WSB played the GME shorts, and then broke the market and are angry the market isn't working. Also, most of them are going to get burned.

1/29/2021 4pm
So, this is an unusual post that will require a lot of explanations and memes so expect a long post with a lot of links.  Thanks, /rWallstreetBets (WSB) for trying to bring down the system.  You'll fail, but good on you.  Hereafter anyone following the advice of WSB will be covered by that abbreviation.

Section 1: What I think.

  1. Individual investors are limited in the amount of leverage they are allowed because leverage is a multiplier and allows a small problem to become a big problem instantly.  Thanks 1920s!
    • Hedge funds and banks are "limited" to 10-100x of their assets (as currently valued)
      • a credit that gives them a bigger position and asset worth means they can leverage even more.
    • Out of control leverage is always a systemic risk, even if the only entities allowed to do it are less than 5% of the market.
    • Hedge funds and Investment banks should be limited to no more than 30x and I'd prefer 1-3x.
      • Yes, that would make the house of cards fall.
      • No, none of us should care as long as the government bails out the "natural persons" instead of the "corporate persons", like it has always done without fail throughout US history.
  2. The run up on GME is the market working as intended.
    • A bunch of fools shorted a stock so much they subjected themselves to a gamma & short squeeze, the market bankrupted them.  Good.
      • Get stupid, get wrecked.
    • Except liquidity issues were created for market-makers & clearing houses who basically have to cover WSB and can't anymore.
      • WBS squeezed the hedge funds, but also the middle man who processes their bets.  So the middleman can't buy anymore, ergo WSB can't.  The man hasn't even come down on you yet.
  3. This is a game of hot potato, if you hold too long you're going to get burned.
    • If the GME board issues a bunch of shares they will have enough money to re-tool and survive.
      • But hold WSB has on shares might end, ending the squeeze.
      • WSB will have saved GME, a terrible company with overpriced games and a (currently) horrendous business model.
    • Anyone who is telling you to hold or buy more might be for real, but the rest of the universe will be selling you our shares at the inflated price you created... so.... thanks!
  4. Y'all are a bunch of toxic assholes.
  5. It is awesome.
  6. It is fun.
  7. Get money.
  8. It isn't over.  Most of the WSB people are going to be as screwed as the Hedge funds who already lost and effective positive change is unlikely.
  9. The later to the party and more optimistic you are, the more likely you're going to get screwed.
What happened
A bunch of reddit revolutionaries decided to stick it to wallstreet/hedge funds.  The Hedge funds had decided to sell 130% of all available shares, short.  This was dumb.

That is, if there were 69.7M  shares outstanding (the actual case) short sellers sold 90.61 million shares more than actually exist.   It was a brilliant financial play to call them on it (given the capital to do so).

The Redditors saw the Hedge funds (like Melvin Capital) put themselves in a terrible position and decided they could capitalize on that bone-headed move via a gamma/short squeeze.  They succeeded in forcing several hedge funds out of their positions via a squeeze but didn't seem to notice that as they were buying at a high price, to press the squeeze, other shareholders were selling into them, because there are two sides to every trade.

It made national news.

Three days late to the party I got a text: "Last year they were a $2.50 stock now they are $344!"  #should I invest

On a related note, someone bought two tubes (6.8 oz) of Theodent 300 for $300 which has a non-toxic, and proprietary, alternative to non-toxic and basically free fluoride.  So you can avoid the Fiendish Fluoridators I guess. 

I paid $2.79 for a tube (8.2 oz) of Crest and felt just fine about it.

So those are some data points.

Every armchair quarterback has an opinion.  Let's see . . .

