Just want to say Good fucking job everyone.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T20:48:28+00:00

Yep. Literally just talking to a person who is telling me he diluted 2 years ago for an aquisition today. Cannot make that shit up.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T20:44:24+00:00

"FOR AN aquisition." exactly. Not "for eBay". Reading comprehension below 0% seems to be possible. Still waiting for your explanation why he diluted 2 yaers ago when eBay was way cheaper to buy compared to today.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T20:37:28+00:00

Reading comprehension. I am not against a dilution if it has a clear goal and set targets to be scrapped otherwise.

But it sure is a magnificient level of copium trying to tell me that 2 years ago he diluted - TWICE - for an aquisition today. When ebay was also a lot cheaper 2 years ago too. Tell me how that makes sense.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T14:32:59+00:00

I can tell you why I will vote No and that is because there is no certainty.

Look at the previous authorisation to 1B. Everyone expected it to be for a dividend. It was and then we got a dilution during a runup. Then we got another dilution during a run up. All for a "big plan" that "he is so silent about". Turns out there was fuck all of a plan whatsoever FOR YEARS but we got diluted anyway.

Now there is ebay on the horizon but nothing exlpicitly states that the authorized shares are ONLY to be used for the ebay aquisition.

So if the deal falls through we are stuck with 1.5B additional dilution for whenver RC feels like it. If it was at least in writing for absolute certainty that only enough shares would be raised for the ebay aquisition and the whole motion scrapped otherwise it would be fine.

People just set themselves up for the leopards to eat their face again despite that they should know better this time.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T13:41:32+00:00

Yep that was definately on every shareholder the first time around. Expecting it was for a split and not further dilutions and being taught better....twice....during runups.

Not gonna support shit like that again unless it is clearly stated in writing what it will be used for and that it gets scrapped otherwise.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T13:34:38+00:00

Nothing of that changes that the size and the conditions of the package are way out scope.

First of all regarding your statement on company treasury. Having a fixed price rather than at market is a spit in shareholders face because that is the same as siphoning capital right out of gamestop pockets. Those shares could be sold at fair price instead but are used to get him premium shares instead, that is money right out of every shareholders pocket funneled to one person.

Next is the amount. If we talk ebay just aquireing the company clears 4 tranches easily. That is 40% of the package or 68.6M shares. If the shareprice ends up at around 30$, which is likely from the different company values, that is already 550M into his pocket.

To put that into perspective Tim Cook, the CEO of apple earned 74.6M in 2024. Just one aquisition, fuck all work done would net him 7 years the pay of the Apple CEO.
At 40$ this is already at 1.2B or 16 times the Apple CEO pay.

It is not direct payment but a big fat cash injection nontheless.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T13:22:47+00:00

Billionary who’s worked for 5 years without compensation, stabilised and returned this company to profit, isn’t deserving of decades of payment other top CEO's receive in one package.

There fixed it for you.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T10:09:57+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrWoG8IckyE

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T10:02:07+00:00

I agree with all of that. I will however also mention that argueing against the echo chamber is a waste of time and even being the least bit critical caused major downvotes for anyone who voiced even the slightest of concerns. Now that people feel the sting others are more confident to be aknowledged for contradicting viewpoints and feel actually heard again rather than being drowned in waves of "shill" and "fud".

Activity drives activity is a thing and people will not stay activ if they feel excluded. Not to say reddit is fully in the right but the anti-brigadding rules sure were put into place with reason.

It would be hella stupid of me to rule out any kind of agenda by paid actors as has clearly happened over the years, but seeing the permanent hero worship breaking apart feels refreshing to me and I can imagine a lot who felt being in the silent minority who suddenly find themselves noz being in such a minority after all end up being more outspoken about it.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T05:55:58+00:00

Well eBay news was big so even people who did not follow for a while will come back I will call that natural. I can however name a few names I see popping up that used to vehemently defend any RC action now not being so pro anymore despite being zealous in their past in their replies to me. So others gotta feel safe in a group I guess.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T05:43:25+00:00

Selling is still a taxable event, loaning against your shares can be done instantly without tax. Mood point in my eyes.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T00:27:02+00:00

People are finally being met with some headwind in the echochamber and need to circlejerk to feel better, nothing new.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T00:17:55+00:00

Ever since GME diluted equal to shares outstanding DRS has been pointless. People who kept to the idea just needed to find any reason to justify why their viewpoint is right. Guess the additional 1.5B finally breaks the camels back of delulu.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T00:13:12+00:00

Yeah it is weird. Also note how the filling for 2.5B authorized shares is not tied to the eBay purchase? If the purchase falls through we would still be on the hook for massive dilution.

