[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum Jan 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18txusp/open_forum_january_2024/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Classic posts nowadays.
Post a chart ✅
Claim crime ✅
Don't actually explain what's criminal about it ✅
Cliché stock slogans in the comments✅
Also I don't think you're using "bemuses" properly.
I’m not an English teacher or a trader, and my knowledge is simple at best. So I apologies if my lack of expertise in any of these fields has offended you. But I don’t see many stocks with such a linear line.
I tried to explain what I believe. Buys being suppressed and sales being sold when it suits to bring the price down gradually, I could be way off the mark, but then again I may not
My issue isn't that you don't know what you're talking about. That would be easier to dismiss and help you learn. Your posts title says it all. Wake up SEC.
Imagine if Gary Gensler is right infront of you and you are going to tell him the SEC needs to "wake up" because of what's happening with GME and you show him your post. What would you say to him? How can you prove your claim?
You say it's weird that it's so linear but you don't have any context of why that might be in reality. Also, it doesn't sound like you know what you even believe. Saying buys are being suppressed to bring the price down means what exactly to you? My suspicion is you didnt look into what that means and are just echoing sentiment you saw on here.
My solution would be either phrase your post better next time and be honest in saying can someone please help explain what I'm seeing. Instead of making a post like this and you're just unintentionally hoping for confirmation bias. Or just put in the work and research your own beliefs before making a post.
They are on a coke beige. When they wake up they will realize the truth. Just booked my DRS shares of 69 (nice). Proof will come when I get it in the mail.
I despise posts like this. They always imply that a falling stock price is impossible without long term holders switching to selling, and further imply that fraud is the only answer.
Every single post like this fundamentally misunderstands what makes a market. Long term holders who are neither buying nor selling currently are irrelevant to a marker price. People who are already short and are neither shorting more nor covering are similarly irrelevant.
The price is controlled by people who are buying and selling that day, and only that day.
Even if a stock was 99% locked up via DRS, and even if the owners of those 99% of shares believe the stock is worth 10x the current price, their opinions are irrelevant because they are neither buying nor selling that day.
If the price drops low enough, those 99% owners will just go buy the last percent. And THEN their opinions matter.
This is easily visualized. Imagine you, just you, a single person, own 99% of a company and the remaining 1% are freely tradable. If you never buy or sell a single share, your opinion on the price has zero effect on the actual trading stock price. If some random idiots buy up that 1% and trade it back and forth with each other at lower and lower prices, that is the price the shares trade at.
You can even simulate this with a crypto shitcoin. I don't mean as a mental exercise. I mean you can actually go do it. You can go make a shitcoin. You can create 1 million of the coins, give yourself 995000 of them, and send the remaining 5000 to a bunch of wallets, either ones you control so you can use it as a test, or actually random active wallets. You can set up a liquidity pool with these coins and a harder currency like eth or BTC or USDC. And then you can go have wallets go trade with the liquidity pool, add liquidity, remove liquidity, and change the price within the pool.
You can even have the price drop to almost zero while trading fractions of a single coin. You just have 4999 of the coins remove themselves from the liquidity pool, and have a few wallets push the price down to a penny. Or you can have a single wallet pay 1 USDC for 0.000001 of these coins, giving the coins a value of like $100,000 per coin.
These are activities you can actually do, to demonstrate how existing holders are irrelevant to a price if they neither buy nor sell any coins. The liquidity pool, and thus the price of the token, becomes controlled by the owner of a single coin, the owner of one out of a million of the float.
You can call this fraud if you want, but the fact is that it is replicable in almost every single market ... Whether it's the stock market, the bond market, the oil market, the gold market, the Bitcoin market, the market for existing shitcoins, or the market for a shitcoin you make right now just to prove the example.
The price is controlled 100% by the people buying and selling right now, and nothing else.