Wallstreet sympathizers called for more regulation saying the Reddit users need to be stopped because market manipulation is illegal.   But, while I'm not a lawyer, I don't think that's true.  FRAUDULENT market manipulation is illegal, flagrant market manipulation isn't.  And probably doesn't need to be.  The market is a tidal wave and will punish (almost) everyone on its own.  Shorting and talking about it market manipulation too, and that's been going on since shorting was invented.  Not to mention hyping a position you already have.  If there is a danger is that now there are more people in the market and they know a lot of BS can play there.  Like the rampant market manipulation and unjust bailouts of Wallstreet that has been going on for more than 2 generations.

Communists and socialists talked noise.

I say the market is working as intended. Short sellers thought it was a good idea to put outstanding shorts at 130% of the float, I get it - but also - screw-em.  Which, to be clear, they should totally be allowed to sell a ridiculous number of shorts.  It can't be fraud when you're talking openly about it (Refer to the Trump impeachment take 1).  From what I've gathered, the WSB people really believe that GME isn't destined for bankruptcy (I didn't ask them about Blockbuster or Kodak) AND being stupid isn't illegal.  It's probably not great for Wallstreet, or society, that everyone might have been keyed into how ridiculous financial markets can be when brought to the extreme.  But here we are.

While WSB are clearly colluding that's not, in and of itself, a crime.   For example, Hedge funds exist.

Pump and dump is the most interesting counter-argument I've heard, but I'm not sure what I see on GME qualifies as false, misleading, or greatly exaggerated.  Probably wrong?  Sure.  But false?  Good luck proving that.

I think Vanilla (with a hint of apricot) is the best flavor of ice cream.  Think you can prove me wrong? That would be best accomplished while attempting to impregnate yourself.  Read that again.  I, Johann, think Vanilla is the best flavor.  Am I wrong?  If I can get 8 million people to agree with me, am I wrong?  If I can get the market to agree with me then . . . what?

Don't get too excited
  The Johnny-come-latelies (unsophisticated traders) will always get stuck with the bill and the early investors reap the rewards.  In my opinion, if you're reading this it's way too late for you to get in on it.  I'm only writing this because I've been inundated with questions about it.  Every trade has two sides, if you're buying someone is selling.  If you're selling someone is buying.  WSB would have you believe that the short sellers will need to buy to cover their positions, but the original short-sellers are already bankrupt were rescued and have sold the short positions to better-capitalized hedge funds, who - if they've done their due diligence, can wait WSB out. (As of 2/2/2020 the amount of short shares over the number of shares that exist is 40%.  High but not crazy if you understand these things.  For example, not high enough to squeeze.)

That means, they aren't going to close their shorts if they don't have to and they might even sell MORE shorts if you're buying them at the price you've artificially inflated.  I would if I did that sort of thing. Seriously, WSB won, but WSB' inability to accept that makes me want to short them (a thing a basically never do). Particularly if I was a market-maker and already held a bunch of shares because WSB made them buy them shares by buying an unprecedented number of call options (because that's how options generally work).  WSB has excided a lot of regular Joes though, so there's a lot of dead money to sell those shares to at an inflated price.  If I bought it at 5.25 in August 2020 I'd sell it off in bursts:
  1. Over $150 to cover my initial investment
  2. 50% around $300 (I feel bad for this guy)
  3. 25% $500-700
  4. 20% The moon🚀🚀 🚀🚀 💎✋
In all honesty, I'd only get to part 4 after I got to $10 million which, in my opinion, is more than any human will ever need.  In a month or two I believe GME will be sub $20 (for a multitude of reasons).

Disclaimer
This post is mostly written from my 20 years of market experience and some supplementary research.  When I first started investing I was always confused when my 1-10 share trades didn't go through, but I did find that if I was making 100-1000 share trades I had no issue, so I just started doing that.  I learned to make my own market, essentially, because - as the WSB people can currently attest - being reliant on market-makers to make your trades sucks when all you do is make weird choices.  But that's my life as a value investor.

So if you don't know anything about what's going on, my audience, this post should get you to a pretty good place, but if you're a professional market-maker: Send me your notes and I'll fix it with strikethrough and purple text. And Fuchsia (2/2/2021).

