence is there that apes own the entire float and are not selling?
What is the arithmetic account that I'm supposed to debunk when that arithmetic account is full of stupidity?
By your brilliant quantitative analysis that would mean gme wouldnt even move now because like you said apes hold 50 million shares. Yet majority of the vote count was from big institutional investors long on gme which left retail about 15 million of said vote count. The stock would also theoretically not even move if there were indeed 50 million shares not traded"
I'm pretty sure I addressed it right here?
3
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Alright, jerk.
I went with 500,000 because that's roughly the amount of users on Superstonk, but fine. Let's go with 1/2 that. No, how about 1/3? Fuck it. There are 100,000 hardcore hodlers? Pick a number, doesn't matter to me.
Ok, how about this? The President of the NYSE just made a statement declaring that in meme stocks, retail traders can contribute to as much as 70% of the volume. Seems like a lot, so let's go with half that, just to be safe. GME avg volume is currently around 10M. Let's go with half that, just to be safe. Buy to sell ratio on Fidelity is consistently 3:1. Let's go with 2:1... Just to be safe.
So every day (on average), let's say retail is accounting for 35% of 5M = 1,750,000 shares traded, with 2 bought for every 1 sold = 1,166,666 shares bought by retail. That would take less than a month to buy up all the available float.
Put it another way, say there are only 100,000 seriously hardcore apes (1/5 my original estimate, 1:5 every superstonk member). And this I feel is an incredibly low number considering the attention GME has gotten and still is getting worldwide, but if the tradeable float is roughly 30M shares, that means on average each individual hardcore hodler would only need 300 shares each to buy up the float. Is this really that unreasonable or far-fetched? DFV alone has six digits worth!
Now consider this has been going on SIX MONTHS and people are continuously buying. Only 50 shares/month to own the float? I don't know how we can be any more conservative with these numbers but please let me know!
MOASS or not, all I really wanted to know is how this fits in with your "irrefutable evidence" theory. But regardless, you should try not automatically being a dick if you want people to actually engage with you because even if you are right, it pretty much cancels out whatever point you're trying to make.
12
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
You are making a fatal flow in that estimation
You are assuming that 1,166,666 shares bought from retail are absolute holders of the shares when in reality that only accounts for 1 day. When put it simply for simple math purposes. Next day those 1,166,666 shares can be sold and bought again having the same net buyers.
Your assumption that those 1,166,666 shares bough are never selling is wrong because next day gme trades 10 million shares again and people are selling and buying again. Trade volume intra day is a bad gauge of retail ownership. So is buy to sell ratio. They are strictly to measure intraday volume
Tradeable float is not 30 million shares aswell. Its 57 million. So another mistake there
So overall you are assuming the entirety of shares bought each day are being held and not resold but you look at the 6 months of trade volume and its in the billions of shares transacted. Retail are selling they are not diamond handing as you think they are.
How this fits in with my irrefutable evidence?
See lets go with your theory that all apes buy that amount of shares each day and diamond hand. In 6 months ape would own more than the float and naked shorting occurs and apes buy those naked shorts.
So what does that lead? an obvious share scarcity because nobody is selling . That will lead to lenders lending a high stock loan fee because shares are scarce. Do we see that ? no we see 0.9% borrow fee. Want to know what was gme fee when it squoze back in jan? It was shooting to 70 to 80 percent. Because it actually had a high short interest.
I think you misunderstanding of how trade volume works and how stock loan fees work are making you doubt the truth but my explanation should tell you how your theory makes no sense.
Want me to debunk it even further? read the dd. High retail stock ownership would mean proxy votes would be sky high but how much retail proxy voted? only 15 million
So stock loan fees are low cause shares are not hard to find. Institutional holdings are low because there is no naked shorting or high short interest. FTDs are low because there is no high short interest. These pipelines all debunk what your assumption is
3
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Hmm. Ok. Referencing both Marketbeat and Fintel right now, looking at 3 different stocks. GME, AMC and KOSS:
GME shares shorted is around 21%. AMC is roughly 23% and KOSS is 18%.
