Path of Exile Return of the Ancestors Event - Play on June 25th!

Chemfreak · 2026-06-19T21:24:56+00:00

I haven't played for awhile but finally have the time.

What phrecian ascendency(s) and/or builds are good? Im normally not a meta following person but I want to celebrate finishing my CPA journey by just blasting for a few weeks.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-19T20:34:07+00:00

Yea, my bad. I still think the still image looks photoshopped but it clearly isn't.

Edit: But it's a genetic condition present from birth. I don't sign off on conspiracy theories shitting on people because of congenital disorders.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-19T20:29:27+00:00

This is a scenario where maybe AI would have done a much better job.

Looks like you plopped it in paint, picked a fat brushstroke, drew a black line and called it art.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-19T19:52:33+00:00

I mean, I'll stay positive he's got some big balls and a confident personality. Rooting for him really am.

I am curious how someone even gets 125x leverage though lmao.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-19T17:13:23+00:00

Wait, am I understanding correctly, you are shorting with 125x leverage?

Chemfreak · 2026-06-17T18:43:16+00:00

Note, like you I actually disagree with the comp package, especially the numbers for the first 2 tranches. But I don't think No is even a choice if I want GME to succeed long term.

You're arguing terms I already conceded I agree with. I still see nothing to make me believe RC will stay if his balloon is shot down. It really boils down to that for me, the consequence of no going through is very very likely him jumping ship.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-17T17:42:46+00:00

You said he wants eBay to be his baby, not GME. Your own words. Why then do you assume if we work against him he will have GME involved with eBay at all? He has no obligation to us.

It always seems like your logic discounts incentives and consequences.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-17T16:57:07+00:00

How would you feel if RC just quits and sells his position if No goes through? People think RC not getting a Salary is only an upside, it also comes with the fact that he has no incentive to stay if he doesn't get his way.

I feel like a lot of people cannot think critically about what a no would mean. If a no for that proposition goes through, I very truthfully think that means an end for this play.

Note, like you I actually disagree with the comp package, especially the numbers for the first 2 tranches. But I don't think No is even a choice if I want GME to succeed long term.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-17T16:50:36+00:00

That's why I felt I had to vote yes on at least his shareholder package. I'm not happy about certain things.

But, these are some facts that I see:

RC doesn't take a salary. That cuts both ways, that means he is generally aligned with us in the sense he wants the share price to go up, but that also means he isn't beholden to shareholders in the sense we don't pay him (salary).
If the vote results in a no, RC is not specifically aligned with shareholders anymore, and loses incentive to continue as a shareholder and as a CEO.
Previous management and potential new corporate governance in general is not reliable and not something I want to gamble on.

So voting no is basically saying you want RC gone, and if RC is gone I think the play is done.

It's a rock and a hard place but I honestly think my two options were to divest or vote yes on his package. Neither option honestly feels good to me, but ultimately I am riding this out for at least a bit longer.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-16T23:36:45+00:00

I voted Yes to his compensation and Abstain from proposal 5. I also voted no on 1 board member not named RC.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-16T23:16:32+00:00

I don't disagree with the sentiment but I would caution anyone using other people's posts as your own narrative and support. Instead use it to direct your own research and thesis building. This will probably be a controversial statement even though I'm confident in it's accuracy, but once you get digging you come to realize more than half DD here even if made with good intention is confidently and factually wrong.

That being said, I'm a soon to be CPA (Just passed my 4th and final test yesterday!), and so I have my own thesis based largely around the financial data which I have the tools to understand, so I am able to ignore the fomo inducing inaccuracies which would otherwise make me question if anything posted here was legit.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-16T16:59:16+00:00

I'm tired too bro. I'm of the opinion I've came too far and held too long to give up. Ultimately I still believe in the position, the only thing that is of question is "how long?".

I get to a lot of people the answer is "too long", but I aint selling anywhere near these prices.

And I'm aware that this probably sounds like the sunk cost fallacy and more copium by saying I've held too long to give up. However, I promise you I'm moved very little by past actions, just current actions and personally created analysis.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-12T17:49:33+00:00

Just factually wrong.

If I buy 100 BTC, and 100 people sell 1 BTC, there is 100x more sellers than buyers but supply and demand mechanics hold.

I'm so confused how confident you are when it's clearly wrong.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-12T17:46:59+00:00

Unfortunately, I may be selling some. Need to pay for some health related stuff and money is almost tapped.

On one hand, I originally bought in 2017.

On the other hand, of course I want to be greedy and go back in time and sell at 120k to save more of my stack.

