Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 151 to 180 of 200

Thread: Reddit Trolls Wall St. Hedge Funds, Buying Up GameStop Stock

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I would call the willful decision to drive a valid business enterprise into the toilet fairly malicious.
    You're just talking about short selling their stock right?

    Or was there something else that they did to "drive a valid enterprise into the toilet"?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    That's interesting. I would call driving up the price of a piece of $#@! company hanging on by a thread through a pump and dump fairly malicious.

    I wouldn't call either thing malicious. Short selling isn't malicious, and neither is pumping and dumping.

    In either case the people who would ostensibly be victims are other investors who chose to take on the risk they did and just took the opposite side of the given bet. Nobody is entitled to have a stock price be one thing versus another.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #153
    It seems like this Gamestop episode has prompted money to come in from the sidelines all across the market. That would be in addition to the massive stock buybacks many companies are doing right now.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    They are what they hate.” - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  6. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Show's over. No one is scared. Back below 100 over coming months with mini spikes along the way. Pattern happens all the time penny stock land. This is no different.
    Already down to $111
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  7. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Already down to $111

    Closed around 91. Everyone probably margined out so likely bounce

  8. #156
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Short interest has gone from 140% to between 30% and 50%. Every spike is and opportunity to reshort. Back side of the move now. Show's over. No one is scared. Back below 100 over coming months with mini spikes along the way. Pattern happens all the time penny stock land. This is no different.
    Do you have any direct metrics/reports that show the short has gone down that far? AFAIK there's been no new direct metrics released yet. CNBC jawboning from known liars doesn't count.

    Ya know, even if this thing is "done", it definitely exposed Wall Street, much of the banking sector and the entire media to a lot of young people as the corrupt criminals that they are, instead of the fake story of existing to protect people and the fruits of their labor:

    "Oh yeah short squeeze is over. Fail. We Wall Street criminals win again. Never mind that we locked people's accounts for days, shut down buying across multiple brokers then claimed people stopped buying while we wash traded the price down, and threw every propaganda piece of $#@! we could muster out to the world. But yes, please come back again soon. We promise we'll play by our own rules next time."

    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    That's interesting. I would call driving up the price of a piece of $#@! company hanging on by a thread through a pump and dump fairly malicious. Since we disagree, it is best to let the market sort things out and let people make bets whichever way they want to fairly determine a price.
    Posts like these are when you expose yourself as nothing but a Wall St apologist. Illegally shorting a company to the brink of bankruptcy is fine but catching them in a short squeeze because of it is a "pump and dump"?

    Stop talking like there's actually a market here. There's NOT and that should be wildly obvious to everyone now. When brokers lock out accounts for days (mine was completely locked Wed and Thurs), restrict trading actions that go against them (sorry, no more buying until we say so), and other unhanded, if not outright illegal, actions, when can we drop the charade that it's anything resembling a market? Like I've said before....there is no market. There is only the Fed, Treasury, Blackrock and Citadel and they're one little colluding group with one mission. That's it. To steal everything they can, as fast as they can. They'll break their own rules any time it suits them if they're ever in danger of being on the losing side of a trade. But they'll throw you under the prison for breaking any rules. They are pirates and nothing more. "Skull and Bones" ain't just for decoration. It's their flag. Note that Monday's GME high price, before the precipitous drop started was 322.
    Last edited by devil21; 02-02-2021 at 05:25 PM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  9. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post

    Posts like these are when you expose yourself as nothing but a Wall St apologist. Illegally shorting a company to the brink of bankruptcy is fine but catching them in a short squeeze because of it is a "pump and dump"?
    1. I was illustrating the absurd by being absurd. I don't care if stocks squeeze or stocks dump. People should be able to trade their money however they see fit. I view the world in principles not like a progressive where it is the little guy vs the big guy.

    2 There were likely no illegal actions by anyone on any part of this

    3. Companies don't go bankrupt from shorting. Companies are not their stock. How is it possible to not know this?

    4. It has never been easier (and it isn't close) for the retail investor. If you are retail investor you have MAJOR built in advantages over institutions. The idea the little guy is screwed by Wall Street is wrong. Low commissions, tight spreads, free instant access to all relevant company information, low cost screeners, etc. You can get in and out of trades instantly instead of a few weeks for institutions. And the last year in particular has been tech bubble easy.

