Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 250 posts

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#181

Post by spelunker »

cirgue wrote: post #119
netcan wrote: post #17

$GME was always going to be a "Revolution That Wasn’t." Almost everyone playing knew it. IMO, it was kind of an exemplifier of postmodernism, used colloquially. All the "beat down hedgies" stuff was just part of the game, just like "fuck the fundamentals" was part of the game. IMO it has had an influence. A neurotic, dramatic lens through which we can look at financial institutions, more abstract economics. What is c…

WSB started as a canard to get more drunk tourists to the small stakes poker tables, in this analogy the poker table is low volume options where you can get a handful of robinhood investors to move the price and make a quick thousand bucks. It’s still that today, but larger players with more money figured out that they could do that too, and potentially on a larger scale. That’s what this has always been about. There…

Just like crypto! Hey, wanna buy into ShibaInuElonIsTheBestCoin? I hear it's gonna pump soon.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#182

Post by SilasX »

WJW wrote: post #177
gulikoza wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But one of the GME points was (is?) that stock is sold without being borrowed first. Or being borrowed without permission and multiple times... If you sell empty bags on the street, promising the buyers there is bread inside, only to collect those empty bags back when the buyers throw the (supposed) bread away because it became worthless, is not good business. You're the only one profiting, both the bakers and the bu…

I don't understand why you seem to be so sure that there is indeed "no bread inside"? If an investor buys a share of GME on the stock market, it does not matter at all if they buy it from a shorter, a retail investor or even from GME itself. A share is a share, there are no "empty bags" being sold. Shares also don't go off like bread, so if you get your share back at the end it is like nothing happened: you still own…

The parent's point was that it does matter if it was sold by someone who had never secured a share of their own to sell in the first place, which puts artificial pressure on prices.

(And before someone jumps in to give me the speech about how the future of civilization depends on market makers being able to fabricate shares long enough to cover: Yes, I know about the exception that permits this. The purpose of my comment was just to clarify what the argument was and that the parent of this comment was not replying to it.)

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#183

Post by prionassembly »

ggambetta wrote: post #4

It was a weird, fun ride. My writing partner Lutz and I work in tech, but have a real passion for filmmaking. We lost some money on $GME, so we had to tell the story from our point of view. The result is STONKS, a comedy/drama feature screenplay [0], fictional but inspired by the GME events, and a love letter of sorts to WSB. We queried Hollywood producers but were ignored; we shared on WSB itself but we were insta-b…

I haven't seen screenplay typography in a while... how did you typeset that?

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#184

Post by conorcleary »

zinclozenge wrote: post #179
CommieBobDole wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

/r/superstonk used to show up in my feed on Reddit a lot, and it seemed like most of the highly-upvoted posts were elaborate explanations of how, any day now, there was going to be some sort of massive short squeeze that was going to cause $GME to hit a price of ten or twenty million dollars a share (at which point the outstanding shares of $GME would be worth more than everything else on earth combined), and everybo…

Superstonk has pretty much been a qanon-esque community since day 1. I still hold 10 shares of GME (bought at $220 oof) _just in case_. With that said, every now and then they come up with something that makes me do a double take. Right now they're obsessed with direct registering their shares. I'm guessing they think that if they can lock up the whole float they can force a short squeeze. Also if ryan cohen issues a…

> But I can assure you that the members are 100% serious.

> Direct registering shares

> Issues an NFT dividend

< This forces the hedge funds to also buy those NFT's to pair with the shares, which they'll be forced to buy too = short squeeze.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#185

Post by rccb2002 »

gruez wrote: post #144
rccb2002 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to clarify my original statement, I did not mean to imply that after the 4th quarter results come in, that another squeeze will immediately happen. I've always thought that this would take some time (i.e. DRSing the float). I don't think it necessarily has to reach 100% (although that would fantastic) I do think the higher the number climbs, the harder it will be for investors and regulators to ignore. DRSing sh…

>I've always thought that this would take some time (i.e. DRSing the float). Is there any expectation that the number of DRSed shares will continue to climb, rather than asymptotically approach some arbitrary number? At this point you'd think everyone who wanted to DRS their shares already did it, so for that number to increase you either have to target stragglers (not many of them), or buy more shares (I doubt folks…

March 22nd is when Gamestop 4th quarter results are released. They should also release the number of DRS'd shares.

But to be completely Honest: I will be able to answer your question with more certainty in about 12 months.

That will give us 5 data points. That should be enough to get an approximate number of shares being DRS'd every 3 months.

Through all of the due diligence and personal research, I do believe Illegal naked shorting is taking place. I'm not here to convince anyone to buy GME, but the DRS number seems simple enough for the general public (short attention span--I include myself in that) to wrap their heads around. DRS is the elevator speech, so to speak, for me.