And none of this is, or has been, financial advice, because I only opine.  These posts are primarily for me because I like to write them.  If you want actual financial advice you can pay me $200/hr for it.
 
Oh hi Market cap.

Contrary to popular opinion, market cap isn't (really) a useful metric anymore outside of: Large-cap, Mid-cap, small-cap.  Liquidity, float, and financials mean something to the trader and the investor but generally, there's no "there" there in market cap.  It's like noting that Tommy Wiseau think's he's handsome.  What does that tell you?  

That if you have a broad-based business to business clientele opinion doesn't matter as long as you can deliver.

No disrespect to Tommy's alleged handsomeness, but we all know it's pretty suspect.

Market Cap, it's the nonsense people who don't know wtf they're talking about say to gain authority.  Tell those people to FO.

The legacy of paper and the 1800s
"The System" is based on the idea of face to face interaction and handing over pieces of paper.  We don't live in that world anymore but "the system" is using legacy rules that assume it's still the case.  So when you buy a stock through your brokerage firm, that firm has to fund that trade for two days until cash settles.  The volume on a thinly (heretofore) traded stock has exploded and the clearinghouses don't want to cover the cost.  So get stuffed. It's a free market, but Market-makers create the market you experience.  And the market makers aren't interested in your 1-3 share buys, so get stuffed.  That is, everyone in the market is free, including the people who buy real numbers of shares to allow your 1-3 share buys that no one cares about.  If they can't make money off your BS trades then they won't make the market for them.  And WSB broke the market makers, in the short term.

The Clearinghouse that Robinhood uses decided, sure you can still trade GME but they're going to need a large fee as well as increased collateral for that trade.  So I, Johann, can still buy GME*, but WSB can't because Robinhood is a 3rd party app whose clearing firm (supplier) is squeezing them because WSB has eaten the liquidity of both the clearinghouse and Robinhood.  And market-makers aren't making the market because WSB put them into a liquidity squeeze.  

 (Just checked 2/2/2021, I can literally buy as much as I want with no limits.  Why?  Conversation and Hennessy? Nope, capitalization.)

I mean listen to Robinhood CEO try and spin his (in)solvency.  The balls on this guy, 20 minutes of  good questions answered with 'It's all good, we have enough money, IPO coming soon!'

In fairness, we probably have Vlad & Baiju to thank for pushing transaction fees to zero so maybe those huge balls were earned.

BUT, WSB can't trade because that would make Robinhood insolvent.  Maybe call King John or Richard, they're still trading.  (WSB your anger is misdirected, you're guy isn't a real player.  He got you all the stuff you wanted for a long time, but now what you're asking is just too much. Even though it feels the same to you, you brought all your friends, and their friends too, and it's just too much for your guy to handle.  You need to move up to the big game.  Except the big game doesn't like how you play so... get stuffed?)

Market Makers
When you buy an option market makers just buy the underlying stock then sell you the option and make money on the spread, possibly selling shorts to hedge, since they created the bid/ask in the first place (it's somewhat complicated, but market makers create liquidity based on math).  When you place orders you see the bid/ask, right?  Market-makers created that out of thin air.  They do the same thing when you buy a weird number of shares, Market Makers buy in bulk and sell you the plebian amount of shares you requested at your desired price then sell the rest at a slight discount, and profit the difference.

When you manipulate the price, we all know GME isn't worth 5k a share, Market-makers aren't interested in your trades.  It's  POPPYCOCK!

When you buy an option, someone has to sell it to you.  One possibility is to just buy and hold the underlying stock (to easily settle when your contract expires), sell you the option, and hedge the sale with shorts or futures - Market-makers make money on the spread.  No one is going to buy your weird play unless a market maker (like Citadel) comes in and makes it happen, and WSB is messing with them too so they aren't going to facilitate in their normal fashion.  You can play market maker too if you have enough time and money.  So WSB should start market-making if they're so but hurt about no market-makers facilitating their game of hot-potato. 