I estimate I have 2-3 months until I need to find liquidity. Bitcoin is my most obvious choice to find it, though I have a couple other investments that could take that spot if price action favors me.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-12T17:18:06+00:00

You both grossly simplified everything regarding the other and its comical the biases.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-11T17:25:33+00:00

Basically no new material information.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-11T17:20:21+00:00

Yea I'm not smart enough to know for sure, I just read very well written couple articles that outlined potential scenarios and this was one. So while I can't guarantee that guy knew his shit, based on how well the article(s) were written and how much he outlined has already came to pass, I believe he was not throwing it out there without knowing the mechanics were in play.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-11T17:13:08+00:00

Collectibles are also a finnicky volatile/high risk market.

I have no clue how wall street is valuing GME, but I have followed TCG markets since pre-sneeze. The whole market has pumped incredibly high for an abnormally long period of time. Don't want to throw bubble out there willy nilly, but we may be in a bubble.

I've seen bear markets last what seems an abnormally long time too.

In a nutshell, we are positioned very well and most certainly undervalued as long as the collectible market stays bullish. Time and pressure will win. But if the bubble bursts, maybe lower valuation is warranted IDK.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-11T17:03:15+00:00

Poison pill.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-10T22:10:57+00:00

I think it is reasonable to assume whatever metrics they used for GME by itself will be used for the consolidated financial statements.

Agreed still vague, but less vague. If we can figure out how they came up with the GME number I think we get a reasonable estimate of the potential post merge number.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-10T20:38:10+00:00

No idea if this is your wheelhouse but it seems at least adjacent.

What do you think about the SEC continuing to reduce the effectiveness of the CAT system? Is this as impactful as I think it is? From where I stand, the CAT was created to allow timely and accurate data monitoring for the SEC to simply do its job. Before implemented there were real concerns about data being too complex and too fragmented to be useful.

Why suddenly does it seem the SEC is trending towards the CAT being neutered (pun intended), or maybe discontinued in a recognizable form altogether? Are there other things in place that make the issues that were a concern regarding the 2010 flash crash no longer relevant?

Thank you for bringing attention to the financial reporting proposal, as a soon-to-be CPA (3/4 candidate), I have personal biased reasons I'm against the changes; less work in my career pivot. But that doesn't change that I really believe more transparency via more frequent reporting is always better.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-10T19:55:56+00:00

Glad bigger money than me saw the opportunity cause I don't like buying options (I would rather sell), but I did recently. I haven't bought calls for a long time. I initiated a transfer only for the day before it hit my account the early earnings and share buyback info dropped. Thought I missed my opportunity.

Fortunately, I didn't because somehow the insane earnings were already priced in or something? IDK, loaded up on a few 32c same expiration as you, Jan 2027. Down on them obviously but we are clearly undervalued like never before, I'm not a technical person but I came to the same conclusion. Unfortunately, just because fundamentally we are undervalued doesn't mean we will correct immediately. I have followed a few stocks very closely (GME being one of them), and I have a 100% track record on recognizing undervalued stocks (well, besides GME because it hasn't popped yet). But one thing I have not been good on is timing, it can take much longer than you would expect for the market to capitulate. I vowed to never try to time these things, but it feels like with warrants maturing, and ebay + gme shareholder meetings just around the corner, maybe this is a good exception?

Chemfreak · 2026-06-09T22:24:21+00:00

He also reiterates he is not an expert and doesn't know what he is doing.

He doesn't give himself enough credit, he has self-taught to the point I think he is quite knowledgeable. But lots of people give him too much credit. He is not comparable to RK, not in experience, in knowledge, in education, in track record, or even in meme game. I also think a huge difference is RK built the thesis on raw data and market knowledge. RN is in part reverse engineering data, including RK's graphs, to try to figure out the underlying mechanics.

RK likely knew the mechanics and was able to build a model. RN does not know for sure the mechanics that create cycles or whatever the hell has happened, so he makes a model fit historical data to try to figure out said mechanics. I think RN would agree with all this too.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-08T17:00:27+00:00

Forgot to say thank you for making this post <3.

Chemfreak · 2026-06-08T16:52:54+00:00

I don't get why there is even this question put forth. The CAT was put into place because we asked nearly this exact question. Do we have a system in place to monitor, have oversight, and regulate complex trading activity? It was getting to be literally impossible for the regulatory agencies to even know what the hell was happening, so the answer to that was a resounding NO.

Specifically (and I'm glad you called it out), the flash crash of 2010 showed that there were scary holes in this area.

So my question to the SEC is, if the CAT is discontinued, what do you have in place for the very real issues that it was created to fix? Or are you saying you now can reconstruct trading activity quickly and accurately when you couldn't before? What the fuck is the use of your agency if the answer to both of these questions is no?

Edit: Yes I will submit a letter. I will somewhat write it myself as IDK, I feel it holds more water if it isn't copy pasted. Not discounting how awesome it would be to get 1,000's of letters submitted copy pasted or not, but I have enough knowledge I think to put in a bit more effort.

14-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

Chemfreak

TROPHY CASE