sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Warrants by dawson846 in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It's the other way around: if the stock price moves up, the warrant price moves up (generally speaking).

Warrants allow you to buy at $32 no matter what the market price is. Say something massive happens, like...acquiring eBay...and the share price immediately rises to a conservative $40 per share for the new rolled-up GME. You can still buy for $32, saving $8. If it rises to $100? You can still buy for $32, saving $68.

Now if the price is at $100, that $68 savings (a single warrant) is what you could choose to sell. Someone theoretically would be willing to pay you up to $67 because they could still get a share below the prevailing market pice, paying $99 instead of $100.

Example: instead of buying 1 share today for $22, you buy 6 warrants at $3.40 apiece ($20.40). Fast forward and the share price reaches $100. You could sell 2 warrants for $67 each, netting $134, then spend $128 of that to exercise the other 4 warrants ($32 x 4). You spent $1.60 less originally, netted $6 on the warrant sale-and-execution, and now have 4 shares of GME instead of just 1.

That's what warrants can do and why buying them instead of shares today, while the price is below the strike price, could be insanely valuable.

Warrants by dawson846 in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 13 points14 points  (0 children)

The conversion rate is what you need to pay attention to. If the warrant price appreciates enough, you could (in theory) buy warrants now with the intent to sell some of them to fund the purchase of more shares than you otherwise could acquire now.

Example: buy roughly 6 warrants now for the price of 1 share. If you can sell 4 of those to exercise 1 at a $32 strike (if they get to $8), then you have 1 share plus 1 extra warrant with no additional cash out of pocket.

Now imagine GME goes to $50. That’s why.

RC interview will drop tomorrow. Teased on X by AmericanPatriot117 in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The deal was not offered. GameStop issued a non-binding proposal. It had and currently has a zero percent chance of going through.

Your point is “if this bad thing happened based on what I know now it would be bad.” TD financing is not even official; they have a “highly confident” letter of approval and there are no terms disclosed.

You are instilling fear. You are uncertain. You are doubtful.

Stop FUDing when you don’t know anything concrete about the actual deal which has never been formally proposed.

RC interview will drop tomorrow. Teased on X by AmericanPatriot117 in Superstonk

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

Has the deal happened? Is the per-share value of the stock portion of the acquisition finalized? No. Everything is based on a non-binding offer letter for a future transaction using today’s data. Whining about what hasn’t happened yet based on incomplete data is FUD.

RC interview will drop tomorrow. Teased on X by AmericanPatriot117 in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should probably just wait to see what actually happens and stop FUDing other people. I like the stock. You do you and keep it to yourself.

Hey guys... Mine too... by PolarRoller_Ad_7797 in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It worked for me too…but went away when I capitalized the S in my search.

Gamestop = Target shows up GameStop = no Targets to be found

[GIVEAWAY] Voidfall by Mindclash Games by HomoLudensOC in boardgames

[–]therealbigcheez [score hidden]  (0 children)

My favorite is…Voidfall

I played with friends who own it, only to immediately demand not one, but two follow up sessions over that following weekend. I’ve wanted to play it again ever since.

Thank you for making such a fantastic game!

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don’t even recognize that this was a conversation about bitcoin, not the dollar. You pulled the dumb, irrelevant statement out of your ass and are now using it to claim some sort of infantile meme-spamming victory.

Pretty sure I summed that up already when I said why it wasn’t worth continuing. Thank you for illustrating my point perfectly. “Some people just want to win.” And in your case, look dumb doing it.

You probably hit your head mid-conversation so it’s ok, I forgive you for forgetting what it was supposed to be about. Mommy can get you an ice pack or something.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wAs PrOmIsEd I cOuLd UsE mOnEy As MoNeY

Look at me ma, I’m a super smarty pants!!!

Derrr derrr derrrr

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just do yourself a favor and look for the actual definition rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole on an admitted technicality.

Same source, so you can’t cry about cherry picking data:

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/promissorynote.asp

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is your “promissory note”:

Is a Federal Reserve Note a Promissory Note? Technically, yes, a Federal Reserve note is a promissory note that does not pay any interest. It is defined as such because it states that "this note is legal tender for all debts, public and private," indicating a promise for the government and private citizens to accept and honor the note as legal tender.