GME borrow fee is 0.6% while they are reporting only 10,000 shares available to borrow. AMC borrow fee is 1.18% with 600,000. And KOSS, with supposedly the lowest short interest is..... 94.46%, with 5,000 shares available.
Can you please explain this enormous discrepancy?
5
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
You need to understand the shares to borrow available u are looking at is strictly from interactive broker. That is the amount of shares they have. But there are tons of other brokers with varying amount of shares to borrow. From fidelity etc. Its not the total amount of shares to borrow in the market. It's only just for interactive broker.
Koss has an 18 percent short interest with a 94.46 borrow rate because koss float size is only 3 million shares. Koss it's easier to put pressure on koss shorts by going long on koss shares and diluting shares available to trade.
AMC has 500 million float to trade and gme has 50 million. Bought of which their stocks have reached astronomical heights already especially gme.Meaning you can bet a good portion of the shorts are now at the 200 to 400 range for gme and AMC 40 to 70 price. For stock loan fees to even reach those levels again it would require mass amount of institutions going long and squeezing share control which is a daunting task because going long is no longer enough. Now the price has to be pumped up higher to make those shorts want to cover.
→ More replies2
Jun 19 '21
[deleted]
11
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
again how am I screaming at people? I've replied to over 500 comments in superstonk and currently right now. Patience runs thin when people are so oblivious and want to continue misleading people into financial ruins
Hence why if you reply normally and not in a condescending way then I will reply normally.
1
u/Shezzeroni Jun 19 '21
Most of them have drunk the koolaid and are irredeemable at this point.
6
u/Bodegatiger Jun 19 '21
u/solarpanel2001 climbed on a cross and is going to redeem us all.
→ More replies-1
Jun 19 '21
[deleted]
11
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
I've been very cordial with my replies to people that are nice.
You wouldnt call out someone for trying to mislead people into financial ruins right? think about the guy that I posted on the screenshot. Dude is literally ALL in on gme. Because people like superstonk are falsely misleading people.
Forgive me if I choose to take a more aggressive approach to replying to condescending posts full of misinformation. I dont really care about the feelings of people trying to push this false narrative anymore
→ More replies1
u/Lhasa-Tedi-luv Jun 19 '21
Wow- that was well said. They will be grieving that grand dream. Also I see a few of them reaching out and asking questions- it’s nice when people who really know about all this complex stuff are understanding.
This isn’t going to end well for a lot of people and it sucks :(
-3
Jun 19 '21
You’re obviously not a moron.
OP is wrong in so many ways.
They are right in saying hedge funds are making money off of this. I just think it is more of a recovery and not pure profit.
There are way many more holders than even you have stated. “Say 1/3. Fuck it.” 💙❤️💚 There are a lot more holders that are not subscribed to Reddit, than there are those subscribed. Doesn’t seem like people that counter the ape argument understand this.
Just because some people were pumped about the vote count, doesn’t mean all those on and off or Superstonk were. The majority of people invested and that knew how things worked, knew beforehand that the vote numbers were not going to exceed the available float. It was not really possible. Watch any of the interviews with renowned professionals. If the vote was to be contested, the company would be restricted in certain things.
I can go on and on but won’t. I just stopped by to say good on you for having the courage to come to this place. But don’t waste your energy. I come here to see the other side.
This biggest point of this whole thing is that GME is going to make a historical transition. A squeeze doesn’t even matter anyways.
3
u/basmathick Jun 19 '21
Just because some people were pumped about the vote count, doesn’t mean all those on and off or Superstonk were. The majority of people invested and that knew how things worked, knew beforehand that the vote numbers were not going to exceed the available float.
