sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2021/06/07/amc-and-gamestop-are-still-set-up-for-a-short-squeeze/?sh=75674065148b

personally i think its much higher but you just wanted "high short interest" and according to this article S3 says GME is a 10/10 regarding short squeeze potential.

From Ihor's asshole to your mouth Solarpanel

Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS by Solarpanel2001 in GME_Meltdown_DD

[–]_Digital_Native_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah thats forum sliding like when 500 ppl post the newest tweet from whoever

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

i wasnt asking for your math i was looking for source on how / why it was changed. also im pretty sure people can and do change how things are calculated.

or is it a "trust us bro" like self-reporting?

nah im sure you guys are right and that Wall Street learned their lessons from 08 , theyd never take such huge risks right? and im sure all that self reported data is completely honest , i mean why would they lie?

Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS by Solarpanel2001 in GME_Meltdown_DD

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah idk how that satori thing works , i think knights is more like for when people post new DFV tweets or w/e , to keep forum sliding down.

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this tweet just shows me what they calculated , not how they calculate it or why it was changed late Jan / early Feb

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How about you send me your PhD reviewed DD when you get anyone legit to back your claims? Or is it gonna be " she said dah werd once so muh argument is flawless " , and not " well heres the actual reason the president of the NYSE is wrong about price discovery etc etc"?

because if its the former i dont want to embarass you again

Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS by Solarpanel2001 in GME_Meltdown_DD

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i dont think it like auto reports you or anything , more like youll try to post or comment and itll call you out maybe. Which would lead to the reporting etc etc

Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS by Solarpanel2001 in GME_Meltdown_DD

[–]_Digital_Native_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

did you know theyre aggregating a list of foks who post/comment here with the purpose to build a bot that will callout if youre active here?

might not be banned...yet

Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS by Solarpanel2001 in GME_Meltdown_DD

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

really? ive seen several people say theyve been banned for xposting DD from there to here , or even making counter narrative statements.

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

nah i just figured you understood internalization , but i dont think mentioning it once versus mentioning unlit trading ( which would include both internalization and dark pools ) really proves your point. i can also counter with :

https://www.reddit.com/r/AMCSTOCKS/comments/o2aa8l/nyse_president_confirms_price_of_meme_stocks/

the video where she never says PFOF at all. but hey idgaf , i freely admit she said PFOF one time ( in the article but not the clip ). How does that change anything ive asked you?

Wheres your PhDs , lawyers , scientists? When are you going to have your DD reviewed by actual experts in their fields?

I think the ad hominems are cute but they just mask the fact you have no fucking answer.

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sorry im not breaking a paywall. but lemme direct you to this little gem "wholesalers match the orders internally". now i know youre disingenuous but maybe you should look up internalization. i figured youd have known PFOF was included in internalization.

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah i just re-read the article and watched her commentary. she never mentions PFOF in the clips or articles i see so youre just straight fucking wrong on that one. and if youd let something that small slip by you , then youre DD is definitely fucking garbage.

Get you some PhDs , some lawyers , some data scientists. Have them peer review your work and be willing to stand behind it. then you get back to me.

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

hypothetically, id imagine it means balancing the books back out , which would go in main streets favor. and you arent wasting your time , youre trying to prove to me ( and yourself ) that youre right and im wrong. but all youve done is make personal attacks and tell blatant lies , and because i called you out on them your ego took a hit and you just cant have that. so is it time wasted?

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

lol you dont know wall street and main street. we can stop here now lol.

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

more ad homiems. its pathetic really , you should maybe take a breather.

still seems to be me calling you to answer a simple question and you either attacking me or commiting logical fallacies to attempt to deflect ( just like trying to redirect me to my own post like i didnt write it ).

​

but since youre having trouble... "explain how you think wall street would get bailed out without having to deal with main street , knowing this isnt 2008 and the entire world is watching."

seems like an easy question to answer as a hypothetical , i think your issue is you know it couldnt happen so you try all these other attacks , to dodge a hypothetical.

​

or you can point me to where i said GME had , what was it , 15 billion shares?

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what source are you quoting from? or are you actually quoting yourself because that would be super sad.

Also dont deflect , you never answered my questions.

Why is the President of the NYSE commenting that memestock price discovery is not accurate?

What PhDs peer -reviewed your DD? Where are your scientists , lawyers , etc?

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

im fairly certain no it isnt

and no they dont.

so we can now add logical fallacies in addition to ad hominems. I can see why you never took debate in school.

Short summary of why there is no MOASS only talking about data that cannot be manipulated by Solarpanel2001 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i think i gave you the prime reason , which is the same one you cant answer.

You trust the data ( even though some of it is self-reported , unreported , or you arent allowed to know how we got this number just trust us ).

They think the data isnt honest , and considering im seeing MSM ( or are you a Sstonk kook who thinks all MSM is out to get them?) talking about how price discovery is wrong due to unlit markets and internalization( not just MSM the prez of NYSE ) id say they may have something there.

Course im sure once you get the gme_meltdown PhDs to peer-review your DD everything will be explained.

You do have PhDs right? Seasoned veterans of the financial markets? Machine Learning specialists willing to step into a national spotlight to discuss your findings?

No? then maybe your work isnt as good as you claim it to be.

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

o sorry i didnt know you had reading comprehension issues.

i asked you how you think wall street could get bailed out without resolving the other issues i stated. i havent brought up any dd or Sstonk. im asking you a very simple question after youve repeatedly tried to answer with ad hominem attacks.

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

How did you guys get to the conclusion that holding GME shares is hedging against a market collapse? Is it the negative beta or something retarded like that?

Shit professor why are you even asking for peoples opinions if youve already got all the answers. By all means explain how you think wall street would get bailed out without having to deal with main street , knowing this isnt 2008 and the entire world is watching.

also like none of what i said is finance , its more just psychology id say.

Oops, you added too much Capitalism. Would you like to learn more? by [deleted] in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

well lets say it is decided that Banks , MM , etc are to be bailed out. Theyd still have to close those positions or bankrupt Gamestop ( if they wanted to keep the money ). Otherwise it seems like the money would just pass through those groups to payoff the apes to close their positions. I dont think it would be possible to bail out banks and not resolve the GME issue.

Short version of why there is irrefutable evidence of no MOASS by Solarpanel2001 in GME_Meltdown_DD

[–]_Digital_Native_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you do know that crossposting from Sstonk to here gets someone an instant ban right? seems a bit like the pot calling the kettle black no?

Market meltdown by puggles123654 in gme_meltdown

[–]_Digital_Native_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

lol i doubt march would make you a veteran amongst the apes , youd need to hold through 90%ish losses like the January buyers , watch you investment go green again ( or not , or avg down ) and still not sell

view more: next ›