    Here is my message to you. Stop the made up nonsense. No one is conspiring against you. Money's out there laying on the ground. If you don't pick it up I have no sympathy for you. It will never be easier than it is right now.

    Last edited by Krugminator2; 02-03-2021 at 07:11 AM.

  10. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    Posts like these are when you expose yourself as nothing but a Wall St apologist. Illegally shorting a company to the brink of bankruptcy is fine but catching them in a short squeeze because of it is a "pump and dump"?

    I like how you added in that qualifier "illegally." Is that what this comes down to? The fact that some politicians made up a law about it, so now it's "illegal"? You're a big law and order guy I take it?

    That law is where the focus should be. Rather than complaining about somebody breaking it (and whether they actually did break it or not is beside the point as far as I'm concerned), we should be complaining about the politicians who made up the law in the first place. The politicians should stay out of the way and let buyers and sellers mutually and voluntarily agree to exchange stock shares for money, taking on risks that they accept based on a cost benefit analysis that's rooted in their own valuations of possible outcomes, which no bureaucrat could make for them.

    Here are a couple articles about it for those who want to consider this from a libertarian point of view:
    https://mises.org/library/short-sale...se-naked-power
    https://mises.org/library/sec-short-sells-us-down-river

  11. #159
    Still over 90 ron zeplin bux this afternoon
    Do something Danke

  12. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    Because all the new games are now downloaded, there is no more disc or for us 80's kids, cartridge to buy.

    SO you're saying GME hasn't evolved to net.based gaming? Huh... Well, that doesn't justify the attempt to wreck them with intent. The market will do that in its good time.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.




  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    You're just talking about short selling their stock right?
    I've read only one article on the matter and it was very well put together. That said, it is my only source of information on the issue. My understanding is that the short sell tactic was aimed at driving GME out of business and, I'm assuming, raking in the $$ and possibly profits from the sale of the corporate assets, once they are dead and buried. What made no sense about the whole thing was the article by the Melvin employee, encouraging the market to follow suit. The raw stupidity of this can barely be overstated, the net result to date serving as proof of my assessment's validity. That was some spectacular stupid. I cannot imagine that that employee has retained his position at Melvin, or that he will ever again secure employment in that sector. It will be interesting to see how "government" responds to this and whether said employee will face legal consequences for his sheer stupidity.

    Or was there something else that they did to "drive a valid enterprise into the toilet"?
    It wasn't so much what they did, but why. Besides, a key element to shorting is to NOT tell anyone else about it. If you have good reason to believe a stock will take a hit, the smart move is to appropriate as much stock and sell at current market. When it drops, you buy it all back and pocket the difference. You don't go telling your friends about it, much less the whole world. We see where that leads. WSB may be a raft of dumbshits - or not, since I'm not really familiar with them - but they had a sense of propriety - perhaps even honor - and the Melvin article offended them enough to drive the price of GME through the roof. How in this day and age can anyone be so clued out as to think they could get away with the scheme in question, broadcasting it to the world?
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  15. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    IMy understanding is that the short sell tactic was aimed at driving GME out of business and, I?

    Number of non-fraudulent companies driven out of business in the history of the world by short sellers- ZERO.

    Besides, a key element to shorting is to NOT tell anyone else about it.

    Why? We have a First Amendment in a America. They can say whatever they want. Shorts have very good reason to publish research. Shorting is often prohibitively expense. There are fees to borrow the stock. There are loan fees that can run the hundreds of percent annually. So publishing research that the market will recognize overvaluation can act as a catalyst for the stock to drop.

  16. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    My understanding is that the short sell tactic was aimed at driving GME out of business
    I'm not anywhere close to knowledgeable enough about investing to give lessons to hedge fund managers. I'm sure they have tricks up their sleeves that are beyond me. But if GME is a profitable company that's viable in the long term, then how does that work? If some investors drive their share prices down by short selling them, then others will just be able to buy them at bargain prices. The price will reach a floor where it's so low that it attracts buyers faster than the short seller can keep up with if they want to keep short selling, and they'll end up having to buy back the shares anyway and either take whatever gains they could garner before it got to that point or cut their losses, or ride it out and lose even more money. On the other hand, if GME was not a profitable company that was viable for the long term, then it wouldn't be the short sellers that drove them out of business, but their own failings as judged by the whole market.

