Not with a bang, but a whimper

afm199

Well-known member
I'm wondering if today marks the end of the WSB reddit gang of day traders influencing stock prices. I'm sure we will see some continuing volatility, but what I seem to be seeing is a rapidly growing pool of short squeeze candidates, which has one primary effect. It distributes investment from one or two equities to ten. That, in turn, reduces the ability of the gang to influence stock prices by lessening the capital available to invest in the candidates.

GME, BB, AMC, KOSS,BBY, SLV, GSX, FIZZ, BKNG, EXPE, AAL, NOK, and no doubt others. These are interesting times. Good luck to all you brave guys squeezing shorts.
 

Bay Arean

Well-known member
I have a poor understanding of stock trading. BUt from what I read, they drove the price up but didn't sell when they had the chance. Is that right? I would have thought that making the money off of big shots and making the point was even better than just running up the price....

It seems like legal mischief as opposed to bombing office building and other fantasies toward the plutocrats.
 

stangmx13

not Stan
Robinhood preventing mass trading from certain stocks sure isn't helping. You can buy 1 GME share on that platform now - what a joke.

Maybe WSB will be reinvigorated if/when Robinhood is fined by the SEC.
 
SEC Data Out: They don't have shares to settle SO HOLD!!

TLDR: 5,074,937 shares (around 10% of the free float) were failed to deliver during the first half of January. This is not a tiny amount for which can be classed as an "error" with clearing, but rather signifying the fact that our thesis that they were naked short-selling was correct. This is a crime. The proof is there, literally, in the data. Since the figures change on each day, and they don't distinguish between new fails and other fails I have just assumed that they're new fails. The real number may be less as a result, but don't be mistaken that the naked shorts go into the millions to say the least.

I am a retard and may be wrong on this. Do your DD.

Source: https://www.sec.gov/data/foiadocsfailsdatahtm

Hi Guys,

Today the SEC data on the failures to deliver just came out for the first half of January. Note that GME has been on the SEC Threshold List since the 8th of December. This list was created by the SEC to make sure they could keep their eyes on abusive naked short-selling, but just like 2008 they're asleep at the wheel. When you short a share, you have to deliver the shares to the buyer within 2 days. If not, it's classed as a failure to deliver and signifies that you sold shares without having them or being able to locate them a.k.a naked short-selling

I just combed through the data on this (you can go through it yourself and add up the "GME" failures to deliver) and the failures to deliver added up to 5,074,937 shares. That's almost 10% of the whole fucking free float. We don't even have the data on what's happened after the first half of January, but I assume it must be higher because of the even greater price spikes we have seen.

This is FUCKING CRIMINAL and all of these idiots deserve to go to jail for what they've done. They got their hand caught in the cookie jar shorting 140% of the free float of GME, then halt trading at the same time across the world and then tank to get the paper hands to sell. Now they're pushing the narrative that we're focusing on silver which is complete BULLSHIT. All the posts calling for silver are 2 day old Citadel/Melvin shill accounts, DO NOT LISTEN TO THEM.

The facts are on our side. The hedge funds cannot suddenly change the rules of the game so the SEC can't report failures to deliver. The fact that they most of them don't have ANY SHARES to actually back their short position, I think that the short interest is still heavily underreported (don't listen to S3 or any of the sellouts, check Finwiz). We're still at around 122%. They literally cannot cover, and this is the thing none of the media shills are talking about. Even if they wanted to, they couldn't cover. This is why GME has been on the SEC Threshold List since December. This is pure naked short-selling.

So, continue holding. DON'T LET ANYONE TELL YOU THAT WE DON'T HAVE THEM BY THE FUCKING BALLS. WE DO, AND IT'S TIME TO PAY THE PIPER.

Disclaimer: I am an autist and not a financial adviser. I just ate crayons for dinner. I hold shares in GME because I like the stock. Do your own DD.