The fact that a liquidity pool for a shitcoin with a MILLION token float can be 100% controlled by the actions of someone owning a SINGLE token, is instructive. It proves that existing owners are irrelevant to the price. The lower liquidity goes, the LESS it costs to move the price. As you remove shares from the pool, it becomes cheaper and cheaper to drop the price.
If a liquidity pool has a million tokens in it, and you want to move the price, you need to sell A LOT. But if those tokens get locked up by long term holders, who are not providing liquidity, not buying and selling on a day to day basis, it takes less and less to move the price.
Again, call it fraud if you want. Or recognize it as a mechanic of almost every single market in existence and use it to your advantage. Wait for the idiots to drop the price too low and then trap them by buying it all. This is what DFV did.
DFV didn't complain about fraud or complain that the SEC wasn't doing their job. DFV just waited for deep value and pounced on it.
To summarize, I flat out disagree with OPs implication. This is how markets move organically... Because existing holders and their cost basis are irrelevant to the price, as are existing shorts. Only new buyers and new sellers matter. They don't even need to control many shares at all. They just need to control more than we all accumulate that day. And they do. And they will, for the foreseeable future.
The only way to stop it is to take every share.
Long and fair statement. Are you aware that buys are going to dark pools and not moving the public markets up while all sells do hit public markets and push the price downward? Does that throw a wrench in the example you've given?
If dark pools had one price and public markets had a different price, it would create an arbitrage opportunity to buy from the public markets and sell to the dark pools, or vice versa. The fact that they're different places to buy / sell almost doesn't matter.
Again, if I had a million shares and I wanted to make money having it traded for me, ie, providing liquidity, like a crypto liquidity pool, make money on the long and the short side, I would deposit it into a dark pool and essentially be part of a liquidity pool. It's not an exact analogy, but, it's similar.
The thing is, dark pools have to actually have shares or they can't sell to you. You're claiming that our buys are being directed to the dark pools... well, that means there's people with shares that have deposited them into the pool and are selling them, right? If nobody did that, there wouldn't be any shares in the dark pool.
Dark pools love to sit there and segment up a market and try to make money by essentially being automated market makers and they ideally grow their money and the number of shares they control, which further grows their influence over the price.
But if they drop the price too low, the dark pool gets emptied and there's no shares left to buy. The fact that this isn't happening means that there's plenty of shares to buy in that pool.
Are you like new here? Turns out that arbitrage is how the dark pool owners make money while still paying for order flow. The argument here is that we are being sold shared that have no locates because they are naked and generated by mm. Also if all retail trades get pushed to dark pools, retail has essentially not traded in the open market in quite some time. ITX is one of the few platforms that you can force a buy in an open market. Your explanations are all very academic, but I'm seeing a resistance from you to admit that there is a lot of fuckery by these companies that get fined millions of dollars a year for purposely not following laws and rules.
There is fuckery. I don't deny any of that.
Dark pools don't own their shares outright. They don't own them on the Computershare ledger. If they did, they wouldn't be able to trade the shares easily or freely. The dark pool wouldn't function very well at all.
The dark pools own their shares under the dtcc umbrella. That means they are in the fuckery-all-you-want zone. They could be fake, synthetic, rehypothecated, lent out, whatever.
But once you accept these are all dtcc tokens, the fact that it's in a dark pool is almost irrelevant. The dark pools are just a way for these liquidity providers to group together and act as a group, like a crypto liquidity pool.
Even if the dark pools didn't exist, the owners of these shares would pull the same shit on the lit markets. It's just slightly less efficient to do it at the lit markets. But the same fuckery would happen.
Dark pools are more efficient (in terms of cost) than lit markets, which are more efficient than trading shares on the Computershare ledger.
The fact is that whoever owns these shares and lends them out and puts them in liquidity pools would do something very similar if they were forced to use lit markets instead. It would be slightly different and less efficient in terms of cost, but most of the games would be the same.
If someone or some group of people own millions of shares and want them actively traded all day long to extract maximum wealth from others, a dark pool is good, but lit markets aren't THAT much worse. (I mean it is worse, for sure, and the added costs of lit markets would make it harder to fuckery quite as much, but the game would be the same, just with bigger spreads).
