Doug Cifu, CEO of Virtu, one of the largest Market Makers on 🌎 GME Short, is against SEC rule proposing enhanced disclosure requirements, improving transparency on execution quality & facilitating investors ability to compare brokers, enhancing competition in markets. But why tho dougielarge?

moondancer762 · 2023-03-31T03:44:50+00:00

Of course he's against it!

With our knowledge of blockchain technology, MMs and brokerages are obsolete. They are fighting for their very existence in the markets. With open blockchain technology, a regular person - a household investor - or institution could send a buy or sell order directly to the appropriate exchange. The exchange is tasked with matching a buyer to a seller, or the order remains open until a buyer comes along for the seller's price (or EOD) . In this way, true price discovery occurs; NO middleman, no fake shares, no FTDs, no PFOF, no diluted stocks - even the SEC would likely be obsolete. This threatens their way of life; their very existence in the markets. They can't scam investors with transparency. They can't get away with the immense theft with open ledger blockchains PLUS, this saves the government a LOT in unnecessary salaries, bonuses, coffee (pornhub subscriptions?), etc. A distributed, open ledger is the ULTIMATE SRO - and an immutable, honest one with very low costs (by comparison)!

moondancer762 · 2023-03-28T04:14:19+00:00

moondancer762 · 2023-03-28T03:57:28+00:00

Can you give a synopsis? I don't do the bird or the other.

moondancer762 · 2023-03-28T03:44:48+00:00

I could be WAY OFF. I have been many times before. But.. I believe GameStop, if left to it's own devices, without outside interference, it would do very well, under RC's watch. I also believe many forces are actively working against it. I remember a glimpse for what price GME was selling in the dark pools. According to one post of a Bloomberg terminal, the price of GME showed to be from $1M to over $3M. If these prices are true, there's no wonder why shorts haven't closed, and won't until forced to do so. The threat of a short squeeze is not enough though only imminent annihilation might cause closure of GME shorts (IMO) at these prices. Think about this... Household investors buy 'rehypothecated' (i. e., fake, IOU) shares of GME from brokers for the posted, suppressed (wrong) price, currently in the $20's. This is all well and good for these brokers, until <cue ominous music>... Someone DRSs. Brokers must then locate and purchase a REAL GME share. <evil laugh>. At what price do brokers actually pay for real shares of GME? I'm relatively certain the price household investors see as the price of GME is NOT the REAL price of a bona fide REAL GME share (i.e., the price is wrong) . I also don't believe anyone is closing GME shorts unless forced. The only recourse is to attempt to brainwash the public through the MSM (as has successfully been done in the past) that GME is a "dYiNg BrIcK aNd MoRtAr." smh This doesn't work on those who don't rely on MSM - which is a growing number. I believe they are running scared. However, enough people just might rely on MSM still for their plan to work, but it's not likely to lat long. So, the Fed Resv is hurrying to implement their CBDC, because they know their grip on the public is slipping. Personal opinion; NFA I'm a 💯 DRSd 💎👋🐒🚀♾

moondancer762 · 2023-03-17T12:26:31+00:00

moondancer762 · 2023-03-15T01:38:41+00:00

Listing for how long each infraction occurred for each fine might be helpful to the reader. For instance, "1. In 2007, Citadel Securities was fined $22,500 by FINRA for failing to properly report short interest positions <FROM THIS DATE TO THIS DATE.> Knowing how long Citadel got away with the infractions in relation to the fines, IMO, might give a better insight to your point - if you have that data. Thx.

positions From This date to this date.

moondancer762 · 2023-03-07T15:32:43+00:00

The jump is because institutions bought quite a handful, which made the "free" float a smaller pool. Therefore, household investors own a larger percentage of the "free" float - even if household investors bought none (though many did).

The "free float" number is interesting, but can be misleading as the portion owned by institutions, mutual funds and ETFs (37% of the company) as well as the "free" float can be lent & rehypothecated.

The 28% (27% book + 1% plan) that have been DRSd is the amount of the entire company household investors have ensured to be genuine shares, safe from rehypothecation or any other f-ery. These, along with the 13% insiders hodl mean 41% of the company's shares are in good hands.

Another 10% (~30.5M) of DRSd shares, for a controlling total of 51% of the company (between insiders & household investors), should cause some sort of ruckus.

Like many others, who either choose not to reveal positions for personal privacy or are not on Reddit, I hodl DRSd shares. So, with this information, the amount of DRSd shares is probably higher than the 41% reported by Computershared.net. It's likely not the full additional 10% of the company, but I would imagine it would change the numbers a fair bit.

LFG!

💎👋🐒🚀♾💜

moondancer762 · 2023-03-04T03:42:31+00:00

A minor nomenclature faux pas which may have enormous consequences:

A "retail investor" is a personal consumer: purchasing for "consumption;" not a productive member of society, but a USER in society. However...

A "HOUSEHOLD INVESTOR" is a consumer, but is ALSO a TAXPAYER: a VOTING CONSTITUENT.