Edit 1: I added up the aggregate balance on each day reported. The reason I have added them all up is because such large numbers cannot be due to clearing errors. I am an autist so I might be wrong, but I read that it was measured as an aggregate balance. I think the data makes sense because we know there was 140% short interest, so there must have been huge amounts of naked shorts and thus failures to deliver. Lots of people set limit orders and asked their brokers not to lend their shares which must have contributed to this. Someone please tell me if I'm wrong.

Tendy Capital
 

CABilly

Splitter
I have a poor understanding of stock trading. BUt from what I read, they drove the price up but didn't sell when they had the chance. Is that right? I would have thought that making the money off of big shots and making the point was even better than just running up the price....

It seems like legal mischief as opposed to bombing office building and other fantasies toward the plutocrats.

I wrote out a big long stupid attempt at explaining but it's more than just people inflating a stock price. It's a calculated move to specifically stick it to professional market manipulators. They are trapped, as they took bets that actually account for 140% of the existing shares in GameStop. If enough people buy and hold, these big time players are fucked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameStop_short_squeeze

It's more activism than get rich-ism
 
Last edited:

Bay Arean

Well-known member
I wrote out a big long stupid attempt at explaining but it's more than just people inflating a stock price. It's a calculated move to specifically stick it to professional market manipulators. They are trapped, as they took bets that actually account for 140% of the existing shares in GameStop. If enough people buy and hold, these big time players are fucked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameStop_short_squeeze

It's more activism than get rich-ism

Thanks. I'll read up. My idea was soak em then donate to people who need help and make the point all the same (income redistribution). I heard that some of the "conspirators" actually lost money, I think.
 

Butch

poseur
Staff member
I’m still trying to figure out the games.

Er, what is the “ WSB reddit gang” ?

And...
GME, BB, AMC, KOSS,BBY, SLV, GSX, FIZZ, BKNG, EXPE, AAL, NOK, and no doubt others

Jargon cracks me up.. i prolly have a bunch o momey wrapped up with theses assholes. I have an appointment with a “financial advisor” tomorrow morning. My expectations are low. Way low.
 
I’m still trying to figure out the games.

Er, what is the “ WSB reddit gang” ?

And...
GME, BB, AMC, KOSS,BBY, SLV, GSX, FIZZ, BKNG, EXPE, AAL, NOK, and no doubt others

Jargon cracks me up.. i prolly have a bunch o momey wrapped up with theses assholes. I have an appointment with a “financial advisor” tomorrow morning. My expectations are low. Way low.


youtu.be/x65TDamuSHU

FYI - Yes, CasuallyExplained is a WSB Redditor.
 

HappyHighwayman

Warning: Do Not Engage
- I don't understand how they have naked shorts since they're illegal

- Robinhood should not regulate the market, that is what the SEC is for
 

CABilly

Splitter
- I don't understand how they have naked shorts since they're illegal

- Robinhood should not regulate the market, that is what the SEC is for

Robinhood’s customers, the big fish who pay for the user data, probably demanded it. They severely restricted users from buying these stocks so the hedge funds that got caught with their asses in the air could cover their short positions. Dirty as fuck.
 

stangmx13

not Stan
Robinhood's email to users today is kinda funny. The short of it is they claim they limited buys on certain stocks to cover clearinghouse deposit requirements, as they rose tenfold during the volatility caused by all this. Then they literally say "We didn’t want to stop people from buying stocks and we certainly weren’t trying to help hedge funds." - two things they actually did. But its ok cuz they didn't want to :rolleyes
 

easter bunny

Amateur Hour
Well, the RH explanation was more about how they didn't have the cash to pony up to the clearinghouse to cover the [suddenly increased] volatility requirements. So if they couldn't cover for more shares, they had to restrict the purchases. Can't wait to see how this ends.
 

afm199

Well-known member
Robinhood's email to users today is kinda funny. The short of it is they claim they limited buys on certain stocks to cover clearinghouse deposit requirements, as they rose tenfold during the volatility caused by all this. Then they literally say "We didn’t want to stop people from buying stocks and we certainly weren’t trying to help hedge funds." - two things they actually did. But its ok cuz they didn't want to :rolleyes

They had to raise the cash to cover the new margin requirements, and could not legally trade more shares until they had. The big brokers didn't limit because they have plenty cash on hand.
 