If someone were inclined to listen to me, I can do a quick 2 minute, back of the napkin calculation that may spark interest, using DRS.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#186

Post by anyfactor »

galcerte wrote: post #11
ggambetta wrote: post #4

It was a weird, fun ride. My writing partner Lutz and I work in tech, but have a real passion for filmmaking. We lost some money on $GME, so we had to tell the story from our point of view. The result is STONKS, a comedy/drama feature screenplay [0], fictional but inspired by the GME events, and a love letter of sorts to WSB. We queried Hollywood producers but were ignored; we shared on WSB itself but we were insta-b…

Most discussion around $GME takes place on r/Superstonk these days anyways. Can't remember why it was banned from WSB. Something to do with the new mods I believe.

I will be your WSB historian.

Two folds to the story -

WSB Side

WSB mods alleged the sub was suffocating with the GME and subsequent squeeze stock posts and shitty memes. I made couple memes myself but after the weeks to come WSB was inundated with all the memes centered around this one topic. WSB is a general investment subreddit that took a turn towards GME everything.

Another problem was GME's foundational investment theory, that it had high short interest. But if you look at DFV's way of investing he preached low valuation high potential stock. Just the mere short interest as a determinant wasn't true but an after thought. From that point on, many people who thought they were late in the GME game started to pile on other high short interest stock like Bed Bath and Beyond, WKHS etc. At that point WSB was becoming less of a shitty DD based stock to shitty meme based stock site. Mods clutched up modding but you can never know the difference between one pile of shit vs another pile of shit when it comes to a post. So post removal felt arbitrary.

Superstonk Side

The GME centered group left WSB because there was a new mod who didn't fit the WSB philosophy. There were some personal hypothesis about her(?). They even alleged I believe that mod made their adolescent child a mod of WSB who were also removing content left and right.

My post about cautioning people about GME which reached some magnitudes of thousand upvotes and plenty of agreeable comments was removed without notice.

There were several highly upvoted and good value posts removed which led to people believing that the real wall street might have infiltrated the WSB. So, in this cloud of distrust groups left and they started their own spinoff version of WSB.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#187

Post by jcranberry »

raxxorrax wrote: post #50
netcan wrote: post #17

$GME was always going to be a "Revolution That Wasn’t." Almost everyone playing knew it. IMO, it was kind of an exemplifier of postmodernism, used colloquially. All the "beat down hedgies" stuff was just part of the game, just like "fuck the fundamentals" was part of the game. IMO it has had an influence. A neurotic, dramatic lens through which we can look at financial institutions, more abstract economics. What is c…

I think it should started a discussion about some excesses of the stock market. Rich people can look for battered companies and severely profit from their accelerated demise which some people wanted to fight against for once. Out of their own motives for profit or just for fun to be able to at least once stick it to speculators looking for easy profit. That trading was halted and "corrected" proved they had an impact…

Sufficient volatility will cause automatically triggered halts. It's required by regnms.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#188

Post by lern_too_spel »

conorcleary wrote: post #184
zinclozenge wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Superstonk has pretty much been a qanon-esque community since day 1. I still hold 10 shares of GME (bought at $220 oof) _just in case_. With that said, every now and then they come up with something that makes me do a double take. Right now they're obsessed with direct registering their shares. I'm guessing they think that if they can lock up the whole float they can force a short squeeze. Also if ryan cohen issues a…

> But I can assure you that the members are 100% serious. > Direct registering shares > Issues an NFT dividend < This forces the hedge funds to also buy those NFT's to pair with the shares, which they'll be forced to buy too = short squeeze.

It looks like they are serious. They really believe their "DD" about "authentic shares" and "NFT dividends."

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#189

Post by WJW »

SilasX wrote: post #182
WJW wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why you seem to be so sure that there is indeed "no bread inside"? If an investor buys a share of GME on the stock market, it does not matter at all if they buy it from a shorter, a retail investor or even from GME itself. A share is a share, there are no "empty bags" being sold. Shares also don't go off like bread, so if you get your share back at the end it is like nothing happened: you still own…

The parent's point was that it does matter if it was sold by someone who had never secured a share of their own to sell in the first place, which puts artificial pressure on prices. (And before someone jumps in to give me the speech about how the future of civilization depends on market makers being able to fabricate shares long enough to cover: Yes, I know about the exception that permits this . The purpose of my co…

It does put (a little) pressure on prices, sure. Borrowing money to buy stocks puts a little extra upward pressure on prices. But neither is illegal, neither brings guaranteed profits (naked shorting is regulated so much exactly because of the risks to unrelated market participants if the stock goes up) and neither has the capability to directly harm the underlying company.

Re: Wall Street was the real winner of the GameStop saga

#190

Post by jcranberry »

ashurov wrote: post #62

I have seen so much fuckery with the stock price and ridiculous headlines in het media about GME that can't really believe that we have seen the actual squeeze. Furthermore, the SEC report said that the price run-up was because retail bought in, not because the hedge funds closed their positions. So when did they do this and went from 200% to 20%? Besides all of that, the fundamentals for GME are great. They are hiri…

The speed of the turnaround on GME's public perception is crazy. In the beginning of the pandemic they were constantly excoriated for refusing to close stores and let employees go home. But then the squeeze happened and everyone's opinions did a complete 180.
Post reply on HN