GME tsunami!
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (65)
sorted by:
Yes, turning off just for us.
Shutting off the buy button stopped "retail" buyers (peasants like us) from getting more shares and driving the stock price higher. The higher the price goes, the ability to pay back the shares the hedge funds shorted becomes exponentially harder (more expensive).
In other words, the hedge funds pressured the folks that manage the Robin-da-hood app to slow down the price increases so Citadel would have more time to fabricate fake shares and close (or delay) the payback of the shares they still owed.
While going through it, I think temporarily allowing hedgies an exclusive chance to cover shorts might make the most sense.
If they were only after controlling the price, they’d probably try to shut it off completely.
Problem is, the hedgies had GME down to nearly a dollar per share back in 2020.
So depending on how many thousands of shares are shorted at ~$2 or $3, they have an impossible hill to climb to not go bankrupt.
The UBS thing though, if UBS underwrote those shorts and has liability for them…
Market cap is 10.3 billion. They had 240% of that in shorts. Let’s spitball that at 2.5m shares they have 5m outstanding shorts. Current price that’s have them owing …
Hey here’s a smoothbrained question. Isn’t market cap just shares outstanding * price?
So if the price is ~$35 with 306.19M outstanding shares, why the hell is the market cap $14.93bn when 35 * 306.19m is not anywhere near 14.93bn (it’s 10,716,650,000)?
Anyhow if the market cap on Nov 2020 was 1.31bn at $4.14 a share, let’s assume we were still looking at around the same number of shares, and they’re on the hook for something like 10.716 * 2.4 = 26.04bn at current prices. Obviously this would create skyrocketed demand and raise the price, but we’re talking about one of the banks with the ability to print unlimited amounts of money being the underwriter for this.
What I’m getting at is… more than just destroying some hedge funds, isn’t what we’re really looking at here a potential thermonuclear bomb waiting to destroy the fiat-based banks by hyperinflating all their worldwide dollar-based fiat currencies (dollar, yen, pound, etc)?
Sure they can print money to cover whatever they need, BUT there are consequences to doing that, so if they need to print say 20 trillion and release it into the economy all once, that’d mess some things up.
There are allegedly only 1.5 trillion dollars in circulation as of 2016. That’s obviously referring to the hard currency and not the digital ledgers, but multiplying that by 20, or even 2 or 3 in a span of months would change things.
Or am I seeing this incorrectly?
It's been a few years since I went through all the Deep Dives / Due Diligence (DD).
The way I understand it is each underwriter has a bigger underwriter above them. Therefore just like when Credit Suisse failed, UBS was the next in line (in the large spider web of shared liability) to be holding the bag.
You are correct on the Market Cap, but it may take into account the executive shares that may not be available or allowed to be sold. I'm not clear on this but the DD's in the link above may cover that.
I think the fraud surrounding GME and the other shorted stocks will collapse the entire market. Once people see that their pensions and 401k's are at risk, there will be a run on the market and in parallel the banks.
Yes, the paper money is only a fraction of the available digital dollars they fabricate constantly. As you may have seen, some banks are NOT able to give their clients large sums of cash ($5,000 - $10k) upon request. The paper just isn't there which tells you that there's too much fake digital money floating in the ethos.
The Fed Reserve is painted in a corner. They can't raise interest rates nor can they lower them without major detrimental consequences.