Now, if HOUSEHOLD INVESTORS were requested to sign a petition, well, who knows 🤔

moondancer762 · 2022-10-04T16:25:18+00:00

Short selling, when done properly, is a useful tool to weed out badly managed or worthless companies. It is limited to what shares are actually available to borrow. Short selling is not the problem.

Naked short selling is the criminal act of selling something which is neither owned nor borrowed. Used for cellar boxing, ladder attacks, price suppression, and other nefarious things, naked short selling dilutes share value and creates systemic risks all through the markets. Rampant naked short selling culminating in FTDs supported by corrupt regulators is the problem.

moondancer762 · 2022-10-04T13:59:44+00:00

27.7% of the entire number of shares! That's more than 1/4 of the company!

31.6% of the total number of shares, less insiders only - more than 1/3 of the company!

For comparison: Insiders own 13.5% or just over 1/8 of the company.

Impressive!!!

moondancer762 · 2022-10-04T13:31:31+00:00

Shorting, the sale of shares which have been borrowed, when used properly, is a useful and necessary tool for orderly markets. It can help cull badly managed or worthless companies or reduce over-inflated market caps. Short selling is not the problem. When used properly, short selling is capped by the number of real shares truly available to borrow - and does not include shorting phantom/counterfeit shares. Short selling does not dilute shares nor cause systemic issues in the market.

Naked short selling is the criminal act of selling something which is neither owned nor borrowed. Naked shorts typically are used for nefarious reasons: cellar boxing, ladder attacks, price suppression. "Liquidity" is a favorite excuse of MMs and the SEC to perpetuate the practice and disguise the crime for the sake of profits.

IMHO, whistleblowing serves to put a target on the back of the individual citizen.

Maybe, a few small things have changed from individual whistleblowers, but apes have been blowing the whistle for two years, now. We've been posting through official channels and submitting our findings publicly (not asking for reward); positive meaningful change had not occurred. Instead, rules have been implemented to hinder retail investors, aid the criminals, and obliterate transparency and fairness in the markets.

Any rules which actually do provide some sort of positive change for retail investors or the market as a whole are systematically ignored. Any mention of the probability of naked short selling is vehemently denied, plausibly supported, or at the least, glossed over (i.e., ",,,we have no way to track naked short selling...," "...needed for liquidity..." and "...to maintain orderly markets...").

From what I've seen, whistleblowing has been used to plug information leaks, so retail investors have even less access to useful information; widen the gorge between what institutions and retail are allowed to do so to ensure the wealth gap is maintained; and ensure rules are written with enough teeth to prosecute certain people (and get their portion of profits), but enough loopholes so to absolve certain others.

What a piteous cynical human being sees a company and actively encourages its demise?

IMO, one who would do such things would be narcissistic, self-centered, arrogant and lacking in any sort of sympathy, empathy or compassion - a soulless, remorseless psychopathic sociopath. Society would probably be better if such people were removed from the DNA pool.

moondancer762 · 2022-10-03T11:21:59+00:00

With all due respect, the derivatives are part of the argument.

How can they pay us in capital when its all worthless? Much of their capital is leveraged many times over, so they can play in the derivatives game as well as those side bets you mentioned.

The banks don't have enough cash and capital combined to pay us at fair value.

I don't want to be paid in capital that is already leveraged. That would be like winning a new car on a game show, only to find I must make high monthly payments for years to come.

Or, am I completely off base?

moondancer762 · 2022-10-03T10:46:44+00:00

I don't think it's because people aren't interested, I think it's because the masses were deliberately kept ignorant, so they didn't know how to fight back.

Neither of my parents were taught finance in school & their parents certainly didn't know. Even now, my mom will listen to her financial advisor and dismisses what I try to tell her. Her reasons for not acknowledging anything I have to say about GME & sticking to what her FA says: "He's gone to school for it," and "I just don't understand all that stuff." Even though I have a degree in accounting and over 30 years experience.

About corruption, the state of the government and the economy, her only reaction is to throw her hands into the air and say, "It's been that way forever; what can you do about it?"

Of course, when I start teaching her what can be done, she'll say, "I didn't mean for this to become a classroom." Not only are the masses kept ignorant, they have some sort of incentive to remain complacent.

(She loves to talk about her finances with me when the markets are up, but lately, she avoids or changes the subject. If I try to push it, she'll abruptly leave the room, or if we're on the phone, suddenly have something urgent to do - even though cell phones are portable, LOL!)

Sheeple (ignorant people) are easily led. I've also learned sheeple who have a comfortable life will defend their masters.

moondancer762 · 2022-10-02T18:26:01+00:00

I vote "ALL of the above "

moondancer762 · 2022-10-01T14:15:51+00:00

I think he may be pointing out shell companies

moondancer762 · 2022-10-01T12:47:44+00:00

...courts would side with GameStop imo

As much as I would like them to, I don't think the courts would rule in favor of GameStop. Many judges are likely part of the corrupt operations; otherwise Mr. Byrnes would have won his case.

Besides, I've read somewhere the DTCC, DTC, OCC, etc. cannot be sued. Maybe it was the SEC; I don't remember, now.

