Even if that happened, only a tiny fraction of shorts would be able to have closed.
And they did not.
This is gme, not AMC we're talking about
Oh, and they shorted gme at like 50 cents a share, so they are so fucking underwater, that a few small share offerings didn't help the shorts whatsoever
You DO NOT know that for certain though. Otherwise there’d be so many lawsuits, RC would have done something to protect shareholders etc.. but the OPPOSITE has happened? How will perma-bulls explain that? Being forever bullish about GME is unironically FUD, because then everyone else views GME as a cult, because everything you people say, is always the opposite of what is really happening?
You're right. We don't know that for certain. The market is deliberately obtuse. It's also an inverted reality (AM = After Market, PM = Pre-Market; these are terms that are deliberately opposite our 12-hour clock time).
RC sold shares in an At-The-Market Shelf Offering. The additional liquidity, instead of tanking the price of GME, caused the price of GME to increase. According to laws of supply-and-demand, the additional shares should have decreased the price of GME.
The rules and regulations of the stock market (as enforced by the SEC) exist to 1) create liquidity and 2) protect institutions. When you understand that obfuscation is the mechanism for achieving goals #1 and #2, then you start to see why a variety of middlemen serve systemically critical functions; why the majority of institutional trading occurs either internally or within "Dark Pools"; why and how "settlement periods" exist; and how financial instruments like swaps are both opaque and have minimal reporting requirements.
But didn’t GME issue a lot of new shares? That should have gave shorts an out, no?
The shorts have Multiple times the float, short.
Even if that happened, only a tiny fraction of shorts would be able to have closed.
And they did not.
This is gme, not AMC we're talking about
Oh, and they shorted gme at like 50 cents a share, so they are so fucking underwater, that a few small share offerings didn't help the shorts whatsoever
You DO NOT know that for certain though. Otherwise there’d be so many lawsuits, RC would have done something to protect shareholders etc.. but the OPPOSITE has happened? How will perma-bulls explain that? Being forever bullish about GME is unironically FUD, because then everyone else views GME as a cult, because everything you people say, is always the opposite of what is really happening?
Lol.
Keep listening to Jim Cramer, and CNN.
Weird comment.. I don’t listen to Jim Cramer, but he is unironically much smarter and richer than you apes that are always wrong and losing?
You're right. We don't know that for certain. The market is deliberately obtuse. It's also an inverted reality (AM = After Market, PM = Pre-Market; these are terms that are deliberately opposite our 12-hour clock time).
RC sold shares in an At-The-Market Shelf Offering. The additional liquidity, instead of tanking the price of GME, caused the price of GME to increase. According to laws of supply-and-demand, the additional shares should have decreased the price of GME.
The rules and regulations of the stock market (as enforced by the SEC) exist to 1) create liquidity and 2) protect institutions. When you understand that obfuscation is the mechanism for achieving goals #1 and #2, then you start to see why a variety of middlemen serve systemically critical functions; why the majority of institutional trading occurs either internally or within "Dark Pools"; why and how "settlement periods" exist; and how financial instruments like swaps are both opaque and have minimal reporting requirements.