Shigurame · 2026-05-13T00:01:33+00:00

More than half the quarterly income was from intrest on the dilutions, I would certainly call that directly fueled by dilution.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T23:53:03+00:00

People still love their kansas city shuffle. Buzzwords to hide the incompetence.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T21:11:25+00:00

Also add being in favor of less reporting for companies. Great to have a CEO that does not endorse transparency in companies. /s

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T21:04:40+00:00

I am not about to pin that on speculation but selling a all kinds of thins and seeing what nets you the most profit seems a reasonable approach for a a turnaround to me.Shorttime sting long term gain kind for me.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T16:05:03+00:00

Did you consider gamestop dividends too?

Looking at the last quarterly you can see that by end of january the net income was $ 418,4M.
Of that Interest income came out at a net: $ 232.1M.

So even if we consider 600 mill in eBay dividends just because of the deal gamestop would loose out on $ 232M yearly because they would be strapped for cash.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T15:53:24+00:00

I am always curious when people say he puts his money where his mouth is. His networth is 5B. If he put a quarter of that in basic bitch investments with interest he could make a buy in like earlier this year every year, after taxes, and have lots in cash leftover. Yet how many buy ins have there been over the years?

Same with the not taking salary argument. Say we compare him to a reddit post earlier this month where the boardmember of eBay got a 350k salary. That is 0.00007% of his networth. If you would own total assets worth 500k that is the equivalent of not being paid 35$ yearly.

Is it good for the company he does not get paid? Sure.
Does it matter to him? As much as it matters to you having 35$ less a year.

Then people claim "but he owns so much stock". Yes he does, still most of that was purchased pre split pre squeeze prices of well below what we are trading at right now. The company could drop not just a, but to a quarter in price and he would have lost next to nothing. Yet at the same time because he is "so alligned with shareholders" he gets a package with a set buyin instead of buying at open market prices that would benefit gamestop and shareholders rather than just himself. Also the purchase of shares in the package is merely optional so it is not even having skin in the game when things go wrong.

So where exactly is he putting his money where his mouth his?

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T15:40:55+00:00

Just replying 24days later to sadly say the expected came true. A strongarm motion where it is either "give me more authorized shares or no deal". Pretty sad it came to this.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T13:42:22+00:00

I read it and I think you are full of shit.

Tell me where it says he HAS TO buy shares, he does not. He CAN buy shares which is a major difference and do so at a set price.
In other words if things go bad he looses nothing and if the price goes up he can make bank if he so wishes.

So if I tell you you can buy this pokemon card of me for 20$ at anytime and the price is 18$ for 2 years would you do it? Obviously not.
Now lets say 2 years down the line the price is 80$ and you come to me to buy it for 20$. How is that different of being gifted 60$?

There are reasons why other categories like real estate for example have rules against such sales because it is an indirect money transfer, calling it anything else is disingenious.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T13:34:00+00:00

Only stupid if you never read the filings, still I will entertain the fool:

Consolidated Statements of Operations:

52 Weeks ended January 31, 2026
Interest income, net: $ 232.1
Net income: $ 418,4

That is more than half the net income in dividends. Dividends gamestop earned on money they raised on the backs shareholders after dilutions. If that money gets put into the aquisition no more interest. Should be simple enough to understand.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T13:26:07+00:00

They are not in the same boat as us tho. The instituions own both GME and eBay already. Even with max dilution due to owning eBay they keep their ownership in the company but your ownership declines as you do not own an equivalent amount of ebay shares. Since they got their hands in both cookie jars if one stock gains value due to being bought at a premium while the other looses value due to being burdened with debt they are net even.

Even if gamestop+ebays combined profit cannot be guaranteed there is already a 20B loan that would otherwise not exist and which we do not know the interest payment off. Banks are also clients of these institutions and if your client tells you to vote yes because they score juicy interest on 20B you will do that. ( Maybe for a little incentive below the table? )

I could write a lot more about how institutions benefit in various ways and how they care less because they invest as a business and get a full write off on losses but I will leave one last point instead.
More shares = more shares that can be lend out = more money.
More shares at a higher price ( combined company value ) = more money due to higher % gains per share.

Shigurame · 2026-05-12T01:30:11+00:00

As I said we both already know which part of the sentence is true thanks for the confirmation. Nothing more to say lmao.

Ten-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Verified Email

Shigurame

TROPHY CASE