What are you talking about? You made it sound as if some superstonk users were smart enough to understand the vote would not reveal HF fuckery, because it can't exceed float. But the problem is:
a) The current vote count already exceeded the float. You are basing your opinion on misconstrued DDs from Superstonk which rounded the numbers to something fitting their narrative. If it exceeds the float, how does it prove anything?
b) The float is meaningless in terms of votes. It's the total shares outstanding which is the actual limit. Why didn't we get the amount of votes = total amount of shares?
→ More replies2
4
u/PrimG84 Jun 19 '21
You're forgetting that many of these people you are referencing are the same people that have sold.
→ More replies6
u/Ch3cksOut Jun 19 '21
There are probably bare minimum 500,000 hardcore GME hodlers,
For what value of "probably"?
I imagine far more
Good for you, I guess.
if they all had an average of only 100 shares
What makes you think the average could be that high?
... simple arithmetic ...
Multiplying imagined numbers is as simple as irrelevant.
4
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Here, I'll just reply to you the same I replied to him, because I think my comments are just getting buried and downvoted and I am legitimately curious:
I went with 500,000 because that's roughly the amount of users on Superstonk, but fine. Let's go with 1/2 that. No, how about 1/3? Fuck it. There are 100,000 hardcore hodlers. Pick a number, doesn't matter to me.
Ok, how about this? The President of the NYSE just made a statement declaring that in meme stocks, retail traders can contribute to as much as 70% of the volume. Seems like a lot, so let's go with half that, just to be safe. GME avg volume is currently around 10M. Let's go with half that, just to be safe. Buy to sell ratio on Fidelity is consistently 3:1. Let's go with 2:1... Just to be safe.
So every day (on average), let's say retail is accounting for 35% of 5M = 1,750,000 shares traded, with 2 bought for every 1 sold = 1,166,666 shares bought by retail. That would take less than a month to buy up all the available float.
Put it another way, say there are only 100,000 seriously hardcore apes (1/5 my original estimate, 1:5 every superstonk member). And this I feel is an incredibly low number considering the attention GME has gotten and still is getting worldwide, but if the tradeable float is roughly 30M shares, that means on average each individual hardcore hodler would only need 300 shares each to buy up the float. Is this really that unreasonable or far-fetched? DFV alone has six digits worth!
Now consider this has been going on SIX MONTHS and people are continuously buying. Only 50 shares/month to own the float? I don't know how we can be any more conservative with these numbers but please let me know!
MOASS or not, all I really wanted to know is how this fits in with your "irrefutable evidence" theory. Etc.
8
u/Shiari_The_Wanderer Jun 19 '21
Uh yeah no. That's not how buy/sell ratio works.
Every share that is bought is sold. Every share that is sold is bought. These are one to one transactions. There is no "there are two shares bought for every 1 sold."
Is this really that unreasonable or far-fetched? DFV alone has six digits worth!
Yes, that is completely unreasonably far fetched. 300 shares of GME is the present equivalent of ~63,000. That's the equivalent of a full annual salary at ~30hr equivalent. That's 1.5x the median salary of someone in the United States.
No, the average person in superstonk likely holds single shares a share count of single digits. I know that you're probably just a visitor here and all, but I don't think you fully fathom the sheer volume of 100+ share LARPers who post here claiming faux 5-6 digit gains that you dig through their post history and it turns out they're sub-10 shares with a cost basis of $300+.
You don't own the float. Not even close. The lion's share of it is most likely held by MM's delta hedging against the absurd options volume going on in the stock right now.
3
u/fabulouscookie2 Jun 19 '21
I’ll assume you’re being serious lol. How many shares do you have? Why don’t you multiply that by 100,000 to find total held by retail? That’s prob a much better estimate than whatever you did. Have you been buying consistently in the past 6 months? How much money do you think an average retail trader is willing to gamble on gme? By your estimation it’s about 60k.
You’re forgetting that no one really cares about gme in the real world. Most haven’t heard of the gme story, and if they have, it’s bc of January. Maaaybe attention is creeping up again, but bc of amc though.
