1st off if you don't know, Jim Cramer is the biggest paid financial shill for Wallstreet. His job is to get dumb money to invest in dumb things. His track record is soooo bad there's no other expiation. You can actually do well on stocks and beat the market by doing the opposite of what he says.
CNBC just used 30 minutes of time that was scheduled to be part of a normal hour of Shark Tank.
Every day at 5 PM Pacific the news on CNBC ends and Shark Tank begins. This Monday was no different, except the stock market saw the NASDAQ take a -4%+ drop and DOW take a -3%+ drop only to recover, and like another post on this sub pointed out, that’s the most significant drop and recovery in a trading day since October of 2008. Eesh.
So why does Shark Tank matter? Shark Tank is a ratings monster. There’s a reason it is first up in prime time every single day on CNBC. There’s a reason I watch it every day other than just wishing I could make a bunch of fucking money for some other reason besides just all the money I plan to make on GME (so I could then throw it all into GME and make more). But besides all that, it would take a lot for CNBC to just skip over 30 minutes of Shark Tank. They wouldn’t give up all those eyes for nothing, unless they wanted them on something. And guess what they had on.
They had fucking Cramer. And he was shitting on retail traders like normal, but he was also desperately sending a message. And that message was that we are not in a recession and everything is okay. He tried to say that now is the time to buy. That buying in this uncertain time is the antidote. They gave Cramer 30 whole minutes of Shark Tank time so he could plead with the working man to keep buying, keep bag holding as we veer off of the cliff, because we are veering hard. He knows it, CNBC knows it, they mentioned it on the show.
They literally said, you can taste it. Regular people can taste it. Wild statistics like the dip and recovery today being the biggest since October 2008 are piling up, we are seeing the writing on the wall clearer and clearer and the dumbest of smooth brain non-apes who invest in mutual funds are starting to hear little birds telling them something is off. And they’re starting to question their masters, and CNBC has to take the time to inject an extra fat dose of it-will-be-okay to keep grandma and mom and dad buying stock while the market makers and rich investors cash out and jump ship.
TLDR; Shark Tank being interrupted by Cramer telling folks to bag hold harder is the canary in the MSM coal mine.
Persona opinion: this is likely tied to the GME and other stocks naked shorting and synthetic shares costing Hedge Funds BILLIONS so far. It looks like a major one got margin called yesterday.
OK.
I had a chance to look over the SEC paper. I got about halfway through and skimmed the rest. I did not watch the video.
I also did a little review of some things on Reddit for GME.
Let's see if I have this correct:
Is that the theory?
Let's look at MEME. It holds $1.7 million in assets. 4% of that is GME. If a fund were to short 10% of MEME (a ridiculously large amount, and very unlikely though not impossible), that would mean they would be short $170,000 of the fund. 96% of it is not GME, so they would buy up those stocks, leaving a "net short GME" of $8,500.
That would be a monumental waste of capital.
Let's look at XRT. It has around 8 million shares ("officially"). Short 10% of that (again, a really bad idea if it could even be done -- and not reporting it would also be considered a criminal act if more than 5%), then that would be somewhere around $70,000,000 short (valuation of underlying assets). Since GME is less than 1%, they would have to buy $63,000,000 and be "net short GME" of $7,000,000.
IMPORTANT POINT: This assumes that NAV and AUM are equal. They are NOT equal. In fact, this is one of the red flags the SEC paper points out -- NAV and AUM for an ETF (ETP) can be way off from each other, which leaves investors at much greater risk than they think. This also makes it very difficult (maybe impossible) to get this hedge exactly right. Something to consider.
IMPORTANT POINT #2: Even $7,000,000 is peanuts for GME shorts. These guys supposedly have A LOT of money tied up in their GME positions. GME traded $350,000,000 worth of shares yesterday alone. Even if there are 10 times the phantom shares of XRT out there, it would not make any sense to go through XRT just to short GME which could be done directly in the market. Much more efficient use of capital.
Also, excessive shares of XRT could easily be explained by large investors hedging, or even wanting to push down the market. Maybe the Federal Reserve or similar criminals are manipulating to push the market around.
Why is it GME shorts, and what evidence is there that they are shorting XRT and then buying up everything that is not GME?
Have you thought about this? If they are buying up everything other than GME, then they should be pushing those stocks higher -- either with actual shares or phantom shares. Are those stocks going UP? Hell no. The overall XRT portfolio is going DOWN, with the market. So, what evidence is there that theses excess XRT shares for due to GME shorts? It could have nothing (or very little) to do with them.