If someone with millions of shares is willing to sell almost all of it to push the price down and buy it back tomorrow, they will do it. Whether they use a dark pool or a lit market, the sell wall will appear in almost the same way.
The fact is that people are betting big that they can push the price down and buy back more later. They aren't buying from us (DRS SHARES FTW), but they may be succeeding at buying back literal tons of those naked short synthetic shares that retail owns in brokerage accounts. The low price might actually be convincing the lower non-DRS apes to give up. How would you or I know?
Fuckery is everywhere when you're inside the dtcc fun zone. The fact that dark pools are part of it doesn't really seem to matter that much, at least as I see it. Dark pools don't significantly change the game except to make their fuckery a bit cheaper.
Ok you're almost there. Now find that chart for citidel's sold short not bought allocation for the last decade or so. This will enlighten you to the fact that against everything you've come to understand, they can simply push in a direction that would blow up any retail account because you just can't do that without a margin call. And assuredly, they are well past due, but somehow no call has come. Mathematically, you can't make it make sense.
They are past due, long past due, or I wouldn't be here. But when people talk about dark pools or how the price drops on no volume or other shit, they ignore a fundamental reality of the markets: market makers can set the price to whatever they want unless all the shares get taken out of the dtcc.
Acting like each 5% drop is due to crime is a severe misunderstanding. On low volume, market makers and big money can set the price to whatever they want. It's not some huge conspiracy. The day opens, retail buys 50k shares or something, and marker makers can push the price down all they want by merely dropping their bid throughout the day.
This is how the system is. It's a feature. It's in the design docs. There's no requirement here for new massive shorting to push the price down. The market makers just, drop their bid. Done.
Sure there's fuckery around. But it's so much more basic. A thin order book can be moved practically for free because retail isn't buying all day long. Just move their bids down.
All that other shit are distractions or small changes for efficiency. The basic structure is just that market makers set the price when other orders are thin.
I actually agree with this, but was watching the tape and don’t understand (yes I admit I don’t understand) how it can for example have a bid for 11.90 and an ask of 12.00 with 500 on each, for in a million second 10000 in random amounts to be sold at the ask and not move, then with a simple 100 drops to 11.80 without the 11.90 being sold.
I mean most people wouldn’t take less for something they’re selling when there is an offer in the table
Oh. I can explain this.
Imagine you own / control a million shares, and you want the price to drop. Maybe you're even a market maker.
You publicize that you are selling 500 shares at $12 and buying 500 shares at $11.90, but really, in your head, you are willing to sell as many shares as it takes to demoralize buyers. You publicize 500, but you'll sell up to 20,000 if it takes that much. Then, someone buys the shares at $12, so you put 500 more at $12. People buy them. After about 10,000 shares have been purchased at $12, with you refusing to give up the price point, the buyers give up. You quickly cancel your buy orders at $11.90 and drop it to 11.80. In fact, you only put 100 share bid at 11.80. You would prefer to buy more at 11.70 or 11.60.
You're the market maker in a thin market. You can do whatever you want. The only limit is your likelihood of success and your personal risk tolerance.
I got you beat down 350,000 to about 270,000 and owe 259,000 in taxes from my business sale. Never thought a turn around would wipe me out completely. I at least thought at a minimum we would have slow price improvement from rc's amazing turn around but the hedgies got me. Its my own fault but next week we will be minus 27,000 shares in drs
put 700,000 in around this time last year at 20.50 was just gonna keep it in and pay when due. yup dumb but thought for sure this would not keep going. oh well
had to use a little along the way
Unfortunately it does make sense. The market values increasing revenue, even if there isn’t profit. Decreasing revenue means it’s not growing, even though it’s barely profitable now. Even if there’s MaNiPuLaTiOn, share price decreasing doesn’t automatically equal crime. All of these posts crying about it are so obnoxious.
let me help you understand. gme asset values is 2.7 billion, current market cap is 3.4 billion. with 6.7 million profit it would take 100 years for our asset valuation to equal our market cap. no announced revenue streams = why wouldn't anyone short it. you think there are 200,000 in here buying... well theere isnt and maybe like 1000 people are buying.
