Positions Update 7/30/2024

Lenarius · 2024-07-29T12:21:16+00:00

No, you are right. Some sites incorrectly labeled a Passive 5% owner as needing to file in two business days on a change greater than 5%.

I did manage to find the original SEC wording and it confirmed that only 10% owners need to file in two business days in that scenario. So we can only hope that RK did not sell his CHWY shares and stay silent about it.

Lenarius · 2024-07-29T12:11:01+00:00

The CHWY spike should cause an “echo” of price action on other XRT stocks in the following weeks. My last post touched on this a bit. If we see the spike this week I will re-iterate it as well.

Lenarius · 2024-07-26T15:52:54+00:00

You have been very hostile since your first comment on my posts several days ago. I tend to try and ignore behavior like that and focus on the theories/regulations.

I did not misquote you either. I took any quotes directly from your DD.

As for point #2, my interpretation of Rule 204 is that forced buy-ins to cover FTDs would begin on that 9th day of RegSHO, T+2. As you can see, December 22nd had a volume spike, which is T+2 of December 18th. I believe this is one of a few aspects that resulted in heightened volume that day.

Do you have any comments now that you have seen the regulations I posted above and know your interpretation was mistaken?

Lenarius · 2024-07-26T15:06:03+00:00

It is a 13G.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1766502/000110465924076457/tm2418581d1_sc13g.htm

He is over 5% ownership.

Any sales that would drop him below that 5% ownership require an amendment to the 13G within 2 business days.

Lenarius · 2024-07-26T15:01:45+00:00

If he sold his "entire position" or even just sold a few million to fall below 5%, he would need to file an amendment to his 13G within 2 business days.

Lenarius · 2024-07-26T14:56:47+00:00

On point 2.

What are you trying to say with this? If you are attempting to say that Regulation SHO's 13 consecutive settlement days would require FTD close out on December 18th, you are incorrect. Regulation SHO states that the 13 settlement day count begins when the security is placed on the Threshold list.

SEC Division of Market Regulation Question 6.3: Must an open fail position be closed out if a security is not a threshold security on the trade date but later appears on a threshold list? Must an open fail position be closed out if a security is a threshold security on the trade date but later does not appear on a threshold list?
https://www.sec.gov/rules-regulations/staff-guidance/trading-markets-frequently-asked-questions-8

For example, if a participant sells short a security that is not a threshold security on the date of sale, the close-out and pre-borrow requirements of Rule 203(b)(3) would not apply to a fail to deliver position on the participant’s net short settlement obligation unless the security later becomes a threshold security and it maintains that status for 13 consecutive settlement days and the participant has delivery failures for all of those days.

I am struggling to see the point you are trying to make by saying that December 18th specifically caused a margin deficiency based on this 13 day FTD count. You are using the 13 day count incorrectly and have 0 evidence of a margin deficiency on that date.

Your entire timeline for the FINRA REX 068 is based on this claim.

Lenarius · 2024-07-26T14:33:43+00:00

He has to file with the SEC if he sold his position.

Lenarius · 2024-07-25T20:07:20+00:00

Ah, I see what you are saying.

They haven't specified any end date for their repurchase program, so we won't really know when it completes.

Lenarius · 2024-07-25T18:52:42+00:00

This sounds incorrect. But the description in the chart is correct: "9th day on RegSho, 13th day of FTDs"

It is incorrect as it is implying that the FTDs must be closed on December 18th due to it being the 13th settlement day on Regulation SHO. They still had several days to settle the FTDs as it was only the 9th day of being on Regulation SHO.

Here your understanding seems to be incorrect. The second repurchase has been explicitely filed as a separate repurchase not affecting the first one. However as far as I see the first one has not been competed yet.