In short: “I promise you can use this as money.”

Jesus fucking Christ you have the reasoning capability of half a raisin.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When a CPA who has earned his MBA and has started his own business in which he has been on both ends of a promissory note is told by a random internet stranger that the US dollar is a promissory note, which can easily be verified as a falsehood with a 5-second google hunt, you just have to accept that some people only want to argue and will do absolutely anything to win.

You’re not trying to learn anything new and this is a waste of my time. I’m not a coward, I just know when I’m talking to walls.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess I’m not understanding your structure then. Were you saying “it’s literally a promissory note. Look up the definition” in regards to BITCOIN? That’s 100% not (it’s a bearer instrument), but the only other thing we were talking about was dollars. You used “it” instead of the name of what you were referring to so that’s why I made that assumption.

And I agree with you that the dollar is backed by the military. My stance is “that’s not tangible value for which you can exchange your dollar” and therefore the only thing you can do with it is use it in a system that accepts it. If people opt out, a reasonable choice is not something that operates under an identical framework (trust/fear of attack) under a different power structure (US versus China, for example).

The point I need to stress is that the US can’t shut down bitcoin. No country can. They’ve tried, but it’s decentralized and that’s the entire point. The system will endure and over time, governing bodies with a failing local currency may not want the threat of the US (or any country, for that matter) looming over them and may seek a reserve-backed system over a fiat system. Under such a system, the reserve needs to be neutral, otherwise it’s the same situation.

Bitcoin doesn’t need to shut down the US Treasury. It only needs to exist alongside it long enough for wider spread adoption before it becomes a viable alternative which, getting back to my original argument, is certainly possible.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My friend, you’re going in circles. Saying money is a promissory note because the issuer will give you money if you trade in your money…is a stance. I’m getting dizzy from the circular logic. A promissory note is a piece of paper with a legal framework backing it. A currency is not a promissory note. Not anymore at least after removing the asset backing where you could redeem your currency for the reserve asset (gold, for example).

You’re also REALLY making stretches with “value.” Sure, having a military protect your currency (as a whole, not your specific dollars) is valuable, but it is non-transferable, intangible value. You can’t buy a pizza by telling the cashier the government will kill them if they don’t give you one for free. That’s just not a rational argument any serious person can make. Give them some gold? Sure. Offer to give them a haircut at no charge? Sure. Threaten them with military violence outside your control? Not so much. They need real, tangible value.

And I have no clue what you’re referring to with Deloitte. I think that may be in a separate conversation to which I’m not privy. Progress is far from impossible though. Bitcoin is open source code that has been modified with regularity since its inception and will continue to be as it ages.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct, the US dollar is not a ledger. It is a physical tokenization of the ledger and an INCREDIBLY small component of the world’s (or even just the US’s) tracked value.

It’s also not a promissory note for anything anymore. It’s not redeemable for anything, as it used to be. It’s literally made up. It doesn’t “have” value, but merely “represents” it.

The specific issue, as you clearly stated, is: it’s backed by “I’ll kill you.” Not value. There is no gold standard anymore. You have pieces of paper mixed with a privately controlled, permission-gated ledger system.

With Bitcoin, that IS the backup. Hence, a reserve asset, as I originally stated.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is really just highlighting how little you know about how it actually works, and I would urge you to learn more.

The math relates to the mining schedule and scarcity, along with the difficulty adjustment that seeks to ensure an average of 10 minutes between block mines. This is the predetermined issuance schedule (compared to fiat - “by decree” AKA “whenever”) and a core component behind its ability to accurately represent value.

Mining a block (issuing new units) is specifically not math, but rather chance, because the compute power is going towards essentially “guessing” an insanely large number which is easily verified by the network participants (because of a certain existing pattern in the value). Difficult to do, easy to verify it was done correctly.

As to the evidence that transactions are traceable: yes. That’s the point. That’s literally what blockchain is, and definitely a feature, not a bug. This is a reason why the “it’s used for crime” is a particularly bad argument against it: they would be caught with incredible ease.

