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

91–100 of 250 posts

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

#91

Post by parkingrift »

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…

> Besides all of that, the fundamentals for GME are great.

You need qualitative and quantitative to arrive at a fundamental value. Everything you’ve listed is qualitative.

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

#92

Post by rekoil »

rccb2002 wrote: post #69
moffkalast wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem like a good idea on paper, though when you look at the reports of how many people have actually DRSed their shares it becomes painfully obvious that it's so few that it isn't likely to ever make a difference.

What reports have you seen that show the actual numbers? Genuinely curious. As far as I know, there is only one report that has been released--that was by Gamestop itself for the 3rd Quarter (Aug 1-Oct 30). That number was 5.2 Million. Now, the DRS movement, for lack of a better term, did not start to take off until late August/Early September. IOW, DRSing shares has not been going on since last January. The next qua…

From what I've seen there are now ~122,000 accounts for DRSed shares, and even if the average numbers we're seeing on reddit hold for all accounts (which I doubt), that's still only around ~18M shares, or 28% using your numbers. That's a lot, but it only matters when it reaches 100%.

I don't want to spread negativity, I have a bit of money invested as well on the off chance that the theories are true, but I'm placing my bets that if anything happens it'll be because of stricter regulations regarding short selling, not because of DRS.

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

#93

Post by cuteboy19 »

goldnugget92 wrote: post #29
carnitine wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think not a single institutional investor has rallied behind this cause? Hedge funds love fucking each other over and would embrace popularity with the public. Why hasn’t some firm with a few billion under management taken up this cause if there’s really anything there?

They have? Blackrock just added 10% to their stake recently. Not to mention the former-Amazon staff that GameStop is hiring along with the header of BlockChain at Microsoft mentioning working with GameStop on their new NFT Market Place. Don't just get your news from Bloomberg or CNN.

is this related to Microsoft shutting down Azure Blockchain due to lack of interest?

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

#95

Post by jrochkind1 »

mcv wrote: post #61
danuker wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> remember to buy the dips As long as the dip is not permanent, say, due to a permanent change in the fundamentals. Then it might just keep dipping.

Of course. Always check if something changed about the company itself. And when trading derivatives, even dips caused by the market (rather than fundamentals), can lose you lots of real money. Because even if it will eventually recover, it might dip deeper and longer than you can afford. I lost a ton of money on Tesla that way. (I would have been rich now if I'd been able to keep that.)

Did something change about the company itself in the dips and bumps you just described buying and selling Gamestop at above?

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

#96

Post by devoutsalsa »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #57
galcerte wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 followed WSB for a couple of years before the GME thing kicked off. When it did, it was great fun for about a week, then I unsubscribed. It got very repetitive and boring.

They could at least pick a different moon to aim for.

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

#97

Post by idealmedtech »

iib wrote: post #71
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 am in the process of reading it. I never understood the disclaimer at start, that "Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events, is purely coincidental." in works were I saw it. Is this usually written to defend one legally, even though the events have clear, non-coincidental resemblance to real-life events?

Precisely. There was a film early in the industry's history (Rasputin and the Empress, early 1930s) that depicted events from a real person's life in a very negative (and most importantly, false) way and the studio got the pants sued off them. Hence the disclaimer

edit: it was Rasputin! Here's a Slate article describing the events: https://slate.com/culture/2016/08/the-bizarre-true-story-beh...

edit2: Here is a secondary source from Stanford, which is drier, but also less subject to hyperbole: https://web.stanford.edu/dept/HPS/HistoryWired/Davis/DavisAu...

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

#98

Post by ashurov »

parkingrift wrote: post #91
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…

> Besides all of that, the fundamentals for GME are great. You need qualitative and quantitative to arrive at a fundamental value. Everything you’ve listed is qualitative.

I think the Q4 earnings report will show us quantitative reasons to believe the company is turning around to a profitable company. Furthermore, their move to a NFT marketplace will also move them away from just being a brick-and-mortar company to more than just that.

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

#99

Post by ashurov »

shlant wrote: post #86
a254613e wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reads exactly like the comments on conspiracy theory subreddits like Superstonk.

yep. "time will tell" meaning GME ideologues will continue to move the goalpost for when the MOASS will happen in perpetuity.

I don't necessarily believe in MOASS happening anymore, but I do have a strong believe that introducing an NFT marketplace and what else GME has in store will make sure the long term view for this company is optimistic. Wallstreet might have "won", but it seems that SEC is introducing new bills to prevent some of the stuff that was going on.. Hopefully they will start enforcing it as well.

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

#100

Post by kwertyoowiyop »

olladecarne wrote: post #90

Why is the financial media so obsessed with Gamestop? It's a relatively tiny company and if it truly was the case that it is over they would have stopped talking about it. Instead they publish fear-mongering articles and hit pieces on people like Keith Gill who was just a normal person seeing a value investment and got lucky. hint: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html

You’re expecting far too much objectivity and rational action from the financial media, my sweet summer child. They’ve always been obsessed by trivia and gimmicks. Much more interesting to write about than “buy a few good index funds and hold forever.”
Post reply on HN