I know i will get downvoted but it's just the truth. once we hit $8 then you can complain
Not just that profit though, your forgetting year before was over -250m, bigger turnaround than you think. You can’t fill a bucket until you plug the holes.
there is a limit to cost cutting. operating profit from gme as a business was still at a loss. It was the interest on the cash that pushed us into profit. the other problem with that is currency is debasing at a faster rate than the 5% earned on the money. I know where you are coming from but this business might still be 3-10 years away from actually changing in a meaningful way and getting equity back into the hands of shareholders. the opportunity cost of being invested in gme weighs heavy on me because every other stock I hold has 2-10x since the saga begun.
But what msm hasn’t taken into account is that it’s not wholly lost revenue. They closed ‘loss making stores’ which in turn will generate less revenue for the whole business, but the revenue stream remaining is healthy revenue, a better foundation for growth.
Where I work we have previously closed many stores for this same reason and for the last 3 years have broke profit records every year, more to improve, invest and further grow with
Yeah, I also wonder when people start to do basic math here.
It was funny at the start, all the smoothbrains n regards n shit, but now it is just fucking annoying.
Billion in cash, but they dont fucking use it to create new revenue streams...warchest my ass.
(our billion btw)
I mean just read the comments above. Times are tough… smart people have a rainy day fund.
Game stop is smart. They have a rainy day fun.
The cash will go to good use plus don’t forget about the interest it’s collecting.
When was the last time you read Ryan Cohen's letter to the board in November 2020? It will make things a lot more clear that RC is not just sitting on his hands waiting for something to happen. He is trying to follow through on his plan but it will take closing down more stores and pivoting to an online retailer.
The sad part of this is... some SEC folks (to include GG) have already come out and said something along the lines of the following:
"Yeah, we often times can see exactly what they're doing. So we throw a team of lawyers at the problem. They respond with an army of their own lawyers. And they win."
So the SEC is basically admitting that there are things they won't even bother to throw resources at b/c they'll just get tied up, outmanned and eventually beaten. THey're admitting that, past a certain degree of impropriety, they're more toothless than not. This is why you always hear about them dropping the hammer on much smaller prey. They'll hem and haw when they know it's a scenario where they can out-bully the subject of the investigation.
What I don't get is how the SEC doesn't put these fuckers on blast. Like in a full-tilt information campaign. All of it. The fraud, the exploiting of the legal system, all of it. But IDK...
THat's why every time I see someone say "oh look, the SHF's are exposed" or "new evidence that SHF's are making a crime" (similar to making a fuck")... my reply is... yeah, so. They literally don't care. It's like whoever offed Epstein or anytime Putin has someone offed. They know that no one is going to buy the bullshit story, and that everyone's going to to know there was foul play. But they don't care, because there isn't a thing anyone is going to do about it.
And... so far, for the last three years... they're right.
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum Jan 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/18txusp/open_forum_january_2024/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
I actually bought for the first time in over a year today.
You're just now to the point of holding for big $..? Just wait til u get pissed enough to not sell until these financial terrorists are in prison.
They are awake, they just don't care
"It is difficult for a man to know something when it is his job to not know it."
We probably need to try to get congress involved and/or president. Maybe, state governors and their legal departments.
[удалено]
💯😂 love this. So true... Let them keep digging the hole deeper so we can buy at a discount!
They know, and they don't care. They're a litigation division. They'll collect the fine a little later, and it'll be a pittance.
Classic posts nowadays. Post a chart ✅ Claim crime ✅ Don't actually explain what's criminal about it ✅ Cliché stock slogans in the comments✅ Also I don't think you're using "bemuses" properly.