The thing to remember is that the free market is always unequal. Information isn't perfect and Market makers literally create a market out of thin air when any of us want to place a weird order.  If it weren't for market makers (like Citadel), most retail-level orders/trades wouldn't work at all.  We'd all be screwed.  But when everyone in WSB places the same weird order, the Market Makers & clearing houses can't figure out how to accommodate it all and demand more of a premium or collateral because of the increased risk.  Pay it or don't.  Robinhood can't, and none of us want to.

WSB broke the market.  The Clearinghouses and Market-makers can't put rational values on trade prices because WSB isn't acting within the defined definition of rational.

If you trade in lots of 100-5000 shares you probably don't need market-makers as those trades can generally actually make their own market, plus they get the better price -that of a market maker (you're not a market maker if you don't then sell plebian numbers from your lot).  No one wants to sell 1-3 shares to some random.  All those transactions need Market-makers, who will only do the work if they can find a way to make money on the spread, and WSB has temporarily wrenched that.

WSB is fixing the game and the Market-makers aren't interested in playing with them until the Market-makers figure out the new game WSB is playing.  Since the market makers are the ones who make it possible for us to play at stocks, we can't.  We like to get weird, and WSB got so weird Market-Makers took their ball and went home.  WSB tolled them to F- off and they did.  That is WSB told the entities who create liquidity, the ability to trade, to F- off.  So they, the market-makers, stopped making liquidity.

Awesome.  They're under no obligation to play with us.  But now we can't play ball.  It's not really Robinhood's fault, WSB just thinks trading is magic and there are no logistics.  It's a huge compliment to the system, most people didn't know all the work going on behind the scenes because it was virtually seamless.

It's funny,  WSB is messing with the system but WSB got upset when the system got messed up.  Because, at large, WSB has no idea what they're doing. Although they're right the Citadel (a market maker) is the one who bailed out Melvin Capital (the one who heavily shorted GME and almost went bankrupt) it's for unrelated reasons.  I believe those reasons are to maintain unrestricted leverage.

Except, also because of WSB' hijinks, maybe your broker is just going to liquidate your positions because it can't process the orders without the Market makers or DTCC.  For example, Interactive brokers just "put AMC, BB, EXPR, GME, and KOSS option trading into liquidation".  Because if there isn't a spread, then not only are they not willing to do it, they literally can't without bankrupting themselves.  All of WSB' orders put them into a liquidity crunch, so they just liquidated them to get the liquidity back.   They overpromised based on the idea that traders wouldn't go crazy.  Ooops.



Brokerage lite
Robinhood and the Jonny-come-latelies are proxy services incapable of independently executing the trades they claim to be executing (like most retail brokerages).  Robinhood isn't a market-maker (indeed it sells the information of all its trades to Citadel so the trades can be front-run) and can't do the thing.  Also, because it isn't the 1800s anymore presumably all brokers use the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) to make trades "instantly".  But the DTCC doesn't want to put up the cash for all these weird orders from WSB, and the DTCC must make good on all transactions regardless of what happens to the individual traders.  So it must wait until it can aggregate enough trades at various times and prices to finalize with "one position per security, per client, per settlement date."  But the DTCC doesn't want your Trumped-up trades because they're BS and everyone knows it, and they're the ones who would have to pony up the cash if the person buying the stock goes bankrupt in the two days it takes for a transaction to settle.

Full disclosure, I'm not 100% sure what the DTCC does, but it seems like everything.  Their description of themselves seems like they are, maybe, the be-all-end-all of market-making as well as the hub for all trades on (at least) American exchanges. Which is at least two levels deeper than I concern myself with.

As an aside, Robinhood sells the information on all it's trades to a hedge fund/market maker (Citadel) to make money on the "free" trades (front-running).  Citadel pays for this information, and makes money by front-runing it).