    In any case, without knowing what was going on in the hedge fund manager's mind, it's hard for me to believe that they just wanted to bankrupt GME out of malice. Unless maybe they had some personal feelings about GME and its owners that had nothing to do with the profitability of the company and they let those personal prejudices drive their decision. And if that was the case, I would be in no position to take sides on a personal feud anyway. But I assume those kinds of investing decisions are usually made by hedge fund managers without such personal motives, and based instead on a dispassionate analysis of each stock. Most likely certain features of GME convinced this hedge fund manager that it was a stock to sell at its current price. Whether his analysis was smart or stupid is really beside the point ethically. That's the way the stock market works. Every stock is the price that it is right now because there are people equally on both sides putting their money where their mouth is, some who think it's a good price to sell it at and others who think its a good price to buy it at.

    Capitalism is a system where winning companies come and go as a result of preferences that people communicate to the market by spending their own money based on their personal values. The world this takes place in is ever changing, and many of yesterday's winning companies will lose tomorrow. When those winners become losers there's no virtue in trying to prop them up out of charity, and no malice in trying to shift one's investments away from them and into the winners of today (whether done with success or failure). There's pain for those who own and work for and like to do business with the companies that fail. But on the whole, this ability of capitalism to adjust by casting them off is more good than bad.
    Last edited by Invisible Man; 02-04-2021 at 07:58 AM.

  17. #164
    $53.50
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  18. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Number of non-fraudulent companies driven out of business in the history of the world by short sellers- ZERO.
    GME is fraudulent? Bold statement that could end you up on the wrong end of libel action. On what do you base your assertion?

    That aside, how does that lend just cause to drive them out of business, particularly without benefit of a trial pursuant to charges? "Hey, Krugminator Inc. is fraudulent because I say so. Come one everyone, let's drive them out of business via shorting action. Yeah, that's the ticket."

    If a company is fraudulent, and here "fraud" has a VERY specific legal meaning, you go to a prosecutor with your evidence and see to it that they bring charges. Otherwise, you either STFU and eat the bitter (sorry, but justice is not guaranteed), or engage in action that is at least as morally bereft as that against which you hold complaint. This is called "rule of Law". When we walk away from that, we walk into mayhem. Do take a look around you. If you have eyes to see, you will indeed witness mayhem in America, what with crazy-stupid people burning several of our cities, others allowing people to poo on the sidewalk, and so forth. We as a gestalt have turned our backs to peaceable living among our neighbors, the divisions deepening by the hour. My point is that your unsupported allegation of fraud feeds the flames. You have damning evidence? Show it. Otherwise, you've got nothing, are advocating behavior (at least through implication) that is morally reprehensible at the least and possibly felonious, and embarrass yourself in the eyes of decent and intelligent people.

    Why? We have a First Amendment in a America. They can say whatever they want.
    First Amendment rights is not the issue. Sure they can, but why would they want to? Open your yap and you invite the sort of response that is precisely what they got. This is what would be colloquially labeled as "stupid". "Hey everybody, we're looking to make a killing by shorting GME." Dumber than a bag of hammers.

    Shorts have very good reason to publish research. Shorting is often prohibitively expense. There are fees to borrow the stock. There are loan fees that can run the hundreds of percent annually. So publishing research that the market will recognize overvaluation can act as a catalyst for the stock to drop.
    All that is wholly beside the point, which apparently flew past you at supersonic velocity. The result we all witness is the proof of my assertion. Melvin advertised the always risky move of shorting and WSB said "oh no you don't". HERRO???
    Last edited by osan; 02-05-2021 at 07:30 AM.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  19. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    GME is fraudulent? Bold statement that could end you up on the wrong end of libel action. On what do you base your assertion?
    He didn't assert that they were fraudulent, or even imply that.

    His point was that if they are not fraudulent, then they won't get driven out of business by short selling. Note that, as a matter of fact, the recent short selling of GME did not drive it out of business.

  20. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    First Amendment rights is not the issue. Sure they can, but why would they want to? Open your yap and you invite the sort of response that is precisely what they got. This is what would be colloquially labeled as "stupid". "Hey everybody, we're looking to make a killing by shorting GME." Dumber than a bag of hammers.