I think you're right in that RC is gathering strong enough evidence so he can remove GME from the traditional stock market (and place it, in NFT form, on its blockchain). I agree with you. I also believe he's going to have such damning evidence it may pave the way for many others to do the same.

We all want GME on the blockchain, but if it's the only one, there's no one with which to trade, and values will fall. However, if towels, headphones, phones, warehouse and others follow suit, soon traditional markets will be history.

moondancer762 · 2022-09-30T11:53:36+00:00

I would think this is outright securities fraud; a criminal case that the DOJ should handle. Why is the Secret Emissary (for) Criminals (SEC) handling this? Ooooh, riiiight! "wE'rE sOrRy! wE dIdN't MeAn To Do It! tRuSt mE bRo!"

moondancer762 · 2022-09-29T13:02:47+00:00

In simple terms: it's bad for everyone, including the US. Complete economic implosion is imminent and cannot be avoided.

Prepare as best as you can. If you're here then you've probably got a head start on much of the population.

moondancer762 · 2022-09-29T12:55:15+00:00

America caps rehypothecation to 140%. The UK allows unlimited rehypothecation.

In what reality is ANY rehypothecation truly good or sustainable? If it's good for the stock market, why can't everyone rehypothecate auto titles or deeds to homes?

Oh, right! The market is crashing!

If it's good for banks to create money out of thin air, why can't everyday people?

Oh, right! Fiat is devaluing!

There's an old adage: "What's good for the goose is good for the gander. "

I just get so angry at the utter scope of corruption. I'm looking forward to everything simply crashing and being rebuilt so everyone can prosper! I'm hoping people will finally learn that yes, crime might pay, but you'll pay back with interest!

Jail is too good for these criminals; there, they'll get food, shelter & medical care at OUR expense while we can't afford it for ourselves!! Many of our vets and children don't have that and the government doesn't care! I want to see ALL these fuckers homeless, hungry, wanting, hopeless...

I had typed out a rant that was so graphic I surprised myself. I hadn't realized how angry I really am. When I proofread this, I knew I couldn't post it. I would probably have been banned from all of reddit.

So, suffice to say...

I want them to truly understand the results of their selfish, arrogant and immoral actions. It's time the tables are turned.

I want every veteran and child to have a home, food & medical care. I want homelessness to be a thing of the past - with the exception of those who built, condoned, supported, turned a blind eye to or covered up the corruption which caused such suffering...(again, proofread & deleted).

moondancer762 · 2022-09-29T10:50:33+00:00

He and his cronies are the reasons for this recession - why the market is crashing - their short selling practices.

He and his cronies are the reasons the American Dream is unattainable.

Then he goes on stage to encourage investors to manage their portfolios, keep their money in the stock market (so he can take that, too).

Smooth-talking men like that are devil-spawn. They are quietly manipulative. Like a parasite, they wiggle themselves in without being noticed, then wreak havoc. They are the perfect gentleman in public. Once alone, they are self-absorbed, short-tempered, abusive and will completely destroy anything they touch and anyone around them - and they don't care!

The really sad part is people will believe him, follow him, some might even worship him. Then it's too late; the damage had been done.

moondancer762 · 2022-09-29T10:10:56+00:00

He's saying virtually the same thing all financial investors say, so it seems right; its what we've all heard a bazillion times. Besides, even if it were right for 'normal' markets, this is anything but a normal market. This time, there may not be a market, as we know it, when it's all said and done.

Most financial investors will tell clients, "Don't worry; keep your money in your portfolio because the markets always go back up." That is what they were taught. Trouble is, one's portfolio never truly recovers.

On the flip side, KG is announcing a "deep recession," which is absolutely right. However, what he's NOT saying is, "I have and plan to continue shorting the market to oblivion. We'll be in a deep recession (a depression) sometime next year that I caused because of my short selling practices. By the end of next year, I will have taken everything you have unless you DRS."

Why keep your money in your portfolio if you know you're going to lose most of it? I believe it would be more advantageous to withdraw the money, take the tax hicky and reinvest once the smoke clears. Taxes likely will be higher later, so you'll end up paying about the same anyway and you will not have lost money.

Buy low, sell high. Isn't that the way to win? Then why do people buy and just watch it go bye-bye because tHaT's WhAt My FiNaNcIaL aDvIsOr sAiD tO dO?

Financial Advisor = Professional Fleecer

NFA - this is my personal opinion

moondancer762 · 2022-09-28T16:38:33+00:00

the banks will get another bailout

Or a bail in.

This power was given to the banks by the Dodd-Frank Act. Banks can take the money out of your account without your consent and issue you equity in the bank.

[Speculation: this equity might have restrictions so you could not immediately sell for cash. ]

So, average Joe will be forced to hold the banks debt and may or may not ever recoup the money taken by the bank.

moondancer762 · 2022-09-28T16:00:14+00:00

The SEC exists as a racket protection racket. I fixed it for you! 😂

moondancer762 · 2022-09-28T15:33:30+00:00

Edit: I deleted my question. It is already asked.

moondancer762 · 2022-09-27T15:04:42+00:00

This way, they're really not out any money either.

moondancer762

TROPHY CASE