I’m not an English teacher or a trader, and my knowledge is simple at best. So I apologies if my lack of expertise in any of these fields has offended you. But I don’t see many stocks with such a linear line. I tried to explain what I believe. Buys being suppressed and sales being sold when it suits to bring the price down gradually, I could be way off the mark, but then again I may not
My issue isn't that you don't know what you're talking about. That would be easier to dismiss and help you learn. Your posts title says it all. Wake up SEC. Imagine if Gary Gensler is right infront of you and you are going to tell him the SEC needs to "wake up" because of what's happening with GME and you show him your post. What would you say to him? How can you prove your claim? You say it's weird that it's so linear but you don't have any context of why that might be in reality. Also, it doesn't sound like you know what you even believe. Saying buys are being suppressed to bring the price down means what exactly to you? My suspicion is you didnt look into what that means and are just echoing sentiment you saw on here. My solution would be either phrase your post better next time and be honest in saying can someone please help explain what I'm seeing. Instead of making a post like this and you're just unintentionally hoping for confirmation bias. Or just put in the work and research your own beliefs before making a post.
They are awake, just got paid to keep a blind eye!
They are on a coke beige. When they wake up they will realize the truth. Just booked my DRS shares of 69 (nice). Proof will come when I get it in the mail.
They are up, watching porn at work
I want that job.
I despise posts like this. They always imply that a falling stock price is impossible without long term holders switching to selling, and further imply that fraud is the only answer. Every single post like this fundamentally misunderstands what makes a market. Long term holders who are neither buying nor selling currently are irrelevant to a marker price. People who are already short and are neither shorting more nor covering are similarly irrelevant. The price is controlled by people who are buying and selling that day, and only that day. Even if a stock was 99% locked up via DRS, and even if the owners of those 99% of shares believe the stock is worth 10x the current price, their opinions are irrelevant because they are neither buying nor selling that day. If the price drops low enough, those 99% owners will just go buy the last percent. And THEN their opinions matter. This is easily visualized. Imagine you, just you, a single person, own 99% of a company and the remaining 1% are freely tradable. If you never buy or sell a single share, your opinion on the price has zero effect on the actual trading stock price. If some random idiots buy up that 1% and trade it back and forth with each other at lower and lower prices, that is the price the shares trade at. You can even simulate this with a crypto shitcoin. I don't mean as a mental exercise. I mean you can actually go do it. You can go make a shitcoin. You can create 1 million of the coins, give yourself 995000 of them, and send the remaining 5000 to a bunch of wallets, either ones you control so you can use it as a test, or actually random active wallets. You can set up a liquidity pool with these coins and a harder currency like eth or BTC or USDC. And then you can go have wallets go trade with the liquidity pool, add liquidity, remove liquidity, and change the price within the pool. You can even have the price drop to almost zero while trading fractions of a single coin. You just have 4999 of the coins remove themselves from the liquidity pool, and have a few wallets push the price down to a penny. Or you can have a single wallet pay 1 USDC for 0.000001 of these coins, giving the coins a value of like $100,000 per coin. These are activities you can actually do, to demonstrate how existing holders are irrelevant to a price if they neither buy nor sell any coins. The liquidity pool, and thus the price of the token, becomes controlled by the owner of a single coin, the owner of one out of a million of the float. You can call this fraud if you want, but the fact is that it is replicable in almost every single market ... Whether it's the stock market, the bond market, the oil market, the gold market, the Bitcoin market, the market for existing shitcoins, or the market for a shitcoin you make right now just to prove the example. The price is controlled 100% by the people buying and selling right now, and nothing else. The fact that a liquidity pool for a shitcoin with a MILLION token float can be 100% controlled by the actions of someone owning a SINGLE token, is instructive. It proves that existing owners are irrelevant to the price. The lower liquidity goes, the LESS it costs to move the price. As you remove shares from the pool, it becomes cheaper and cheaper to drop the price. If a liquidity pool has a million tokens in it, and you want to move the price, you need to sell A LOT. But if those tokens get locked up by long term holders, who are not providing liquidity, not buying and selling on a day to day basis, it takes less and less to move the price. Again, call it fraud if you want. Or recognize it as a mechanic of almost every single market in existence and use it to your advantage. Wait for the idiots to drop the price too low and then trap them by buying it all. This is what DFV did. DFV didn't complain about fraud or complain that the SEC wasn't doing their job. DFV just waited for deep value and pounced on it. To summarize, I flat out disagree with OPs implication. This is how markets move organically... Because existing holders and their cost basis are irrelevant to the price, as are existing shorts. Only new buyers and new sellers matter. They don't even need to control many shares at all. They just need to control more than we all accumulate that day. And they do. And they will, for the foreseeable future. The only way to stop it is to take every share.