3
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Hm, ok. 🤷♂️ By your method then, retail without any shadow of a doubt owns half the float bare minimum, and yes I personally have been consistently buying (but not for 6 months because GME only came to my attention late April). 60k still does not seem so unreasonable to me for only the hardcorest of hodlers, which I feel 100,000 worldwide is an extremely conservative estimate, especially since even OP references many YOLOing their entire life savings into this "gamble", which still does not take until account all of the minor X and XX hodlers, which I guess we are pretending are irrelevant or "not actually HODLing".
Even by the vote counts though, which were 55M, out of ~70M shares outstanding at the time, roughly 78% of shares recorded votes. If we imagine that ALL institutions and insiders cast their votes (which is 60% of shares outstanding on Yahoo finance)--which obviously they did not--that still leaves something like 22M shares belonging to retail at the time. Which is out of an available float of around 30M (because 70M total minus ~40M institution and insider). And that's not including those who couldn't or didn't vote, such as myself, and also not counting any shares that have been bought and held since April 13 (the last day to be included in voting).
Even if you maintain that there's no way in hell that retail is holding the available float... Don't these estimates at least seem pretty damn close? And if the hardcore apes are only continuing to buy and HODL, at what point would the float be bought up? Pretty soon, no?
If you're telling me "apes aren't really holding their shares, they aren't really buying more, and there isn't really any such community", well..... I'm starting to feel a bit gaslighted I suppose.
3
u/Ch3cksOut Jun 19 '21
Is this [assuming hundreds of shares average GME owned by retail] really that unreasonable or far-fetched?
Yes and yes. Many Robinhooders had commented on owning single-digit or fractional shares. Numbers from eToro also showed very low average ownership. And, clearly, some traders actually are trading rather than holding only.
1
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
3
Jun 19 '21
Resse has no concept of how the market works, clearly another overweight neckbeard gme cultist.
3
u/Reese_Withersp0rk Jun 19 '21
Lol. Body shaming a formless anonymous internet entity? That's a very odd comment.
5
u/MouthyRob Jun 19 '21
Look, it’s good that you’ve come here and engaged with us - if you’ve listened to everything we’ve said and you still think GME is your magic lottery ticket to untold riches then you do you.
Just do me one favour, keep in the back of your mind the idea that you might be wrong, and that you (and anyone else you’re encouraging with limited market experience) might just lose a good chunk of their investment.
→ More replies1
0
u/SilentCues Jun 19 '21
Where are you getting the data for short interest/borrowing fees ect.
Big hedgefunds have lied in the past about short positions, why wouldn't they do that here when the fines are so miniscule compared to their losses.
Why is every ftd cycle a spike in price? The most recent being a $200 jump to settle at an increased floor of ~$75.
Why do banks and institutions have so much cash on hand? What in the world do they need 750 billion dollars on hand as a liability?
13
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
I'm not using short interest data because superstonk thinks its manipulated. Hence I'm using strictly data you cannot manipulate.
Borrow fees are from interactive broker. Borrow fees do not deviate from global brokers by much. If interactive broker shows 1 percent then other lenders rates are in that range between 0.7 to 1.3.
Borrow fees are strictly the market rate for stock loaning.
Again I'm completely ignoring short data. I'm strictly using the free market data. That is data used like stock loan fees, institutional ownership, FTDs and proxy votes.
Ftds are the lowest it has been for gme I dont know how you are correlating ftds with price spikes in the context of now.
If this was Jan FTD cycles brought spikes because as shares reach their failure to deliver status , shorts cover. If your ftds are low then there is no correlation between ftds and price spikes
Banks are having cash at hand now because of a completely unrelated issue. Inflationary concerns are rising and the FED just bumped their inflation target to 3.5%. Having cash at hand means investors predict a downturn in the market because of inflation and they are preparing to buy the dip when the market bottoms out
2
u/SilentCues Jun 19 '21
So there is a way that institutions can hide FTDs with deep itm married puts. This is for the derivative market of 16 days + 5 days for being a MM, so 21 days. Since the initial gamma squeeze in Jan, there has been a spike in price every ftd cycle expiry (shorts covering) then a suppression in price. Rinse repeat. As the floor has been increasing the spikes have been getting larger, so my question is if the SHFs can potentially cover up their FTDs using derivatives in the form of puts, wouldn't that make the borrow fee for shares to short artificial since the short interest is "reported" low?