It sure seems like a convoluted theory to explain why GME is not going up like it "should" according to some people.
But ... WHY "should" GME go up? Look at the BUSINESS that the stock represents.
LOSING MONEY. BURN RATE that will eat up capital within 1 year, if not saved by a big investor like was done before.
And why would anyone want to save it? I suppose if they have $10 billion short in the stock, it might be worth it to give them $1 billion to try and save it. But that would mean they are short 100 million shares at the current prices. Maybe this idea made some sort of sense (in an evil way) a year ago, but not so much today.
The economy is in a shambles, no matter what the numbers say. Gamers are not going to suddenly have a bunch of money to go out and get games from GME. Their brick-and-mortar concept will have to go bye bye because they cannot sustain the expense. That will put them fully online, which gives them no competitive advantage. It then becomes a commodity like every other website.
I just do not see how this company pulls out of its nose dive, regardless of any short seller manipulation.
But the SEC paper was an interesting read. I already knew most of it, but it was good to be reminded of these red flags, generally, and I did not know how bad XRT was.
So, I appreciate the info. I will not be playing GME on the long or short side because I don't see a good reason to.
But if you are in, good luck to you.
Again, I appreciate that YOU (alone in this thread) had responses for me and a good discussion. For a group of people who think they are "awake," it is not good to see that most of them cannot defend their ideas on much of anything. You can, even if I might not agree completely, and I respect that.
Best of luck.
Ok at this point you are being obtuse.
You are stating that is a waste of money for them to be net short via XRT for GME.
However, if you clicked on any of the links I provided for XRT, you would have seen that XRT is in the Tens of Millions of shares for FTDs.
You keep saying that they would not do it, but the data shows that they are.
On December 21st 2021 there was a one day record of over 5 millions shares. The month of December XRT finished with a 400% short interest which again is self reported.
You refuse to comment on the very blatant 90 day cycle.
You refuse to comment on the swaps that they are using that took out Archegos and put a huge loss on Credit Suisse.
You refuse to comment on the CFTC making those swaps hidden to the public until 2023
You refuse to comment on the crazy amount of FTDs on MEME as well.
I guarantee you did not look at the link I sent you with all manner of Due Diligence on GME.
I know I will not change your mind. The point of this was to show everyone else how much you and others like you do not know nor understand about this play.
This is not a traditional investor play, this is the mother of all short squeezes due to the funds fucking up.
VW was ass when Porsche bought it, but it triggered the mother of all short squeezes at the time.
In the end, we can agree to disagree. But the actually data, no matter how you slice it, shows that I am correct.
God bless you for trying. He will start questioning soon, the ego is in the way right now.
Actually, I think you are the one (among others in this thread) who is being obtuse.
You have NOT addressed GME's financials. It loses money. It has a burn rate that will put it into bankruptcy without a bailout ... SOON.
What do you have to say about THAT?
Regarding GME/XRT --
I have NOT said that nobody at all is shorting XRT naked. Obviously, somebody is. But what evidence do you have that it is GME shorts doing it?
Just because XRT is being naked shorted, it does not mean the shorts are doing it because they want to be short GME. Maybe a chunk of it is those guys, but what evidence do you have it is them?
Seems like hopeful wishes. Somebody ran up GME a year ago, and came up with the naked short story. That was TRUE ... back then. But since those positions have been unwound, the story shifted to XRT being manipulated BECAUSE of GME.
Did you READ the SEC paper? It was talking about the 2012-2014 timeframe. The problem has been around A LONG time -- long before GME became a public stock.
When I was saying before that "they would not do it," I was not talking about the GME short sellers. I was also not talking about XRT short sellers.
Some of the people in this thread wrote in such a way that made it seem like it was the money managers of XRT (which is EXACTLY what I wrote) being involved in using XRT money to short GME within the XRT fund itself.
I said that THAT would not happen. Now, I realize you guys are not talking about that. You are talking about short sellers shorting shares of XRT. So, the XRT managers don't have anything to do with that (although, they should be aware of this, and blowing the whistle, but they don't seem to be).
I just came to this story yesterday. You guys are not exactly clearly laying out the case for your position. You are the only one who has actually explained anything. Everyone else in this thread is nothing more than a cheerleader.
Let's get some pom poms for queball. ;-)
Now that I understand you are talking about the manipulation of XRT shares, and not the XRT management manipulating GME shares, your story makes more sense. Not that I agree with it, but at least it is not complete lunacy.