    All that is wholly beside the point, which apparently flew past you at supersonic velocity. The result we all witness is the proof of my assertion. Melvin advertised the always risky move of shorting and WSB said "oh no you don't". HERRO???
    Melvin made a risky move and lost big. It's easier to call it stupid in hindsight than it was before anyone had the benefit of seeing what ended up happening. But the publication of articles explaining why someone short sold it and trying to convince others that this is a company on the way to bankruptcy, such that its shares should be sold and not bought at its current price, is not self-evidently stupid. If your article succeeds in convincing others to sell more than buy, then you will benefit from the resulting drop in the share price.
    Last edited by Invisible Man; 02-05-2021 at 08:02 AM.

  21. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    GME is fraudulent? Bold statement that could end you up on the wrong end of libel action.
    I never remotely implied GME is fraudulent.

    Here is a an example of a fraudulent company that went into bankruptcy because of research from a short seller. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Forest_Corporation

    Note it is the research that drives a fraud into bankruptcy not the falling stock price. Companies are not their stock.



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    Note it is the research that drives a fraud into bankruptcy not the falling stock price. Companies are not their stock.
    Yeah, I was wondering about that. I didn't get the connection of how short selling a stock could force the company to go bankrupt under any circumstances.

    I thought that if a company kept making money enough to cover its debts, it wouldn't go bankrupt no matter what happened to its stock price. And if it didn't, then it would, no matter what happened to its stock price.

  24. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    I'm not anywhere close to knowledgeable enough about investing to give lessons to hedge fund managers. I'm sure they have tricks up their sleeves that are beyond me. But if GME is a profitable company that's viable in the long term, then how does that work?
    What, the shorting strategy? Likely it doesn't, which is almost certainly why Melvin published that moronic clarion call to short GME, which apparently is not doing so well. Melvin wanted the world to follow suit to they could make a free buck on human stupidity and greed. Well, WSB took exception - and rightly so IMO - and yanked the rug out in a really big way. Almost shockingly so, I would add. I know nothing of WSB, but they must have some serious horsepower behind them in order to be able to jack a stock price from $40 to $320, however briefly.

    If some investors drive their share prices down by short selling them, then others will just be able to buy them at bargain prices.
    You assume too much here, i.e., perfect knowledge. If I KNOW what is going on and I beat the shorters to the punch, then what you say is true and the shorters take it in the neck in a big way, which is yet another reason to hold your tongue about such a move. This is sneaky $#@!, mind you, and because you're playing with one hand under the table, you have to keep everything on the downlow. There could be any number of reasons one would not want to advertise this. How about the target company doesn't want their prices driven down, so they begin to buy back treasury stock. They might even borrow $$ to do it. And there we see the other side of the coin - target repatriates a $#@! ton of stock to treasury, the price jacks way up, and they slowly resell so as not to cause a precipitous drop, make they payments for the loans, and pocket the difference. This would be the mirror-complement to shorting.

    In any case, without knowing what was going on in the hedge fund manager's mind, it's hard for me to believe that they just wanted to bankrupt GME out of malice.
    As I previously pointed out, I am working on limited knowledge of a single article that asserted the deliberate bankrupting of GME as one of the goals. That said, you r point is wholly valid. We don't know for certain what was in the minds of the manager. We DO know, however, that they'd employed one stupid mofo who single-handedly damaged or even destroyed the company and, I must assume, the portfolios of a large number of people. This is the brand of stupid that gets people shrieking for more government. Someone at Melvin should probably go to prison for an extended stay.

    Unless maybe they had some personal feelings about GME and its owners that had nothing to do with the profitability of the company and they let those personal prejudices drive their decision. And if that was the case, I would be in no position to take sides on a personal feud anyway. But I assume those kinds of investing decisions are usually made by hedge fund managers without such personal motives, and based instead on a dispassionate analysis of each stock. Most likely certain features of GME convinced this hedge fund manager that it was a stock to sell at its current price. Whether his analysis was smart or stupid is really beside the point ethically. That's the way the stock market works. Every stock is the price that it is right now because there are people equally on both sides putting their money where their mouth is, some who think it's a good price to sell it at and others who think its a good price to buy it at.
    The reasons are irrelevant to the outcome, which appears to be the wholesale destruction of Melvin. The only relevant issue is their blabbering, which included a solicitation to the market to join the fray. It blew up in their faces in a big way and IMO they deserve the fate that is hopefully coming to them. Let the lesson be learned. Bail them out and you will have effectively rewarded them for their stupidity and horrifically bad judgment, not to mention their moral turpitude, not to mention their having proven themselves unworthy of so much as a shred of human trust.