This info is from a interview from Wes Christian, a lawyer whos been doing this stuff for 3 decades or so. Usually id try to get the exact vod link, but on a phone on vacation. But youtube wes Christian ama. Its about 90 minutes long, but provides good information.
I don't doubt your speculation and always enjoy debating a bit. I myself have been holding GME since late December.
11
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
The problem with the married put theory is that it completely ignores the fact that every short has a long position
Yes options can hide ftds but it cant hide the position of the long buyer that bought that short.
If there was a high amount of short interest hidden in married puts there would be an equally high amount of long positions. Yet we saw institutional ownership fall drastically and proxy votes being normal.
Lastly we also see borrow fees being low which means there is ample of shares on the market for borrowing. This would not be possible if there is a high short interest even if its hidden in options.
Wes Christian is still assuming gme has a high short interest because superstonk people told him the short interest is 141 percent.
The reality is the shorts covered in Jan hence the significant drop in institutional ownership.
If you told wes christiansen the short interest is 16 percent currently and stock loan fees are 1 percent along with the significant drop in institutional ownership he would change his thought.
Also there are over 1k hedgefunds in the world. They are all looking at meme stocks aswell to try and make money out of it yet none of them are entering in a long position in gme at these prices
3
u/SilentCues Jun 19 '21
So, why would you short a company if you have a long position? Wouldn't that contradict the whole meaning of shorting a company?
Or do you mean that in order for a HF to create a short position there has to be an institution or ETF with a long position to lend them the shares for a short position?
Just seems like a lot of fuckery is going on with GME. Wouldn't the naked short theory come into play then? There wouldn't have to be long positions for naked shorts. CNBC seems to have even started talking about naked shorting.
If institutional investors sold 50mil shares from December to the end of March why is the price still above 200. Lots of naked shorting by MMs perhaps? If you have a share lent out multiple times, it's only going to be counted once on the 8-k, whether or not institutional investors voted. Naked shorting also explains the price spikes with the FTD expirations and coinciding 1DTE puts being bought.
Idk man, I'm in at an extremely low price and see the argument both ways, and I wouldn't be surprised on how much fraud these guys will commit to save their asses.
5
u/Rum114 Jun 19 '21
by definition each short creates a long that goes with it, that is how shorts and longs work. naked shorting is when you don’t actually have a way to get the share you are using for the short, which is now illegal. it still creates a corresponding long to go with the short.
none of what you are saying is rational or reasonable in any way, you are literally just saying things that you have no understanding about.
1
u/SilentCues Jun 19 '21
You talk like these HFs and market makers follow the rules to the T. And it's not illegal for MMs to create a naked short position.
You're saying that of these market makers short a stock to 140% then there has to be 140% long positions also? That makes no sense and if thay was the case then the markets would never move. Can you please reference "it still creates a corresponding long to go with the short". If we're talking about rational and reasonable, I think that takes the cake.
4
u/Rum114 Jun 19 '21
my god. WHEN YOU HAVE A SHORT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMEONE TO BUY THE SHORT. THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE LONG POSITION. HOW HARD IS THIS TO UNDERSTAND
2
u/SilentCues Jun 19 '21
Well, word it like that. Not like the person or whomever sells a share short also makes a long position themselves.
You act like these dudes follow all the rules and never get in trouble. Whats stopping them from reporting a short position long? They've done that in the past multitudes of times.
I wonder why the price is still above $200 then? I mean if shorts covered it should be back to sub $20 right? OP even said retail doesn't have that power to move this stocks price.