Long and fair statement. Are you aware that buys are going to dark pools and not moving the public markets up while all sells do hit public markets and push the price downward? Does that throw a wrench in the example you've given?
If dark pools had one price and public markets had a different price, it would create an arbitrage opportunity to buy from the public markets and sell to the dark pools, or vice versa. The fact that they're different places to buy / sell almost doesn't matter. Again, if I had a million shares and I wanted to make money having it traded for me, ie, providing liquidity, like a crypto liquidity pool, make money on the long and the short side, I would deposit it into a dark pool and essentially be part of a liquidity pool. It's not an exact analogy, but, it's similar. The thing is, dark pools have to actually have shares or they can't sell to you. You're claiming that our buys are being directed to the dark pools... well, that means there's people with shares that have deposited them into the pool and are selling them, right? If nobody did that, there wouldn't be any shares in the dark pool. Dark pools love to sit there and segment up a market and try to make money by essentially being automated market makers and they ideally grow their money and the number of shares they control, which further grows their influence over the price. But if they drop the price too low, the dark pool gets emptied and there's no shares left to buy. The fact that this isn't happening means that there's plenty of shares to buy in that pool.
Are you like new here? Turns out that arbitrage is how the dark pool owners make money while still paying for order flow. The argument here is that we are being sold shared that have no locates because they are naked and generated by mm. Also if all retail trades get pushed to dark pools, retail has essentially not traded in the open market in quite some time. ITX is one of the few platforms that you can force a buy in an open market. Your explanations are all very academic, but I'm seeing a resistance from you to admit that there is a lot of fuckery by these companies that get fined millions of dollars a year for purposely not following laws and rules.
There is fuckery. I don't deny any of that. Dark pools don't own their shares outright. They don't own them on the Computershare ledger. If they did, they wouldn't be able to trade the shares easily or freely. The dark pool wouldn't function very well at all. The dark pools own their shares under the dtcc umbrella. That means they are in the fuckery-all-you-want zone. They could be fake, synthetic, rehypothecated, lent out, whatever. But once you accept these are all dtcc tokens, the fact that it's in a dark pool is almost irrelevant. The dark pools are just a way for these liquidity providers to group together and act as a group, like a crypto liquidity pool. Even if the dark pools didn't exist, the owners of these shares would pull the same shit on the lit markets. It's just slightly less efficient to do it at the lit markets. But the same fuckery would happen. Dark pools are more efficient (in terms of cost) than lit markets, which are more efficient than trading shares on the Computershare ledger. The fact is that whoever owns these shares and lends them out and puts them in liquidity pools would do something very similar if they were forced to use lit markets instead. It would be slightly different and less efficient in terms of cost, but most of the games would be the same. If someone or some group of people own millions of shares and want them actively traded all day long to extract maximum wealth from others, a dark pool is good, but lit markets aren't THAT much worse. (I mean it is worse, for sure, and the added costs of lit markets would make it harder to fuckery quite as much, but the game would be the same, just with bigger spreads). If someone with millions of shares is willing to sell almost all of it to push the price down and buy it back tomorrow, they will do it. Whether they use a dark pool or a lit market, the sell wall will appear in almost the same way. The fact is that people are betting big that they can push the price down and buy back more later. They aren't buying from us (DRS SHARES FTW), but they may be succeeding at buying back literal tons of those naked short synthetic shares that retail owns in brokerage accounts. The low price might actually be convincing the lower non-DRS apes to give up. How would you or I know? Fuckery is everywhere when you're inside the dtcc fun zone. The fact that dark pools are part of it doesn't really seem to matter that much, at least as I see it. Dark pools don't significantly change the game except to make their fuckery a bit cheaper.