    That all said, shorting is a strategy that requires one of three things: either super human analytical prowess, stupidly good luck, or inside information. You are predicting the future, and in any case that is always risky business. Shorting is always a gamble - inside information has proven wrong in more cases than we can count, so even that is no guarantee you won't lose your ass. Hell, the target could be putting out false signals to encourage a drop in price pursuant to an objective of mass repatriation. You just never know for sure. So IMO shorting is stupid $#@! on its face. It's a shortcut, the honesty and ethics of which are questionable on its best days, and it is the path of people whose morals I would assess as loose in the similarly best case. That's just my opinion. Righteous investors - REAL investors I will daresay - don't waste their time with this sort of penny ante bull$#@! move precisely because it is risky, morally ambiguous at best, and not a good way to advertise one's character to the world <-- that last being yet another reason not to telegraph one's intentions in such matters. Then there is the good old notion of "fiduciary responsibility", which gets precious little nod these days.

    I once lived in Denver and worked for Rhythms Net Connections as a subcontractor to Pricewaterhouse Coopers. One day I was in a morning meeting and the PWC lead manager went on about how they knew the client was doomed and how we were going to take their last $30 million because we could. I was disgusted by his attitude, which is perhaps why I am no longer wealthy. They took the money and about five or seven months later Rhythms when tits-up. My point here is that just because you CAN do something, it does not follow that you OUGHT to. There was nothing illegal in what PWC did, but had they properly discharged what I saw as their fiduciary responsibility to the client, they would have advised them to not develop the computer system and to hold on to the cash because the business was too far ahead of its time and that they would need the cash to weather the lean time to come. But no - they slaughtered the cow and laughed all the way to the bank. Disgusting. That was in 2000.

    A contrariwise example: in '96 I was called into XYZ Securities. "We need a SYSTEM!" was the panicked cry from the board. OK, let me take care of this. I asked for two weeks, only needed eight days, but waited for dramatic effect. I interviewed nearly the entire company, gathered the data, did the analysis, and came back to the CEO with the recommendation NOT to proceed. When asked why, I told him that at this time the cost will be around $35 million (it was a popular figure for such endeavors in those days) at a time where the technologies were in their infancy (CRM, ERT, etc.) and that regardless of the platform chosen, the vendor might be out of business in six months, suggesting they wait a few years until the weak were weeded out and the tech converged. By the time I was done the CEO looked like he was about to let me come to his house and $#@! his teenage daughter. I could have easily walked away with half a million dollars and conceivably a full million, had I played it - and it was tempting. That was real money in those days. I was not going to do that to those folks - people's lives were literally on the line and I was not going to be responsible for over 100 people being no longer able to feed their kids.

    I sent the CEO an invoice for $14K. I received a check for $35K. When I called to let them know of the error, CEO told me that I probably just saved them from dissolution and that the check was his way of thanking me for being honest, recognizing the nature and extent of the ride on which I could have taken them. I did the right thing because it was the right thing to do, and while the bigger money would have been nice, I have no regret there whatsoever.

    Capitalism is a system where winning companies come and go as a result of preferences that people communicate to the market by spending their own money based on their personal values.
    Not quite. Firstly, "capitalism" isn't a "system". It is simply a tool. What you probably mean is "the free market". China is a capitalist nation, as was soviet Russia, their flailing denials notwithstanding. They are not, however, free markets, though China is far closer to it than the Soviet Onion ever was, which is why China is preeminent and the Onion was long ago diced and sautéed into oblivion.

    The world this takes place in is ever changing, and many of yesterday's winning companies will lose tomorrow. When those winners become losers there's no virtue in trying to prop them up out of charity, and no malice in trying to shift one's investments away from them and into the winners of today (whether done with success or failure). There's pain for those who own and work for and like to do business with the companies that fail. But on the whole, this ability of capitalism to adjust by casting them off is more good than bad.
    The ability of FREEDOM. Capitalism is a hammer... a screwdriver. Freedom is the purifier and the keeper of virtue.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  25. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    As I previously pointed out, I am working on limited knowledge of a single article that asserted the deliberate bankrupting of GME as one of the goals.
    Can you share that article?