OldMadBrit

Well-known member

FWIW, I'm the former Chairman of a NASDAQ listed company and have up front and personal experience of this.

Naked shorting is a huge issue and SEC absolutely refuses to deal with it. SEC has this BS idea that Shorts keep everybody honest lol.

My company was one (of many) target(s) of naked short attacks.

The attack started with an outrageous 70 page hit piece that was posted on a certain and supposedly respected financial web-site, that I will call "Stinking Asswipes". The article was up on the subscription side of the site for >2 days before being made public, giving the short side hedge funds all the time they needed. IMHO the Stinking Asswipes website is pretty much set up to enable this form of attack and I personally believe that they collude with short side hedge funds.

Public release of the hit piece devastated our share price and came close to destroying a deal we were working to close. On one day we saw 3 x our float traded, while the loan rate on our shares was >90%.

Later it became obvious that the number of shares involved, amounted to >>140% of our total issued shares, of which 40% were locked up and not available for trade or loan. :wow :mad

It was obvious who was behind the attack but it took us months to dig through the layers of subterfuge and assemble the evidence. We were loaded for bear (pun intended) when we presented to the SEC but they outright refused to act and pretty much laughed at us.

I have seen this play out over and over, with really solid businesses snubbed out, over and over again. So I for one am more than please to see Citron pull out and the likes of Cohen, Sundheim and others loose their shirts.
 
Last edited:

stangmx13

not Stan
Well, the RH explanation was more about how they didn't have the cash to pony up to the clearinghouse to cover the [suddenly increased] volatility requirements. So if they couldn't cover for more shares, they had to restrict the purchases. Can't wait to see how this ends.

If they didnt have the cash to cover, that would apply to ALL purchases correct? Not just purchases for GME, AMC, etc?
 

blrmaker

Well-known member
Many of the retail investors that were involved in this did it for the pain to wallstreet and really do not care about the $200 of their stimulus check that they could lose, from what I have read.

I for one do not understand the whole thing but I see the anger.

The anger is real and no one is trying to deal with the symptom. : |
 
If they didnt have the cash to cover, that would apply to ALL purchases correct? Not just purchases for GME, AMC, etc?

In theory, I believe you're correct, which is part of the outrage - they did not restrict trading on anything other than the squeezed stocks. Could have bought 100,000 shares of Apple or something - in theory.

I was blocked from buying another 5-10 shares of GME and my limit buys did not execute either even when their threshold was reached. The error message I got was because it exceeded their HOLD threshold of 1 share. I'm already sitting on 150. So literally anything other than selling my shares was blocked to me, despite them claiming they were opening orders back up.

Let's say GME pops to $1,000. I was trying to buy more at $180. 1000-180=820, 820*5=$4,100 I potentially will miss out on - let alone if it goes higher.

As to blrmaker's point on doing it for the pain - the general sentiment I've seen is people going "I've lived on the street, I've lived on ramen, I've lived without luxuries and can grind and scrape and make it through that again if I must. I'm used to it. But the billionaires cannot and likely never have. They are so isolated from having to live daily life that even bumping them down a few pegs will cause them far more pain than they will cause me, because their entire life is wrapped around that number - regardless of whether or not it actually changes their lifestyle beyond the media circus."

It's sort of like the whole memes going around about how technically, I'm closer to having $1,000,000 than Bill Gates is. The changes are more drastic at the lower end.
 

DannoXYZ

Well-known member
The game is rigged to profit big institutions and rob from all the little players. There's ways to avoid delivering the stock when they're naked shorts. They'll kick can down calender and cover when prices drop instead of today. Highly illegal, but SEC's not gonna do anything but give them smack on wrist since they're all buddies.

It's like if you or I bought a stock and it nose-dives 3-days later. The we go to regulators and say, "oh, we really didn't mean to buy it then, can you adjust the date so it looks like we bought today at lower price?" fvckerzs
 
Last edited:
Top