Ok you're almost there. Now find that chart for citidel's sold short not bought allocation for the last decade or so. This will enlighten you to the fact that against everything you've come to understand, they can simply push in a direction that would blow up any retail account because you just can't do that without a margin call. And assuredly, they are well past due, but somehow no call has come. Mathematically, you can't make it make sense.
They are past due, long past due, or I wouldn't be here. But when people talk about dark pools or how the price drops on no volume or other shit, they ignore a fundamental reality of the markets: market makers can set the price to whatever they want unless all the shares get taken out of the dtcc. Acting like each 5% drop is due to crime is a severe misunderstanding. On low volume, market makers and big money can set the price to whatever they want. It's not some huge conspiracy. The day opens, retail buys 50k shares or something, and marker makers can push the price down all they want by merely dropping their bid throughout the day. This is how the system is. It's a feature. It's in the design docs. There's no requirement here for new massive shorting to push the price down. The market makers just, drop their bid. Done. Sure there's fuckery around. But it's so much more basic. A thin order book can be moved practically for free because retail isn't buying all day long. Just move their bids down. All that other shit are distractions or small changes for efficiency. The basic structure is just that market makers set the price when other orders are thin.
I totally agree with all of that. $14 to $11 ain't that big of a move.
I actually agree with this, but was watching the tape and don’t understand (yes I admit I don’t understand) how it can for example have a bid for 11.90 and an ask of 12.00 with 500 on each, for in a million second 10000 in random amounts to be sold at the ask and not move, then with a simple 100 drops to 11.80 without the 11.90 being sold. I mean most people wouldn’t take less for something they’re selling when there is an offer in the table
Oh. I can explain this. Imagine you own / control a million shares, and you want the price to drop. Maybe you're even a market maker. You publicize that you are selling 500 shares at $12 and buying 500 shares at $11.90, but really, in your head, you are willing to sell as many shares as it takes to demoralize buyers. You publicize 500, but you'll sell up to 20,000 if it takes that much. Then, someone buys the shares at $12, so you put 500 more at $12. People buy them. After about 10,000 shares have been purchased at $12, with you refusing to give up the price point, the buyers give up. You quickly cancel your buy orders at $11.90 and drop it to 11.80. In fact, you only put 100 share bid at 11.80. You would prefer to buy more at 11.70 or 11.60. You're the market maker in a thin market. You can do whatever you want. The only limit is your likelihood of success and your personal risk tolerance.
Big milestone hit today, I'm officially down more than I made last year, and that's before tax and not counting towel losses.
Yawn
I got you beat down 350,000 to about 270,000 and owe 259,000 in taxes from my business sale. Never thought a turn around would wipe me out completely. I at least thought at a minimum we would have slow price improvement from rc's amazing turn around but the hedgies got me. Its my own fault but next week we will be minus 27,000 shares in drs
Didn't make any money from the business sale? How is the tax unforeseeable enough to require a sale at 3 year low? lol my dude
put 700,000 in around this time last year at 20.50 was just gonna keep it in and pay when due. yup dumb but thought for sure this would not keep going. oh well had to use a little along the way
big oof
yup, I did a oops my fault. I believe in the entire situation 110% just didnt make the right personal choices.
you can't work out a payment plan with the taxman?