    I still don't get how bankrupting a company by short selling its stock is supposed to work under any circumstances.

  26. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    Can you share that article?

    I still don't get how bankrupting a company by short selling its stock is supposed to work under any circumstances.
    Wish I could. Wifey tossed it at me and it's now gone. Sorry. It was well written and pretty entertaining. How accurate, well - let us just say I took its contents on some faith, so don't sue me if my understanding of the situation turns out to be flawed.

    Was written by a woman, though.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  27. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugminator2 View Post
    I never remotely implied GME is fraudulent.

    Here is a an example of a fraudulent company that went into bankruptcy because of research from a short seller. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Forest_Corporation

    Note it is the research that drives a fraud into bankruptcy not the falling stock price. Companies are not their stock.
    Your wording can be very easily taken as implying fraudulence. Not saying you meant it that way, but will say that your choice of wording might have been a little narrower.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  28. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    Melvin made a risky move and lost big. It's easier to call it stupid in hindsight than it was before anyone had the benefit of seeing what ended up happening. But the publication of articles explaining why someone short sold it and trying to convince others that this is a company on the way to bankruptcy, such that its shares should be sold and not bought at its current price, is not self-evidently stupid. If your article succeeds in convincing others to sell more than buy, then you will benefit from the resulting drop in the share price.
    Au contraire, mon ami. The move was blatantly stupid, a priori. Given the nature of shorting and the fact that the article was a virtual invitation to come take a poke at Melvin, my assessment is a no-brainer. And once again, ignore my self-flattery and look at the result. Nothing can be taken for granted these days; not even the tempting assumption that all men are corrupt scumbags. The folks at WSB apparently took great exception to the blatant corruption of Melvin and decided to act. To that I say bravo. The market has spoken and Melvin has been reduced to wrack. They deserve it. Some probably deserve some jail time, too, but I will settle for the ends of their careers. Getting new jobs stands to be a tough row to hoe for those people. I say good. Let them feel the fright of what their choices might yield. Hell, some of them have no business in that business. That the innocent suffer alongside the guilty should serve as all the more the lesson of how not to behave oneself. Naturally, it will not.

    C'est la guerre.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  29. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    He didn't assert that they were fraudulent, or even imply that.

    His point was that if they are not fraudulent, then they won't get driven out of business by short selling. Note that, as a matter of fact, the recent short selling of GME did not drive it out of business.
    He wrote:

    Number of non-fraudulent companies driven out of business in the history of the world by short sellers- ZERO.
    Given the context of the exchange, the semantics of the statement is loosely-goosey at the very best and leans toward innuendo. Not saying it was intentional, but his wording could have been a little tighter in that respect.

    I would also call the veracity of that assertion into question. I'd almost bet money I don't have that it is untrue. I cut my teeth on Wall Street. The $#@! I witnessed there was simply amazing and in some cases staggering.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Freedom will be stolen from you in a heartbeat if you do not behave as a wild and ravening beast pursuant to its protection.

    "Government" is naught but a mental construct, a script to which people meekly accept and play out their assigned roles by those with no authority to dictate such.

    Pray for reset.


  30. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    Can you share that article?

    I still don't get how bankrupting a company by short selling its stock is supposed to work under any circumstances.
    You can't. It doesn't even make sense. It literally can't happen for a legitimate company that has a product and an actual business like Gamestop. The only thing it could potentially do is make it harder to raise capital if the stock price drops. If there were a theoretical world where you could short infinite shares and drive a stock to zero, the business would still not be bankrupt. It would have no iimmediate mpact on the company's balance sheet and its ability to service debt.

    He keeps talking about the hedge fund Melvin Capital. I can't find a research paper they published. I am pretty sure he is confusing them with Andrew Left at Citron Research, who is just an independent trader who makes his money short selling.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 02-05-2021 at 01:02 PM.