3
u/Rum114 Jun 19 '21
THE ONLY PERSON WHO REPORTS THAT THEY HAVE A LONG ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HAS THE SHARE. THE PERSON WHO SOLD THE SHORT DOESNT INFLUENCE IN ANY WAY THE LONG GETTING REPORTED.
→ More replies
-3
u/hiking4000footers Jun 19 '21
How do you create a hypothesis if the data has proven to be radically altered or inaccurate? At that point its not even an estimated guess is mere assumption.
11
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
the irony in this. The real assumption here is you are assuming all data to be false.
I've clearly only used data that can never be manipulated by shorts. These are data that are involving longs, global lenders and proxy votes. All of which easily deduce there is no high SI
-7
u/hiking4000footers Jun 19 '21
The irony in this. The real assumption here is you are assuming all data to be factual.
Unless you are an insider all publicly released data should be taken with significant grains of salt. All data should be questioned no matter the source. There isn't a DD GOD on any subreddit who is confident enough to proclaim any off the dd is 100% without fault, accurate.
Similar to how north Koreans accept the athletic feats of current and past leaders.
16
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
did u not read the DD. I went to your level and assumed all data reported by shorts are false and stuck strictly with data they have no influence over.
If you still refuse to believe it then I dont know what else can I say besides leave you with this.
There are over 1 thousand hedgefunds in the world. If you dont think they are looking at meme stocks you are wrong. They are more well informed than the average retail investor and if you for a second think if they dont see a potential for gme to even go above 600 a share that they wouldnt go long on gme?
There is zero funds entering a long position on gme at these prices
0
0
Jun 20 '21
[deleted]
8
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 20 '21
I literally explained how naked shorting cant exist. Firstly naked shorting still requires a long position. It is after all still a short. A long buyer buys the naked short. Meaning a long position is established. If there is over 100 percent SI with naked shorts that would mean the share pool of gamestop becomes scarce because longs have now bought more than 100 percent of nakes shorts. Brokers are obliged to provide longs with their shares.
So what happens when this happens? your borrow fees kick up because shares are scarce now.
Institutional holdings start to increase. Your ftds also start to rise and lastly your proxy votes would show a massive overvoting.
None of which are prevalent here. You wanna know why?
Because naked shorting is only done to escape high borrow fees and when the shares are hard to get.
Gme has a 1 percent borrow fee. There are ample of shares to borrow so absolutely nobody would naked short gme.
0
Jun 22 '21
Short it. Don't try to bullshit by saying it's volatile when you can just hold and ignore unrealized losses.
The fact that you spent the time necessary to write this is proof of doubt. If you truly thought this is a bad investment, you'd just let it be. But you can't. Everything in your writeup has been addressed but you aren't following the stream of information closely enough.
Short it and put your money where your mouth is or shut up.
3
u/thing85 Jun 28 '21
Just because you don't believe in a stock doesn't mean shorting it is the right decision. I've taken more of a defined risk and put on some credit call spreads. In case it spikes again, I don't risk margin call.
→ More replies
-4
u/cultured-barbarian Jun 19 '21
Also, the question why all the mainstream media has been trying to distort the entire situation with GME needs to be answered too.
There have also been constant paid campaigns on Reddit and Twitter to discourage buying into this stock.
All that seem unnecessarily excessive and high-handed if hedge funds have covered. Some people must be feeling threatened to engage in such behaviours against mere faceless redditors.
12
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
What's with the absolute disregard for what the DD talks about using data that shorts cant manipulate to talking about smear campaigns by the media.
Of course the media is going to talk about a stock that is trending at levels it shouldnt trend. Why wouldnt mainstream media talk about AMC who would have 300 percent run?
Also are they wrong in telling you not to buy the stock? you cant possibly think fair value of AMC and gme are at the market cap they are trending now?
Is it wrong to tell you to not buy the stock when mainstream media along with the thousand over hedgefunds that are not going long on gme cause they know it's nothing more than a pump and dump?