It might be a "free" market, but everyone in it is free to participate or not.  And all participants operate under certain restrictions.  Robinhood loosened a lot of them, but WSB' fun little game screwed Robinhood for it's lax policies which apparently now means you can only own one share of GME.  Because it's a free market and we live in reality no one is under any obligation to facilitate your BS trades.

Just because other free people don't do what you want doesn't mean you're not free, it just means free people won't always do what you want.
  
Clearinghouses
Listen.  It's a bitch to go out and physically offer your shares on the street and collect the money.  I get it.  That's why Jesus invented the Clearinghouse, like the DTCC.  They're going to take care of all that for you.

Clearinghouses are the intermediaries (third parties) in transactions that "clear" trades by actually completing it on the buyer & seller's behalf.  But, since they are both the buyer AND seller for every trade they complete, Clearinghouses take on the default risk from both (buy & sell) originators.  So if the buyer ends up not having the funds in two days, the clearinghouse gets stuck with the bill, it's the same if the seller doesn't have the stock (rare/non-existent in the market dynamic).  SO, clearinghouses need a guarantee that buyers and sellers will keep up their side of the deal and require deposits/margin to that effect.  If you're big enough to be your own clearinghouse, like I expect TDA & Fidelity are, it's not much of an issue.

In normal circumstances, Clearinghouses add stability.  WSB sent a surge of Robinhood users to buy stocks and calls for the markets' most heavily shorted companies, not realizing that someone has to cover all their speculation.  It was all fun and games while the users were playing tiddlywinks, but when WSB found their big boy pants they didn't realize that Robinhood didn't have big boy pants.  Robinhood can't make those trades because Robinhood doesn't have the money to cover when WSB Act a fool. (Don't follow that link, unless you're a Robinhood user.)  Not to mention DTCC and market-makers aren't having it either.

Just like Robinhood is WSB' brokerage of choice, Robinhood needs help (clearinghouses & liquidity) to do the actual work and "broker" (clear) their trades.  The big boys didn't (necessarily) "Force" or "collude with" Robinhood to limit trades, Robinhood is just small time and doesn't have the chops to play at the big boy table.  Robinhood is playing like it's Bigtime, just like WSB.  They can talk big, but their "Egos are writing checks [thier] body can't cash." Also, WSB broke the system by being both more irrational and comparatively bigger than any unfounded bubble in history.

WSB is making history.  Amazing times we're living in.

All the latest trading platforms do have are contracts with middlemen who provisionally play at the big boy table, with small, notarized, and carefully tracked bankrolls.  Big boys are their own clearinghouses and Market-makers.  Robinhood will probably get there if the free folk doesn't abandon it due to their lack of understanding, IPO coming this year!

Leverage
Leverage is basically just a loan used to magnify losses or wins.  If you buy a house for 100k and it goes up 5% you've make 5k (105/100), but if you put 20k down on a 100k house and it goes up 5% you've made 25%(25/20).  However, if the house goes down in the same scenario you've either lost 5% or 25%.  Certain financial companies, like investment banks, can put 1% down so an appreciation of 5k is a 500% gain and a depreciation of 5k is a 400% loss.  Also, they can leverage the 5k unrealized gain to finance more purchases for some reason.

Investment banks and hedge funds are allowed to go into huge amounts of debt (30 times more assets than money would be: 100k to buy 3,000k in assets that can be leveraged again if they appreciate) to bet on the market because they are about 3% of the total market, make enough donations to keep regulators off their backs, and bail each other out for their bad behavior as a cost of doing business.  (Like Citadel bailed out Melvin Capital.) Retail investors aren't allowed huge leverage because that would clearly be a systemic risk.  Except, a brief history of financial crises will show you that over-leveraging by institutions is always the precipitating factor to a crash or recession (in the past 40 years).  When natural persons could leverage themselves the same as institutions currently can, natural persons might've been the primary contributors to crashes, but now they can't so it's just the institutions.  But these huge amounts of leverage in my opinion, and I submit it to any casual observer, are still the primary problem in markets.