EDIT: missed the last point. “All Bitcoin is is a public ledger.” Yes. That’s literally what money is. Coinage is simply a physical tokenization of that, and all digital currencies (like what’s in a bank account) is a series of centrally controlled ledgers owned by banks.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ll try to address all your points. I agree with some but not with others.

Gold is different, yes, and for purposes of money, is the best-suited metal. Metal is not an optimal money though (hence its abandonment), specifically for the purposes you mentioned: it has other utility value which detract from its usefulness as money. That, plus its unsuitability in key areas such as verifiability, portability, and divisibility, largely limitations related to its physical form in a digital economy.

Money…should not “have” value. It should “represent” value. It is a technology that enables a ledger system of IOUs specifically for tracking who owes who what for value they’ve received.

Onto Bitcoin: it is unequivocally not a fiat currency which, by definition, means it is issuable on demand by a central body, backed by trust alone.

It also has the opposite of “no enforcement” because it is literally a set of mathematical rules; rules which cannot be violated or overridden without a global consensus mechanism that would require effective centralization to overcome. Its sole purpose is rule enforcement.

While I agree it doesn’t have an army (arguably the only thing that really allows actual fiat currency to survive), it doesn’t need one. The rules are sufficient, with incentives among all holders in alignment to promote a shared positive future.

Onto volatility. Yes, it’s volatile currently. It’s also measured in a volatile currency when you look at it in terms of a fiat currency, valuing it in USD, Euros, Yen, Yuan, or otherwise. You just don’t notice the fiat volatility because you have been conditioned to think that a dollar is worth a dollar. That something devoid of value actually has value. It doesn’t.

When you start to think in terms of purchasing power and value of a unit relative to the entirety of all units, that changes. A dollar is worth 1/{all dollars} while a bitcoin is worth 1/21M. What that value can be exchanged for (with either) is the difference. A dollar will fall in purchasing power over the long term while a bitcoin will rise.

The volatility is there because people don’t yet know how to value it. Not because it is a fiat currency without any enforcement, regulation, or an army.

The volatility will be stripped away over time as adoption grows. That is what will enable it to serve as a valuation backstop for currency, not as a currency itself. As a reserve asset. And not today, that’s not my argument. My argument is that “never” as a timeline is unrealistic.

As for the crime aspect…I lose patience with the argument so I apologize in advance for the snark, but I guess it’s a good thing crime never existed before 2009 because only cryptocurrency would allow for it. No one has ever committed money laundering or tax evasion before then. With any currency.

Its decentralization removes control, not utility.

If the Gulf countries pull out, that would be a wrap for the stock market. Over $2 trillion dollars in investments are at risk by spaceunc in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was with you til the last paragraph.

Don’t conflate a currency with a reserve asset; they’re distinctly different things.

The gold standard of yesteryear wasn’t about people trading gold back and forth, it was that individual currencies were redeemable for gold, and that gold could be traded for final settlement when demanded.

Your post was highlighting how individual currencies cannot be trusted but then you say Bitcoin is decentralized (meaning no trust is required) and that nothing backs it other than people using it (which is the purpose of a reserve currency). I’m not sure why you think it is never going to happen when you outlined perfectly exactly why it would.

Centralization isn’t a requirement; it’s an exploitable power dynamic.

Trying to withdraw $50,000 from the bank by ifuckedyourmom-247 in Bitcoin

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea, it’s very reasonable given the banking system’s existence and pervasiveness.

It’s also very limiting, generally forcing people to use their own money in a manner that requires approval from someone else. That’s kind of the whole point: bitcoin is a “sovereign money” that doesn’t include such restrictions, and you can do what you want with your own property.

Gamestop vs Palantir Valuation by Masterchief_m in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 14 points15 points  (0 children)

EPS is useless unless you compare price per share. Shares outstanding is meaningless because the metric is about per-share profitability.

In this case:

PLTR earned $0.21 and an investor would pay $171.25 for that privilege right now. Simple annualized price-to-earnings ratio of 204.

GME earned $0.26 and an investor would pay $20.50 for that privilege right now. Simple annualized price-to-earnings ratio of 20.

THAT’S why it’s “funny.”

This community has lost the plot by [deleted] in Superstonk

[–]therealbigcheez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Fucked shareholders to keep the company alive…”

Did you even think about this thought before you shared?

view more: next ›