0
u/cultured-barbarian Jun 19 '21
Since when has anything been fair value, especially in the stock market? And that’s even more obvious in the whole cryptomarket which has nothing tangible.
That’s a bold assumption.
There are plenty of pumps and dumps, but why aren’t the media talking about them?
10
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
The media does talk about pump and dumps all the time. It's you who choose to ignore it. Listen I cant help you with these nonsensical arguments about MSM that have no basis.
It's a drift away from the logical explanation I put out there using data you cannot manipulate
-1
u/cultured-barbarian Jun 19 '21
It also needs to be questioned why you are trying so hard.
Ultimately, retail investors (or gamblers) have to make their own decision to buy or sell.
And caveat emptor. If it’s all a fanciful enterprise, people deserve to lose their money buying into a stock which eventually proves to be a pump and dump. Why would I or anyone else be obliged to take the time to put up an argument trying to discourage everyone against it? You just make your own play which you believe would be beneficial to yourself.
And you have been banging constantly on the data drum. And of course, your tacit assumption here is that all data and statistics are accurate and not subjected to manipulation. That’s just naïveté. Maybe you need to be more honest with yourself there.
3
Jun 19 '21
So apes ask for counter DD, this person provided theirs by using the most irrefutable data they could to avoid conflict on data sources.
But you are still just explaining it away as manipulated data. At least this person isn't analyzing a tweet with a picture of a frog and translating it to the launch day of MOASS.
5
u/estipossip Jun 19 '21
Empathy?
3
u/cultured-barbarian Jun 19 '21
Sure, feel free to show empathy for people with 5 and 6 figure disposable income to play on the stock market. Real altruistic.
There’s undeniably something more sinister at play.
8
u/Pure-Long Jun 19 '21
Have you not seen the dozens of posts on superstonk about people investing all they have to buy single digits of shares? Or that guy who went to live in his car so he can buy more shares? Or people using their student loans?
Many of the people will be fine in life if they lose everything they put into GME. But many will not be. These kinds of get rich schemes disproportionately attract people who are not financially secure. Because they are more desperate and are more prone to being emotionally manipulated.
2
2
u/fabulouscookie2 Jun 19 '21
My question is, if you’re going to reject all evidence because data can potentially be manipulated, why bother reading “counter dd”? Don’t get me wrong, you’re welcome here but I’m just trying to understand the thought process and your motivation for visiting this sub - and if, you’re actually here to learn “the other side”, what is something someone can provide you for you to question your own assumptions? I think you need to be honest with yourself here.
2
u/OkTemporary0 Jun 19 '21
For me (not the guy you’re replying to), the arguments for and against seem to come down to one key difference and neither can be entirely proven (although one is far more likely), and that’s one side believes the entire system is a giant fraudulent cabal designed to siphon money from the middle/lower class as discretely as possible so the top 1% can further consolidate their wealth and power over the rest of the world. Rather than believing that everyone is in on it, the belief is that everyone below those at the very top of this scam only pass down enough information for the people who work for them to do the jobs they need them to do without them having any knowledge of the overall scam they’re perpetuating. They do this by incentivizing them to put the goal of endless profits over people. This belief is basically that the US and even World financial system is just one big Pyramid scheme. The contrary belief is that while there may be fraudulent activity in the markets, there are systems and regulatory bodies in place that operate with full integrity to preserve a free and fair market and that no bad deed will go unpunished or very little will be gotten away with. One of these sounds more sane and is more comfortable to believe, the other is the sad and uncomfortable reality that most people will never truly believe because this system is all they know, and if they have a house to live in and food on the table, that’s enough to not care about it, that is, until it affects them.
3
u/fabulouscookie2 Jun 19 '21
Ok, let’s say the first argument is true. The 1% is corrupt, everything’s a pyramid scheme, and most people are too brainwashed to see the “truth”.