Stock market Corrections certainly couldn't be prevented by restricting institutional leverage, but Stock market crashes might be.  But until gerrymandering is fixed we're going to be stuck in a ten-year cycle with a 5-year memory.

Market-makers clearly need access to higher leverage, but those levels can be confined to that situation and regulated.

Margin
Margin is useful to sophisticated investors, but just know your broker can close your margin positions without warning you first.  You should really RTFM.  And probably not use the Margin credit card.

Shorts & Margin
Short selling (if you followed that link it's probably a bad idea for you to do it). 

I (generally) don't do it.  It's an important tool and it's good that someone does it, but that person generally won't be me because while you can make fist fulls of money as long as you're temporally right and the stock is going down if the stock goes up your losses are potentially infinite (so the expected value is always mathematically negative).

In order to short a stock, you need to borrow it first.  You can borrow it from a Market-Maker (like Citadel) or broker with a user who bought the stock on margin.  In the latter case, you're highly susceptible to the actual owner selling his shares and thereby forcing the closure of your short.  When you short, you get the money from the sale of the stock you don't own upfront which can seem like free unlimited money.  And it is as long as you're right and short covering for less than the initial price I guess it is.  As long as you're right. It's important to remember leverage here, as long as the stock is going down your short position becomes more valuable and you can leverage those unrealized gains to buy more shorts (for some reason) and it can look like you've made boatloads of cash as long as the stock keeps going down.

Once you sell the borrowed stock it's added to the float again and you've created an obligation to buy to cover in order to return shares to the lender while paying the lender interest on the borrowed shares.  If you can't cover your short position, your broker, clearinghouse, or market-maker has to, so even if you're only short one stock - like GME - your actually starting a cascade affecting the entire market's liquidity (theoretically usually, but actually in this case).

And virtually no one wants to cover your short once it starts going bad.  Unless they're sure they can outlast the squeeze.

If you make a short sale you generally need to keep 30-50% of assets in reserve to cover the value of the loan (a lot goes into making sure the lender and institution don't lose money).   If the share price drops after you sold the borrowed share, you simply buy them and replace the shares you borrowed pocketing the difference.  Free money for good decisions.  But if the price goes up for any reason, like WSB wants to mess with you, you could be forced to close your position by anyone upstream of you due to your own lack of liquidity - likely at a substantial loss.

This is often the point where someone says, "The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent."

In a way, I guess you could say that when Melvin Capital borrowed a share it destroyed that share and created a virtual-share and an anti-share pair. Melvin Capital sold the share, which is identical in every way to a regular share, but at some point, Melvin Capital needed to buy a share to destroy the anti-share it held to return everything to equilibrium. To an outside observed it'd look like Melvin Capital created a share out of thin air, but because it's holding the anti-share (the obligation to give me back a share) that's not quite true. Though a quick look would reveal that, for example, there are 130% more shares out than exist so those must be virtual shares AND the shorts are going to have to buy more shares than actually exist to restore equilibrium. 

So yeah, Melvin Capital earned its losses. 

Before you try it yourself you should also know
And in response to Musk, you can both sell houses you don't own and cars you haven't made yet.  I think he calls them pre-orders, but he has to deliver them under contract just like short-sellers... except he's not as good as they are at delivering on time.  They are required to deliver what they promised, but I guess he can do whatever.  But it's the short-sellers running a scam, sure Elon.

Float

Why can't WSB buy more shares?
Because behind the scenes it still takes time to move money around and DTCC won't complete the transaction without  100% of the money anymore.  In the past the broker or clearinghouse would put up 1% of that money, appears they've hit a liquidity crunch so aren't doing that anymore so if you can't trade it's because your broker or clearinghouse doesn't have the money.

