Right. An SEC link which is a filing directly by GME itself, stating they declared a split and will distribute as a dividend.
Different tax implication, right.
But taxes are secondary to making or losing money in the first place.
anyone who is short is obligated to buy those extra shares for every share they're short
That is where you have not shown me why that is a problem, assuming the shorts must do that.
When they shorted, they SOLD (stock they did not own). Those sales proceeds went into their account as CASH. That cash is STILL sitting in their accounts. IF they must "buy back" shares (at the split-adjusted lower price), they will use that CASH SITTING IN THEIR ACCOUNT to do it.
Because now they're on the hook for 4 times the amount of what they're short ...
... at 1/4th the price.
"So ... I shorted at $400, and I put that CASH in my account. Now I can buy it back at $120? Cool ... Wait! The split means I can buy it back at only $30? Ohhh ... poooor meeee ... I will cry all the way to the bank!"
Right. An SEC link which is a filing directly by GME itself, stating they declared a split and will distribute as a dividend.
Different tax implication, right.
But taxes are secondary to making or losing money in the first place.
That is where you have not shown me why that is a problem, assuming the shorts must do that.
When they shorted, they SOLD (stock they did not own). Those sales proceeds went into their account as CASH. That cash is STILL sitting in their accounts. IF they must "buy back" shares (at the split-adjusted lower price), they will use that CASH SITTING IN THEIR ACCOUNT to do it.
So what?
Because now they're on the hook for 4 times the amount of what they're short if they don't close their positions by the 18th.
... at 1/4th the price.
"So ... I shorted at $400, and I put that CASH in my account. Now I can buy it back at $120? Cool ... Wait! The split means I can buy it back at only $30? Ohhh ... poooor meeee ... I will cry all the way to the bank!"