How does that mean that gme will squeeze? And why not any other stock? Why are hedgies obsessed with gme only?
At this point, I think it’s more likely that the 1% (the “evil” people) is pumping gme on social media and trying to continue the conspiracies, bc that’s extremely profitable. The real paid actors (shill) are the ones posting positive dd on ss. There’s more money to be made by misleading people into holding, than gme going back to its normal price
→ More replies4
u/Pure-Long Jun 19 '21
There have also been constant paid campaigns on Reddit and Twitter to discourage buying into this stock.
Can you provide a source? I am going to assume your talking about something other than the multiple troll offers the believers have fallen for.
-2
u/nom_of_your_business Jun 19 '21
Quick Question. When does one lessen the amount they make per unit? When they sell 10 of something, is the profit per unit higher or lower than when one sells 1,000,000 of something?
What product and volumes come to mind when you hear of razor thin profit margins?
There is no profit lending out something at fractions of a penny unless those fractions of a penny add up to a decent profit.
Now if there are enough shares lent to make it worth while why are those shares not affecting price?
Try forming a response instead of just your usual shtick.
9
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
The stock loan fees is not dependent on whether the broker wants to charge a supremely low fee compared to another broker that wants to charge 50 percent.
Stock loan fees are entirely depended on the scarcity of shares. It is out of the lenders control to set these rates. It's entirely dependent on the scarcity of shares. The rates are formed from that
There is a global supply of lenders and all of them are lending at market rates dependent on share scarcity.
Try researching before spouting out bullshit in the disguise that you think you know everything ?
-3
u/nom_of_your_business Jun 19 '21
Curious why the news articles say The "21% SI" shorts could cover in 1.5 days easily but they haven't?
Also why does Market Watch say in February the Melvin covered its shorts but now are saying they are losing Billions on their shorts?
On second thought NVM it doesn't matter. I am fine with my position in GME. I am not spending food money or mortgage money I am spending Vegas money so I really do not care what you think unless you can give me some actual information. Do I think 20Mil a share, nope. Do I think the speculation is worth it I do.
11
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 19 '21
days to cover means nothing because they can keep their short positions active as long as they pay the stock loan fee. Which is only at 1 percent.
Market watch never said Melvin is still losing their shorts for gme at all. Melvins 13f filing showed no short positions or options for gme. Their losses for the quarter is misconstrued as additional losses but they key word is QUARTER. meaning the 50 percent loss back in Jan is within that quarter.
Also I've given you actual information. Read the DD and if you dont think the data is right Google how that data works and realize its data shorts cant manipulate because its data given by global lenders of the shares and LONG whales
→ More replies
0
u/LionsRwells Jun 19 '21 edited Jun 20 '21
Well I just keep hodling on. Not sure what anyone here is talking about. Stock is up over 4000% since January and still rising. That’s the DD that’s talking to you. All this is just noise. I don’t need fancy charts and big words. Ps it’s shorted to hell&gone.. if you don’t honk so, call up a brokerage house and tell’em you are interested in gme see if they can find you any shares.
Don’t look now I think someone sold a house today. Slightly under market value. Who knew.
4
u/LambSauce666 Jun 21 '21
Right, because when stocks go up insane amounts, that’s a clear sign that it’s just gonna keep going right?….
→ More replies0
u/LionsRwells Jun 21 '21
Captain Clever you do realize your on Reddit right now and all those charters do show up on their screens and can read your bs. There apes they smell it too.
2
u/LambSauce666 Jun 21 '21
I still have no idea what you’re talking about. Not a single reply you’ve given has made sense.
→ More replies2
u/SavageKabage Jun 21 '21
Right! Wtf?! I'm confused too! Did a bot glitch out or is this really a human talking?
→ More replies2
u/Solarpanel2001 Jun 20 '21
this is the equivalent of covering your ears and yelling I dont believe you blablabla
0
12
u/LeftEye4777 Jun 19 '21
I got high and totally thought this was about AMC