I'm not clear why Robinhood decided to limit the maximum number of shares to be held, it's a weird decision.  When I trade OTC it can take a week or more for my trades to clear, why not just let WSB buy shares the old fashion way where they put up their own money with an order, forward that to the market & clearinghouses, and if everything is in order in 2-3 days transact the trade and then WSB gets it's stock in another 2-3 days, total transaction time 1 business week.  Why isn't Robinhood doing that?  That's a good question that I doubt has a good answer.  I suppose they don't want to, maybe it's a hassle, or there is some other reason likely to do with logistics.  Better capitalized brokers & clearinghouses still allow you to buy because they have the liquidity to do that, while Robinhood doesn't seem to be well-capitalized enough or able to do that. 

Robinhood started doing its own clearing, probably to take the cut, but for the large volumes and high volatility, Robinhood doesn't seem to have the capital to post DTCC's capital requirements for the transactions people want to make.  So it seems that they restricted the buying of shares so they wouldn't have to post as much.

Sorry WSB, go to a real firm like TDA, fidelity, vanguard, Schwab, or whatever.  Robinhood did the job of getting them all to reduce the trade transaction costs to zero.  Robinhood is small time and doesn't have its big boy pants, IPO coming soon!

But maybe WSB should take it's money and go to a real firm, especially if they wanted to punish Robinhood.  Maybe that'd make it a short candidate on that IPO date? 

Nah . . . .

. . .well . . . .hmmmm.  That would certainly be more effective than negative reviews of the app.

Why can people still sell shares?
Shares are the thing.  In this context, shares are their own collateral.  To be sure you get the money it has to go through the clearinghouses and such as described above (who take on the risk) but when you're offering shares they don't have that risk so they're readily able to do it (it doesn't present liquidity issues).  It could take a few days to clear your money (land in your little hands), or not, but you should be able to sell still at the price you want.

When I sell shares my broker credits me instantly and I can trade with that money, but to actually put it into my hands might take a week.  Usually not an issue unless I'm buying a big-ticket item in the real world.

Realized vs Unrealized gain
You didn't make money or lose money until you sell.  This guy didn't make 170k if he didn't sell.  Until the final trade is executed you don't have any gains, you've just got unrealized theories and dreams.  Also if you don't hold it for at least a year you'll be paying short-term capital gains tax instead of long-term, in this case 32% of that in tax instead of 15%. As if you should care about paying higher taxes on money you didn't previously have and won't have if you don't make it soon.

Also, despite what they are saying a lot of WSB folks are closing their positions and making realized gains.  WSB did screw a few hedge funds while it made a few WSB folks richer and several millionaires into billionaires, but the rest of the folk in WSB will be left holding the bag.

WSB is breaking the system that needs to be broken
You've got a lot of reasons why "the short squeeze will work" and "[Gamestop is] not in imminent bankruptcy. . . they [have] more cash on hand than debt. Also, I really think the addition of Cohen onto the board is going to turn it around and GameStop will become a “legitimate” business again." 


I mean, maybe. I don't think that's true and it's certainly not a fact.  But GME can just issue shares at any time and take your prize.  And a few of the people in WSB are going to make massive amounts of cash off the rest of the people in the group which I think is really bad form.  The first people to the party, in my experience, are always the ones who make money off of the johnny-come-latelies.




You already won. Go home.






*I'm not sure if I can buy GME or not, I wouldn't touch it with a 10' pole now and didn't touch it with my finger despite 12 years of people/"investors" telling me how it was the next big thing/gonna make it.  When was the last time you were in a Gamestop?  They're shit.  I'd rather buy from the Xbox Store, but eBay, GoG, and Steam exist so I don't do that either. WTF would anyone go to Gamestop?  Literally, no one knows (other than nostalgia).  We should short it.  I hear it's overvalued.  STONKS!

Comments

Post a Comment