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #177
    Personally I dont consider shorting stocks any form of legitimate investing . Why I see no need for it to be illegal I also see no need for the individual stock markets to allow it . If one didnt I'd be more inclined to pick a few stocks off of it . If you believe a company will be profitable buy it if you do not think so just do not buy it.
    Do something Danke

  33. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    Personally I dont consider shorting stocks any form of legitimate investing . Why I see no need for it to be illegal I also see no need for the individual stock markets to allow it . If one didnt I'd be more inclined to pick a few stocks off of it . If you believe a company will be profitable buy it if you do not think so just do not buy it.
    I find a stock I like and wait for it to go down to a price that I want to buy it.

  34. #179
    2 days until the heads of Citadel, Melvin, Robinhood, and other pirates show up in front of Congress.

    It has the potential to reveal some very interesting and somewhat "secret" information about how Wall Street really functions. I sent some info to a few select Financial Services members, especially the gentleman from WV, that details how brokers route many trades to their own internal dark pools where the broker itself takes the other side of the trade and never sends the order to the exchange. This practice creates fake securities (shares, options contracts, etc) that only exist as book entries on broker's books and do not represent real shares or contracts issued by the corporation or a designated market maker. That, along with naked shorting (which appears to be illegal now) creates a massive higher number of claims on shares than actual shares. THIS is why GME and other tickers were shut down, accounts locked, and buying restricted. The smoke and mirrors of the "stock markets" would have collapsed as there were nowhere near as many real shares being traded on the exchanges to fulfill demand and the illegal shorters like Melvin would have been completely bankrupted practically overnight as the -real- supply and demand principle drove the price of -real- shares through the roof. Melvin would never have been able to actually cover their shorts because the shares they need simply aren't available for repurchase except at infinite valuation! If the squeeze had carried through it would have exposed the massive fraud and collapsed the entire system as the dominoes started falling. If the hedgie can't cover, then their broker must, if broker can't then market maker must, etc etc. What would happen if it became widely known that many of the "shares" people think they hold in various accounts turned out to be NON-EXISTENT and merely book entries internally managed by the brokerages? The entire value of the markets exposed as smoke and mirrors? It certainly explains how the "markets" could easily be manipulated daily by a handful of computers run by the Fed, Treasury (ESF), Citadel and Blackrock and how the market "values" could have ramped through the roof after the covid sell-off, defying all logic, even as the economy completely disconnected from "markets". It was all ESF money handed to the Treasury by Congress, with wash trading back and forth by Citadel and Blackrock, to restore confidence and get people to feel safe enough to send their money back into the smoke and mirrors. This is how they were able to literally contain the covid crash to exactly their favorite Skull and Bones (Mnuchin is SnB) date range.....2/23 to 3/22. Monday 2/24 is when the crash started and Monday 3/23 was the bottom.

    This link documents below how there are nowhere near as many actual available shares as have been "sold" and/or "shorted" for GME. Returning shares to those with claims on them has led to a huge amount of Fail-To-Deliver, meaning the shares can't be obtained for return! Because they don't exist on the exchanges and have been rehypothecated many times over! We see this same scheme in metals markets also, with 100paper-to-1physical clams on an ounce of silver, for example. I think it's safe to assume that this same fraud has been extended to all markets. We even see it in the currency itself with fractional reserve "lending" and what happens during a bank run, when it becomes clear that obligations on the bank are not supported by actual assets of that bank.

    Where are the shares?
    https://wherearetheshares.com/

    Don't get me started on Citadel's illegal front-running of orders that do get sent to the exchanges.

    Will any of this be brought up during the hearing?

    Or will it be a steady parade of "Oh Mr. Melvin, we are so sorry. Please show us on this Hamptons map where the dirty commoners touched you?"

    (sidenote: It's been reported that PSLV has been quietly restricted from buying by some brokers. Think about why that would be, in the context of this "fake shares" scam? PSLV allows actual redemption for physical silver. That's a big problem when there are a lot of fake shares on the books out there. Potentially millions of redemption demands that far exceed the real shares issued by Sprott....)
    Last edited by devil21; 02-16-2021 at 03:11 PM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  35. #180
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    2 days until the heads of Citadel, Melvin, Robinhood, and other pirates show up in front of Congress.