I wrote in one of these posts that the 90-day cycle is tied to the earnings cycle. A big run up, and then melt down. MOST stocks are tied to their earnings cycle. This is a good time for shorts to exit their positions, as the price and volume both go up. But it does not prove anything. You don't like my answer, but I DID address it.
I have not looked into it. So, I can't comment on it.
That is corruption at its finest. There may be some fuckery going on. But guess what?
THAT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THE COMPANY IS A DOG SHIT COMPANY, LOSING MONEY, READY FOR BANKRUPTCY ... AND YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ADDRESS THAT.
MEME has fewer assets than the trailer park that queball lives in.
Question: Other than MEME, XRT, and any other funds that own GME, what OTHER funds ALSO have these FTD's?
If there are none, then you might have something. But since Goldman Sachs makes MOST (maybe all) of its profits from lending out "hard to borrow" securities, you can be sure that GME, XRT, and MEME are not the ONLY stocks and funds that have massive amounts of fake shares.
What do the FTD's show about all the stocks and funds out there? It is is ONLY GME-related, you might have something.
You're damn right, because you did not tell me what was in there. Remember, I don't give a FUCK about GME, one way or the other. I noticed the Jim Cramer thread, and responded. My FIRST post was about what a doofus Cramer is, but other than that I thought everything else in the OP was bullshit.
That's when the knives were thrown at me.
I have ZERO interest in any in-depth DD of GME. It's an intersting story ... MILDLY ... but if you are not going to explain what the hell I am supposed to be looking at, I am not going to spend the time to dig through it.
I spent time reading the SEC paper. I read the first half.
Did YOU read it? I bet if you did, you are the ONLY one in this thread who did.
Wild goose chases are not my thing. If you can point to something SPECIFIC (which I asked you to do about the SEC paper, and you did not do), then I might take a look. Otherwise, nah.
Again, I don't give a FUCK about GME. Therefore, OF COURSE it is true that I would not know everything that all of you, who have been following it for more than a year, would know.
BUT ...
I quickly found out (within less than a minute) that the company LOSES MONEY. And that they have a BURN RATE LEADING TO BANKRUPTCY.
And ... YOU HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THIS AT ALL.
The ONLY person in this thread who responded about the financials ... had EVERYTHING WRONG. Don't you think that is ... I dunno ... weird?
IF all these naked shorts exist, all they have to do is hold out until the company is out of money and cannot find a big whale to prop them up. At that point, ALL the shares become worthless, and the shorts simply close out their positions and have a nice vacation on the yacht.
The longs, OTOH, have a VERY tough road to go. The ONLY hope it seems is the mythical BIG SHORT SQUEEZE ... that was supposed to happen over a year ago. But the stock is DOWN 80% from then, in a market that is UP during that same time.
Why do you continue to IGNORE the fundamental of the BUSINESS that the stock represents? That tells me A LOT about you and the others here.
Well guess what? IF that happens ... I will probably make money on it, just like you.
But what I WON'T do is ... be a bag holder for more than a year, down 80%, and THEN smile about the big move up. No ...
IF a massive short squeeze happens, I will SEE it on my chart, just like I did last year. I MIGHT wait for the inevitable pullback, and then take a ride along with you.
But in the meantime, I have my money elsewhere ... and NOT LOSING 80% SITTING ON A DOG SHIT COMPANY FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR.
If you want to address the horrible financials of the company, I would be interested in seeing what you have to say. Because THAT is the ultimate test. Can they turn it around? If so, how exactly?
If you cannot do that, then I have no further interest in speculating about "secret short sellers." They might exist. You might be right.
But it has not made you any money, has it?
It is a lot smarter to WAIT for it to make its move, rather than sitting on a big 80% crash.
It is already down 80%. There is no reason it can't go 100%.
^ Adding:
I just found something that is right up your alley.
Patrick Byrne gives a presentation, which includes talking about the ideas you are talking about (not GME specifically).
He is saying that Goldman Sachs and the other prime brokers are THE SOURCE of ALL fake shares in the marketplace.
The part where he explains how they create the fake shares is about 10 minutes of the presentation, and starts at about 3:00 (then, he goes on to talk about how to solve the problem with blockchain):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COQvMsbb-Cw
Goldman Sachs and the other 5 prime brokers are the SOURCE of all the fake shares out there.
This is EXACTLY the same as the "money changers" from centuries ago, when they created more money certificates than were actually backed by gold. Same exact scam, just with stock instead of gold.
It is always good to know the names of the criminals to prosecute. Now, it's just a matter of finding the prosecutors and getting them into office.
I am going to create a new thread on this topic, too.