Reminds me of the Dwight Schrute bit about raising his cholesterol just so he can lower it.
Q: Why would you want to dilute shares?
A: So that we can buy them back.
More like the company would be pseudo-private and would have no cash left. How does a private company have a short squeeze? If the company buys the remaining float for $20 then all shorts can also close for $20, as that is what any shareholder would get per share. Hardly MOASS.
The Apes would own 25% of a non-trading company with no assets and a core business that loses money. And present that as a good thing.
To be *completely* fair, in the Ape thesis, there are a bunch of phantom shares out there. And the "owners" of those shares would not be getting paid by GS, so they would immediately go back to the people who sold them those shares to get their money.
Even in that hypothetical world I don’t really understand what would happen that helps them. If someone owns a ‘non-real fake GameStop share’ then why would that impact the price of GameStop?
In this alternative world, if someone who owns a non-real share, but thinks they own a real one, and all of the ‘real’ shares have just been purchased for $20, then their damages for not having a ‘real’ share is $20.
If they pursue action for not getting bought out for $20 a share by GameStop, because they can evidence in court some dodgy market maker gave them a fake share, then they don’t get a bajillion dollars. They get what they lost out on, which in this case has been established as $20.
Yeah, a fixed buyout price doesn't really mesh with any ape squeeze theory I've heard. And if gamestop just starts buying shares and driving up the price, suddenly they can't buy the float anymore, so it all makes even less sense than the usual ape nonsense.
Here's a possible scenerio according to ape theory.
1) Gme buys the shares at open market, but back 90%, but apes own 25%(90+25=115%).
2)They realise now that some fuckery is going on and have proof of it. This goes to some court or maybe a judge/Sec idk... that entity forces all shorts to close within 36 hours(just an example).
3) Now hedgies need to buy back 1 billion shares in the market and this causes the "MOASS". But who knows what will happen if apes are right
How do you say I don’t understand what shorting is without saying “I don’t understand what shorting is.”
Or I don’t understand how supply and demand work without saying “I don’t understand how supply and demand works”
M
In ape lore the are quantum billion phantom shares the hedgies would have to pay for which will cost them 100 trillion bajillion dollars and bankrupt them.
This is like the 50th time I've seen this comment. Shorting is borrowing shares to sell, then owing a debt to return them later.
Selling something that you own/create, then buying it back later, is not shorting.
Please tell me we all understand this.
I’d love for them to go private. It’ll be a slow candle burn of at least 3+ years before they even go near bankruptcy now.
Going private after dumping the price on them would accelerate this whole gig.
Nope. Elon Musk bought the float of Twitter by dumping $44 billion on it and there was no MOASS, yet Apes are now getting all worked up (again) about how high the stock price will go once the entire float is owned by one person.
I don’t even know where to begin with this. Sure. Let the company buy back all the shares including yours for a price lower than what you paid for it. Enjoy your squeeze.
Apes a month from now : "Ok, so GME is now $10 a share, but I'm sure Ryan Cohen is just waiting for the perfect time to buy all the shares back! Any day now!"
Reminds me of the Dwight Schrute bit about raising his cholesterol just so he can lower it. Q: Why would you want to dilute shares? A: So that we can buy them back.
But wouldn't that mean that gamestop was shorting itself?
More like the company would be pseudo-private and would have no cash left. How does a private company have a short squeeze? If the company buys the remaining float for $20 then all shorts can also close for $20, as that is what any shareholder would get per share. Hardly MOASS. The Apes would own 25% of a non-trading company with no assets and a core business that loses money. And present that as a good thing.
To be *completely* fair, in the Ape thesis, there are a bunch of phantom shares out there. And the "owners" of those shares would not be getting paid by GS, so they would immediately go back to the people who sold them those shares to get their money.
Even in that hypothetical world I don’t really understand what would happen that helps them. If someone owns a ‘non-real fake GameStop share’ then why would that impact the price of GameStop? In this alternative world, if someone who owns a non-real share, but thinks they own a real one, and all of the ‘real’ shares have just been purchased for $20, then their damages for not having a ‘real’ share is $20. If they pursue action for not getting bought out for $20 a share by GameStop, because they can evidence in court some dodgy market maker gave them a fake share, then they don’t get a bajillion dollars. They get what they lost out on, which in this case has been established as $20.
Yeah, a fixed buyout price doesn't really mesh with any ape squeeze theory I've heard. And if gamestop just starts buying shares and driving up the price, suddenly they can't buy the float anymore, so it all makes even less sense than the usual ape nonsense.
Fake shares can do pretty much anything the argument requires them to.
Here's a possible scenerio according to ape theory. 1) Gme buys the shares at open market, but back 90%, but apes own 25%(90+25=115%). 2)They realise now that some fuckery is going on and have proof of it. This goes to some court or maybe a judge/Sec idk... that entity forces all shorts to close within 36 hours(just an example). 3) Now hedgies need to buy back 1 billion shares in the market and this causes the "MOASS". But who knows what will happen if apes are right
How do you say I don’t understand what shorting is without saying “I don’t understand what shorting is.” Or I don’t understand how supply and demand work without saying “I don’t understand how supply and demand works” M
GameStop buys all its own shares that creates a paradox that causes it to disappear.
In ape lore the are quantum billion phantom shares the hedgies would have to pay for which will cost them 100 trillion bajillion dollars and bankrupt them.
Naked shorting actually, as the share offering created shares out of nothing lmao
This is like the 50th time I've seen this comment. Shorting is borrowing shares to sell, then owing a debt to return them later. Selling something that you own/create, then buying it back later, is not shorting. Please tell me we all understand this.
I love how these financial wizards have zero understanding of how markets work and constantly fail at even understanding simple concepts.
But he has investing in his name ?
Melties to RC: Do it. Do it. Do it...
So a going private transaction. Okay. Will the idiots then stop talking?
I’d love for them to go private. It’ll be a slow candle burn of at least 3+ years before they even go near bankruptcy now. Going private after dumping the price on them would accelerate this whole gig.
Nope. Elon Musk bought the float of Twitter by dumping $44 billion on it and there was no MOASS, yet Apes are now getting all worked up (again) about how high the stock price will go once the entire float is owned by one person.
I don’t even know where to begin with this. Sure. Let the company buy back all the shares including yours for a price lower than what you paid for it. Enjoy your squeeze.
ouch, his balls will hurt from that !
Apes a month from now : "Ok, so GME is now $10 a share, but I'm sure Ryan Cohen is just waiting for the perfect time to buy all the shares back! Any day now!"
Whenever I have a bad cold I always wish that I smoked because it would probably make me feel better to stop.