    It has the potential to reveal some very interesting and somewhat "secret" information about how Wall Street really functions. I sent some info to a few select Financial Services members, especially the gentleman from WV, that details how brokers route many trades to their own internal dark pools where the broker itself takes the other side of the trade and never sends the order to the exchange. This practice creates fake securities (shares, options contracts, etc) that only exist as book entries on broker's books and do not represent real shares or contracts issued by the corporation or a designated market maker. That, along with naked shorting (which appears to be illegal now) creates a massive higher number of claims on shares than actual shares. THIS is why GME and other tickers were shut down, accounts locked, and buying restricted. The smoke and mirrors of the "stock markets" would have collapsed as there were nowhere near as many real shares being traded on the exchanges to fulfill demand and the illegal shorters like Melvin would have been completely bankrupted practically overnight as the -real- supply and demand principle drove the price of -real- shares through the roof. Melvin would never have been able to actually cover their shorts because the shares they need simply aren't available for repurchase except at infinite valuation! If the squeeze had carried through it would have exposed the massive fraud and collapsed the entire system as the dominoes started falling. If the hedgie can't cover, then their broker must, if broker can't then market maker must, etc etc. What would happen if it became widely known that many of the "shares" people think they hold in various accounts turned out to be NON-EXISTENT and merely book entries internally managed by the brokerages? The entire value of the markets exposed as smoke and mirrors? It certainly explains how the "markets" could easily be manipulated daily by a handful of computers run by the Fed, Treasury (ESF), Citadel and Blackrock and how the market "values" could have ramped through the roof after the covid sell-off, defying all logic, even as the economy completely disconnected from "markets". It was all ESF money handed to the Treasury by Congress, with wash trading back and forth by Citadel and Blackrock, to restore confidence and get people to feel safe enough to send their money back into the smoke and mirrors. This is how they were able to literally contain the covid crash to exactly their favorite Skull and Bones (Mnuchin is SnB) date range.....2/23 to 3/22. Monday 2/24 is when the crash started and Monday 3/23 was the bottom.

    This link documents below how there are nowhere near as many actual available shares as have been "sold" and/or "shorted" for GME. Returning shares to those with claims on them has led to a huge amount of Fail-To-Deliver, meaning the shares can't be obtained for return! Because they don't exist on the exchanges and have been rehypothecated many times over! We see this same scheme in metals markets also, with 100paper-to-1physical clams on an ounce of silver, for example. I think it's safe to assume that this same fraud has been extended to all markets. We even see it in the currency itself with fractional reserve "lending" and what happens during a bank run, when it becomes clear that obligations on the bank are not supported by actual assets of that bank.

    Where are the shares?
    https://wherearetheshares.com/

    Don't get me started on Citadel's illegal front-running of orders that do get sent to the exchanges.

    Will any of this be brought up during the hearing?

    Or will it be a steady parade of "Oh Mr. Melvin, we are so sorry. Please show us on this Hamptons map where the dirty commoners touched you?"

    (sidenote: It's been reported that PSLV has been quietly restricted from buying by some brokers. Think about why that would be, in the context of this "fake shares" scam? PSLV allows actual redemption for physical silver. That's a big problem when there are a lot of fake shares on the books out there. Potentially millions of redemption demands that far exceed the real shares issued by Sprott....)
    Are you really anti-Robinhood? You do realize that didn't have any choice in the matter when it came to halting trading of those stocks that morning, right?

    I thought most of the stuff about "dark pools" and "fake securities" was fairly widely known, not by the general population, but by people who understand finance somewhat. I don't know if it's right, but it is currently legal. Crypto exchanges work similarly, which is why people with a decent amount of crypto tend to keep most of it in cold storage until they actually want to exchange it.

    I'm ok with the feds targeting everybody else and questioning all that stuff, I guess, although the feds are on their side so I'm not sure what they will actually do. But not a fan of them targeting Robinhood.
    Last edited by dannno; 02-16-2021 at 03:28 PM.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Hedge Funds Use Fed to Haul in the Cash
    By Jordan in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-02-2010, 02:10 PM
  2. 2009 - Best Year Ever for Hedge Funds
    By Cowlesy in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-02-2010, 01:01 PM
  3. Hedge Funds
    By AlexMerced in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-10-2010, 03:43 PM
  4. Bailouts: Hedge Funds May Get AIG Cash
    By hugolp in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-18-2009, 07:03 AM
  5. Can Campaigns Hedge Their Funds In PM?
    By Allen72289 in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-06-2008, 12:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •