[2/4 @ $88 per share] GME - Gamestop stock - anyone following this absolute MEME-HILARITY (now with Elon tweet)

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

quikah

Diamond Member
Apr 7, 2003
4,198
743
126
You are missing one key point in your OP.

100+% of the GME float was shorted (at ~134% now). That is why WSB decided to buy it and why it has skyrocketed (massive short squeeze), not because of the new board or whatever (though some people were long on it for a while). It has become a robinhood scenario where WSB has turned it into a mission to tank Melvin Capital which has a HUGE short position. There is no pump and dump as far as I can see. It is a classic short squeeze. The hedge funds were idiots for shorting it so much, they deserve to take a bath on it.

IMO, shorting a company to this extent (especially by a small number of individuals/organizations) should be illegal, it is blatant market manipulation.
 

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,688
2,811
126
What kind of restrictions did TD Ameritrade put on GME and others? They don't allow you to buy or sell GME? Or you can only buy it with 100% cash? I'm curious what the restrictions are.
 

Saylick

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2012
4,052
9,472
136
You are missing one key point in your OP.

100+% of the GME float was shorted (at ~134% now). That is why WSB decided to buy it and why it has skyrocketed (massive short squeeze), not because of the new board or whatever (though some people were long on it for a while). It has become a robinhood scenario where WSB has turned it into a mission to tank Melvin Capital which has a HUGE short position. There is no pump and dump as far as I can see. It is a classic short squeeze. The hedge funds were idiots for shorting it so much, they deserve to take a bath on it.

IMO, shorting a company to this extent (especially by a small number of individuals/organizations) should be illegal, it is blatant market manipulation.

It's tough to say if this type of activity should be made illegal or not, especially since it's a high risk play to begin with. If these hedge funds were this stupid to continue shorting a stock when the number of shares shorted exceeds 100% of the share float, then they are playing with fire to being with. Arguably, the ones who lose are the clients of the hedge fund whose assets were wiped out, and I could understand their grievances if they didn't realize that their fund managers were doing such high risk plays with their money, but what happened today is just that 1-in-a-million case where people got greedy and got burned for it. For all the other times, the hedge fund probably made a killing by squeezing out the little guy.
 

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,688
2,811
126
I just did test buy order for GME at TD Ameritrade and I was able to place buy order no problem. So how is the trading GME at TD Ameritrade restricted? I did the same test at Interactive Brokers and my test order was submitted just fine there as well. I canceled both and didn't buy but both orders were accepted and not rejected.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,851
31,343
146

good point about WSB:

However, the forum does not require members to identify themselves or verify their trades, making it vulnerable to savvy traders.

I only heard of these guys.....yesterday? so maybe this is just common debate about that forum and there is more to it than that, but what if 3-4 of those accounts are all just someone like, I dunno, Elon Musk with alt accounts pumping up the fever? ....
 
  • Haha
Reactions: manly

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,688
2,811
126
LOL at folks saying that pumping a stock is well and good but shorting a stock is somehow evil. Both serve a function.
No one is saying shorting is evil. But naked shorting a stock over 140% of the float? That should be illegal. These hedge funds are bad actors and got caught doing some bad things. They deserve this rope and beatdown.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
100,167
17,880
126
Sure, if they have the money to cover their losses when they lose.

that is what this is about, betting on a stock going down is fine, driving it down is not. If you are ok with short fund tanking a stock, you have to be ok with these guys shoring it up.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,819
33,834
136
that is what this is about, betting on a stock going down is fine, driving it down is not. If you are ok with short fund tanking a stock, you have to be ok with these guys shoring it up.
Oh, I am. Ultimately though, shorters, not necessarily the current shorters, are going to win this one. The current stock price has no relation at all to the underlying value of the company. Pumping up a stock price well beyond the value of the company just because one is pissed off at shorters is stupid (but entertaining). Further, pumping up the price of existing stock does nothing to help the company out except maybe net the CEOs some unearned bonuses if stock prices are factored in their compensation packages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
100,167
17,880
126
Oh, I am. Ultimately though, shorters, not necessarily the current shorters, are going to win this one. The current stock price has no relation at all to the underlying value of the company. Pumping up a stock price well beyond the value of the company just because one is pissed off at shorters is stupid (but entertaining).

oh this is all about bitter pill for the short funds, it is about time they get smacked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,259
4,035
136
that is what this is about, betting on a stock going down is fine, driving it down is not. If you are ok with short fund tanking a stock, you have to be ok with these guys shoring it up.
How exactly are funds driving the price down? GME had been in a slow uptrend since last April, and presumably over time more and more short sellers decided to place a directional bet.

As for all pump and dumps, GME will implode at some point and those greatest fools clicking their buy buttons near the top will lose the most.
 

Zeze

Lifer
Mar 4, 2011
11,395
1,189
126
Post image
 

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,688
2,811
126
The only bag holders I see so far are the institutional shorts who shorted 140% of the float at $4 covering today at $385. What is that? 9,625% loss? The max retail bag holder is going to lose is 100% if GME goes bankrupt. GME is not going bankrupt anytime soon now.

Who's the bag holder? Someone with (9,625%) loss? Or someone who could possibly lose (100%)?
 
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: Grey_Beard and Zeze

brianmanahan

Lifer
Sep 2, 2006
24,624
6,011
136
The only bag holders I see so far are the institutional shorts who shorted 140% of the float at $4 covering today at $385. What is that? 9,625% loss? The max retail bag holder is going to lose is 100% if GME goes bankrupt. GME is not going bankrupt anytime soon now.

lol true, i'd definitely feel better about my max loss being capped at the investment amount

but there are honestly a lot of people on WSB investing like everything they have. some people will get really really burned in the end by this. comparatively not as much as melvin, but these individuals might lose the few thousand dollars or few hundred thousand dollars that they have if they were dumb.

shares outstanding are valued at 22$b at this price level...
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
100,167
17,880
126
How exactly are funds driving the price down? GME had been in a slow uptrend since last April, and presumably over time more and more short sellers decided to place a directional bet.

As for all pump and dumps, GME will implode at some point and those greatest fools clicking their buy buttons near the top will lose the most.

Citron Research's Andrew Left was badmouthing GME when he shorted them. He is not talking now. Looks like he pissed off Palihapitiya lol.


 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: highland145

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
This story is on the news in Asia (CNA) and Middle East (TRT). It is spreading like wild fire.
 
Last edited: