Posted on 01/28/2021 9:50:21 PM PST by TheDon
Other descriptions seen are the market's "Monkey Wrench Gang".
No it usually does not. The vast majority of cases are those buying the stock, spreading phony hype to pump the price, and then selling into the pump to take profits. You can go to the SEC website and see for yourself actual prosecutions and very few involve your scenario. Don't just make stuff up.
For the record, the shorts borrowed 140% of the total stock and in so doing set themselves up for trouble.
all this talk of elites fails to adequately describe what is actually a game being played in real time. The internet allowed communication to develop a group of anti shorts who collectively played the game in an outstanding manner.
They were legal. The shorts were illegal and have no defense
But the actual people doing the pumping are making the commissions from the managers who are going to make bank on the dump.
The only way to prove that this was a pump and dump is to prove that the Reddit kids bought the stock, pumped it on Reddit and dumped it when it got to a certain point.
I believe the price raised because of the short squeeze, not someone doing a traditional pump and dump.
that is my opinion.
Here is the only opinion that counts:
Pump and Dump Schemes Consist of Two Parts
According to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), pump and dump schemes consist of two parts:
"First, stock promoters attempt to boost a stock price by sharing misleading or false statements about the positive performance of an underlying company.[2] These promoters use several methods to spread this false information, including telemarketing, emailing, and social media. The promoters may claim to have imminent inside information on the company and encourage their followers to purchase shares of the stock quickly."
"Second, once the false information inflates the stock price, the promoter will put his own shares of stock on the market, selling them at an artificially high price. This harms investors who purchase these shares because now their stock is at risk to drastically drop in price once it is revealed that the information is false."
If you're holding a stock long term, and someone offers you money to 'rent' them for a while it might sound like a good deal. Free money is free money.
If they can prove that, go for it.
But if the ring leaders are still in a hold position, it might be hard to prove. Or sold off their initial investment, IE they put in a grand and sold off a grand once it went up but still hold the “houses” shares. That can be a strategy of a retail investor.
It would be interesting on what they can prove, if they can prove anything.
But they should look at the short sellers who are selling naked shorts, its the only way to get to a 140% short position. The fund managers, the brokerages, anyone involved need to be looked at, and indicted if provable. I think Wallstreet was getting away this for too long and finally it bit them the backside for once. Now they are in a tough position.
Honestly, besides jumping out a window, what would you do if you were the fund manager who shorted GME? What would be your exit strategy of this mess, and what would be your “legal” exit strategy?
I am just curious, and if you don’t have an answer, that is fine.
(Mostly) Systemic Shorting
Doesn’t the brokerage pocket the “rental” and set it up?
I don’t think retail investors are even involved.
I am just speculating
Can’t have t]he peasants interefering with the billionaire’s schemes. The little people need to be put back in their place.
I would never be STUPID enough to be caught in their very bad position. Lets say if you are shorting futures or selling naked puts, the only way to protect your yourself is have an offsetting call options. Stops are worthless, they can get blown right through. The market could open way past your stop price.
Example:
Naked short GME at $15. For each 100 shares, buy one out of the money calls at maybe $30, so your maximum lose is locked in hard at $15/share.
bfl
I believe Bloomberg referred to GME as a “trader insurrection”
Bucket Shop” lol. Now there’s an old term. Are there any of those around?
No, they were most likely shut down over a hundred years ago. The gilded capitalist era was fascinating. I just love history and enjoy studying the economic-financial history of the United States.
What these kids did is pretty amazing. I’m just wondering, Why other investment houses missed this opportunity? They’re the professionals, who do it for a living.
Actually, some of these brokerage houses make their own market, and I think that’s whether or not they hold the shares. Its an electronic mirage of a bucket shop.
Word is that big banks financiers are being sought now for Bridge Loans to facilitate the settlement of the trades. From a normal collateral % to now 100%.
Thus the buy restrictions.
One starts to wonder now who actually has positions behind these hedges.
The curtain is being raised.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.