The hedge funds want everyone to think the momentum is gone, hence the shift in focus to SLV...but i don't think GME is done yet.
Gamestop
- Thread starter Bonerfarts
- Start date
The hedge funds want everyone to think the momentum is gone, hence the shift in focus to SLV...but i don't think GME is done yet.
I'm thinking so (I hope I'm wrong and it moons to $1000). If reports are true and there's only 50% short sold of the float, then this bleeds out. If you go to WSBs, its filled with true believers who are not giving up the fight. u/DeepF*uckingValue is still in (he lost 5 Mil today). I think that kid is screwed, but if you look at any public company's ticker, there is someone who bought the peak. If I was to advise that kid, I'd tell him to cut his losses. What do I know though.
Last edited:
DFVs stake is still probably worth $30 million or so. He should sell a big chunk of course. The thing is a normal person might have sold out at $2 million or $5 million or $10 million but he rode it up to $50 million. That's why the biggest winner in Vegas lost it all shortly after. Actually I'm really surprised he hasn't sold already. It's out of character for him. He portrays himself as a deep value investor (I've watched a lot of his videos) but GME is anything but a value stock now. Might be something to that.
From Robinhood:
|
|
Here would be my very nice reply to them.
Here it goes...
EAT A PHUCKING DICK.
Signed,
Phuck off
Two questions for you Boner,
1. I know you said you held Long prior to the Influencers running the stock up. You then said you used 20% of the gains to buy more shares later. You probably already answered this but at 27 pages I probably missed it. Did you sell your original Long position or was the 20% of the gains used to purchase more shares unrealized gains on the original position you still held? Just curious how you played it.
2. WTH is a Boner Fart? Is it the same concept as a Piss Boner except a different hole?
What happens if the entirety of the investing public learn that the DTCC has no idea who owns which stocks and how many of any company are actually in existence?
Or that hedge funds use fictional shares to manipulate the ever living **** out of the markets to their own personal gain? Destroying share value and ruining companies and lives to make a profit?
Well that just might be an interesting story. Anyone know any journalists?
www.investopedia.com
Or that hedge funds use fictional shares to manipulate the ever living **** out of the markets to their own personal gain? Destroying share value and ruining companies and lives to make a profit?
Well that just might be an interesting story. Anyone know any journalists?
What Is the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC)?
Established in 1999, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC) is a holding company that consists of five clearing corporations and one depository.
How do does anyone posting on this board actually know that the shares they hold in their portfolios are actually legitimate shares? Anyone?
I tried to write a long-term call on GME (again) early today. The trade was rejected (again). Big Boys are f**king retailers who want to play in the game. Unless you got in early and held, retailers don't get to make money off this obvious fiasco.
I've got to think a bit more on this topic.
if there are supposed to only be 10 shares in existence, but HFs shorted 14 shares, somebody had to buy 14 shares for them to do this, but yet in theory none of those 14 shares existed before the naked shorts came in. So now are there 24 shares in existence? I think 24 shares would be owned by the long side at this point... but yet when the HFs cover they’re essentially wiping out those extra 14 shares. If all of the 24 shares held long went to sell, AND the HFs had not yet covered, that could be wacky temporarily?
I think I’ve got my brain around that but I’m unsure what happens with options and market makers needing to hedge their option books.
I’d think every share is in fact accounted for but with enough shorts in existence you would have too many shares theoretically in existence (until they cover the shorts).
Reference this when people ask 'what is block chain good for?'
When someone wants to short a stock it’s on the broker to find the share not the client.
1.) It needs to be said that influencers didn’t run up the stock, the stock had its own natural growth and the influencers accelerated and amplified the short squeeze. I held 200 shares for about 3 months in the summer and sold after no action. I wasn’t a true believer but wanted to be. Also held for a couple weeks before their earnings report in Dec. There was huge hype on WSBs that a good earnings report would send the price through the roof. Earnings were mixed and the price was flat. Both times I sold thinking it was all too good to be true.
I bought about 50 shares when it was $40 and rode that to $70. Even then I thought it was too good to be true. When it was $85 I went all I on the cash I had liquid in my account ($3,500) and rode that to $350. I sold 10 shares at 350 to recoup my initial investment. After that I had 26 shares for free. I had a sell stop at $205 and when a swing down hit that I sold all my shares, so I turned $3500 into about $8500. Not huge (I made more just today on my other holdings). I put in $1,600 over the weekend as hedge and sold again completely today, down $200. I figure if I held the 200 shares I had in the summer I would have made about $70.000 (gulp).
2.) Ask your mom she has first hand knowledge 😉
There is no way the short interest went from 120% to 39% in one day given the lack of volume today. It's crazy how the financial media is trying to manipulate this and get the redditors to sell. This along with the SLV stuff today is criminal.
“SLV squeeze” was coordinated propaganda campaign aimed at market manipulation of GME. Blatant as hell. Every major news and financial network participated.
yep. I have said it numerous times n this thread that there is funny business going on here and you can’t make this shit up.
This shit will be talked about for a very long time when it is all said and done. Yet, this is nothing new and no surprise to the pros. You seriously cannot make this shit up.
There has been blatant manipulation from the get go on this. Yet,none of this is a surprise or new to the professionals.
In what context are you making this comment? Investments in brokerage accounts? Investments in funds that hold pensions? Answer would somewhat depend. I would say that reputations may be gained or lost for good reasons.
I have no idea what the short interest is but these are the same research shops that reported the over 100% short interest.
Last edited:
“The day traders also appear to have chosen one tactic correctly. They targeted silver exchange traded funds, or ETFs, which are obliged to back their units with physical holdings of the metal. Yes, that’s the way to get maximum bang for your buck. No messing about with funds that merely hold derivative silver contracts. The price of the metal jumped by 10%.
So far, so familiar – or, at least, familiar since last week’s fun and games in GameStop, AMC and others. Yet this latest iteration of “flashmob” investing is different. The central tactic may be correct, but the overall plan looks wildly overambitious. For starters, there are no obviously overextended hedge funds to beat up. Second, the price of silver is hard to push around artificially for any length of time.”
The thesis, and I’ve heard this rumored long before this year, is that the ’paper’ precious metals market has a lot more claims (via rehypothecation, etc.) than underlying metals to deliver.
The idea is that a groundswell demanding delivery would create in essence a ‘bank run’ on the fractionally backed metal supply and expose the unbacked paper as worthless.
If you wanted savings in silver, would you rather be able to hold it, or hold a piece of paper that says someone else will pay you in silver (and does he actually have it, or did he lend it to someone else (who lent to someone else, etc.) for a piece of paper saying he owns a specified amount of the metal)?
this would be a much bigger issue with physical gold, IMHO. There’s less of it and it is very commonly lent / leased out. But the WSB crowd is more into Bitcoin so they’re probably not going to coordinate their actions in gold, haha.
The stock does not have it's own natural growth. It is a failed mall retailer that is in the business (physical games) that will not even exist in 2-4 years.
Is this the end or is this downward price manipulation to spook the retail investors?
It's the elitists phuckin over people trying to make money.
Cubic zirconia hands!
The argument is that Gamestop can/will pivot their business model to mostly online sales. Chewy has a market cap of $40 billion selling dog food online. You don't think Gamestop can do the same thing with video games?