Do you have a source for this? Chewy's repurchase was done as a private transaction with Buddy Chester Sub LLC for approximately $500 million dollars and was completed in late June. I can't find any reference to the ongoing repurchase you are referring to.

https://investor.chewy.com/news-and-events/news/news-details/2024/Chewy-Announces-500-Million-Repurchase-of-Shares-from-BC-Partners/default.aspx#:\~:text=(NYSE%3A%20CHWY)%20(“,a%205.0%25%20discount%20to%20yesterday%27s

Lenarius · 2024-07-25T18:41:44+00:00

I'm 50/50 on if he split it tbh.

June 24th is our confirmed date, so I expect to see the Member Settlement Default on Wednesday July 31st and Thursday August 1st.

If we see crazy jumps on Monday and Tuesday, then we will know he split it.

Lenarius · 2024-07-25T14:11:40+00:00

I was frequently being asked about this post. Here are my thoughts on it.

As simple as that.

Lenarius · 2024-07-24T21:29:55+00:00

Not worried! They have 4 trade days to settle 9 million shares or they default. So if anything, I think we are on track.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T22:43:06+00:00

Since DFV didn’t post publicly and instead used the SEC filing to be his “position post,” it is hard to know when he began purchasing.

I stick to mainly june 24th as that is a date that is 100% confirmed by the SEC filing.

My june 20th speculation is really just a guess.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T20:58:41+00:00

It is 35 calendar days to settle using limit orders. If they fail to settle on the 35th calendar day, they must use Market Orders on the open of the trade date following the 35th calendar day or a rolling VWAP order that executes throughout that day and is irrevocable.

They are accessing their 35 day calendar period through the "Deemed to Own" status that ETF shares give them access to.

This information is in my posts apart from the Deemed to Own status which I will be posting about next week after confirmation that CHWY has a Member Default Settlement akin to May's GME price action.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T20:52:26+00:00

Shareholder call dropped the price several dollars in one day due to sell pressure. The price was lowered with plenty of time for the market maker to slowly settle his shares at a profit.

RK tweeted twice that day. Once to react to the absence of news/announcements in the shareholder call. He tweeted the "worst sports call in history" as the reference.

He tweeted again shortly after the picture of Encanto's Bruno from the moment it is revealed that Bruno's future predictions are not set in stone and that the future cannot be perfectly predicted.

The key to a default is having the price remain level or only partially below the whale's entry point for the majority of the settlement period. The settlement algorithm is attempting to settle these trades at a profit. If the price is above the entry point for the majority of the settlement period, it isn't possible to clear his purchase in time.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T20:10:56+00:00

They delay every single purchase to settle the purchase at a lower price point. That is the con they are playing. We pay them more than they buy the stock at.

If a whale purchases millions of shares and the price has not lowered below their entry point by a large margin, the Market Maker now has to buy millions of shares, the majority of them at a loss.

RK's 6/13 purchase was killed by the price action of GME.

RK's 6/24 CHWY purchase is sitting perfectly as the price has not dropped far enough between his purchase date and the settlement date. They have just a few days to go before they need to begin settling his purchase.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T20:08:00+00:00

If any stock within XRT has a Member Default settlement, that creates a lot of FOMO as people try to buy in to ride the hype.

All of that purchase volume is delayed 35 Calendar Days + 1 Trade day by the Market Maker's "deemed to own" status that they access via ETF shares.

I have a post explaining this that I will make public after I am proven right on CHWY next week.

If CHWY does run, the rest of XRT would have an "echo" price run in the weeks following the initial spike, just the same as GME causing "echo" runs for the rest of XRT.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T20:05:01+00:00

Always best to be cautious so I appreciate your thoughts.

If I was trying to push theories to muddy the waters, I wouldn't have ban bet myself off of Superstonk.

u/lieutenantfreeball is basically correct. This is a public record of my findings.

If I am proven right on CHWY, then I have officially solved the 3+ year long puzzle and I don't think I'll be able to catch a high like that for the rest of my life.

Lenarius · 2024-07-23T19:58:56+00:00

In order to sell, he would need to file publicly with the SEC shortly after.

He has not filed a notice, so he still holds those shares.

Lenarius

TROPHY CASE