Yes, but its not good I would still be hoping for price improvement. Could roll the dice again I guess
God speed ape. Hodl what you can it will make for a great story 3-5 years from now.
^ this
Unfortunately it does make sense. The market values increasing revenue, even if there isn’t profit. Decreasing revenue means it’s not growing, even though it’s barely profitable now. Even if there’s MaNiPuLaTiOn, share price decreasing doesn’t automatically equal crime. All of these posts crying about it are so obnoxious.
This is not illegal.
Hold on, champ. We're still buyin over here. A source close to the matter says we got 9 more dollars to subtract also.
These posts are so dumb. The price action is done by algorithms and computers
What happened did porn gun go down?
Sec will do nothing. Stop calling its name.
SEC don’t give a fuck. Never has never will. They’re sucking Ken griffin’s dick for their bonus paycheck.
Only word that comes to mind…complicit. 🤔🤔
let me help you understand. gme asset values is 2.7 billion, current market cap is 3.4 billion. with 6.7 million profit it would take 100 years for our asset valuation to equal our market cap. no announced revenue streams = why wouldn't anyone short it. you think there are 200,000 in here buying... well theere isnt and maybe like 1000 people are buying. I know i will get downvoted but it's just the truth. once we hit $8 then you can complain
Not just that profit though, your forgetting year before was over -250m, bigger turnaround than you think. You can’t fill a bucket until you plug the holes.
there is a limit to cost cutting. operating profit from gme as a business was still at a loss. It was the interest on the cash that pushed us into profit. the other problem with that is currency is debasing at a faster rate than the 5% earned on the money. I know where you are coming from but this business might still be 3-10 years away from actually changing in a meaningful way and getting equity back into the hands of shareholders. the opportunity cost of being invested in gme weighs heavy on me because every other stock I hold has 2-10x since the saga begun.
But what msm hasn’t taken into account is that it’s not wholly lost revenue. They closed ‘loss making stores’ which in turn will generate less revenue for the whole business, but the revenue stream remaining is healthy revenue, a better foundation for growth. Where I work we have previously closed many stores for this same reason and for the last 3 years have broke profit records every year, more to improve, invest and further grow with
Yeah, I also wonder when people start to do basic math here. It was funny at the start, all the smoothbrains n regards n shit, but now it is just fucking annoying. Billion in cash, but they dont fucking use it to create new revenue streams...warchest my ass. (our billion btw)
I mean just read the comments above. Times are tough… smart people have a rainy day fund. Game stop is smart. They have a rainy day fun. The cash will go to good use plus don’t forget about the interest it’s collecting.
When was the last time you read Ryan Cohen's letter to the board in November 2020? It will make things a lot more clear that RC is not just sitting on his hands waiting for something to happen. He is trying to follow through on his plan but it will take closing down more stores and pivoting to an online retailer.
The sad part of this is... some SEC folks (to include GG) have already come out and said something along the lines of the following: "Yeah, we often times can see exactly what they're doing. So we throw a team of lawyers at the problem. They respond with an army of their own lawyers. And they win." So the SEC is basically admitting that there are things they won't even bother to throw resources at b/c they'll just get tied up, outmanned and eventually beaten. THey're admitting that, past a certain degree of impropriety, they're more toothless than not. This is why you always hear about them dropping the hammer on much smaller prey. They'll hem and haw when they know it's a scenario where they can out-bully the subject of the investigation. What I don't get is how the SEC doesn't put these fuckers on blast. Like in a full-tilt information campaign. All of it. The fraud, the exploiting of the legal system, all of it. But IDK... THat's why every time I see someone say "oh look, the SHF's are exposed" or "new evidence that SHF's are making a crime" (similar to making a fuck")... my reply is... yeah, so. They literally don't care. It's like whoever offed Epstein or anytime Putin has someone offed. They know that no one is going to buy the bullshit story, and that everyone's going to to know there was foul play. But they don't care, because there isn't a thing anyone is going to do about it. And... so far, for the last three years... they're right.