Tesla tumbled 60* bucks this morning

[Kierland]

Mine is way up thanks to my nerd friends on Reddit. And with silver up I’m good for precious metals too.

If you bought paper silver, you played yourself. But you're a rich boy and not only know better but have the means and the capital to hold physical -- though apparently no little person will ever be able to hold enough (or call in enough) to make a difference.

100% PSLV as you said so I’m good. One person can’t hold it all but a pissed off mob can. It’s not a popular view on WSB but I don’t GARA and neither do all the people buying PSLV right now.

[Innocent Bystander]

My legitimate reason is I’m an America. Fuck you traitor.

Smackaholic is not a traitor. The mail in ballots are bogus because of where, when and how they turned up.

But it doesn't matter because Republicans wanted him out, too.

[Innocent Bystander]

Mine is way up thanks to my nerd friends on Reddit. And with silver up I’m good for precious metals too.

If you bought paper silver, you played yourself. But you're a rich boy and not only know better but have the means and the capital to hold physical -- though apparently no little person will ever be able to hold enough (or call in enough) to make a difference.

100% PSLV as you said so I’m good. One person can’t hold it all but a pissed off mob can. It’s not a popular view on WSB but I don’t GARA and neither do all the people buying PSLV right now.

It is not good. The entire point of physical silver is to force the Bankers to admit how many fake certificates are out there which they are illegally profiting from, selling silver which does not exist. Buying silver on paper just gives the bankers your cash for an IOU which will never and can never be paid off by delivering the physical goods you thought you were purchasing a share of.

But they can use your cash to get themselves out of other situations they need cash infusions for.

[Kierland]

PSLV means Physical Silver

[Mikey]

I cited France as an example. They aren't the only ones.

You said "most" European countries.
I asked which ones. You came up with France.
You need a few more make it to "most."
Which ones are they?

Orange man bad and the Republicans fukked up, by not coming up with a viable solution last year (multiple day voting).

It was never up top "the Orange man" or "the Republicans." It's up to each state to set their own system.

Why do you hate states' rights?
Why do you hate the Constitution?

A Republican dominated legislature set up the system in Pennsylvania. It was fine until Trump lost, fairly and squarely. Then, all of a sudden, it was rigged. How can all of the down ballot results be fine, if the Presidential results on the same ballots aren't legit?

Trump and Pence both voted by mail. The Republicans have nothing against voting by mail, except when Democrats are doing it.

[Mikey]

My legitimate reason is I’m an America. Fuck you traitor.

Smackaholic is not a traitor. The mail in ballots are bogus because of where, when and how they turned up.

Please cite specific, confirmed, examples, or STFU.

[Innocent Bystander]

PSLV means Physical Silver

Unless you hold it in your hands, it's just paper.

[Innocent Bystander]

My legitimate reason is I’m an America. Fuck you traitor.

Smackaholic is not a traitor. The mail in ballots are bogus because of where, when and how they turned up.

Please cite specific, confirmed, examples, or STFU.

I don't have them.

[Kierland]

PSLV means Physical Silver

Unless you hold it in your hands, it's just paper.

You really are a dense fuck.

[Screw_Michigan]

[Innocent Bystander]

PSLV means Physical Silver

Unless you hold it in your hands, it's just paper.

You really are a dense fuck.

The point of a silver squeeze is to force them to deliver goods instead of IOUs and 'just trust us'. A stock certificate doesn't do that. It reinforces 'just trust us.'

[Diego in Seattle]

My legitimate reason is I’m an America. Fuck you traitor.

Smackaholic is not a traitor. The mail in ballots are bogus because of where, when and how they turned up.

You mean like the ballots that were "found in a river" according to Trump?

[Innocent Bystander]

Janet Yellen chortles in 'Fuck you".

[Bill in Houston]

Unless you hold it in your hands, it's just paper.

You really are a dense fuck.

The point of a silver squeeze is to force them to deliver goods instead of IOUs and 'just trust us'. A stock certificate doesn't do that. It reinforces 'just trust us.'

A free market transaction is not 'just trust us', it is mutually agreed that both parties are satisfied with the value of exchange.

It doesn't matter if the exchange is tangible or intangible. No difference if it's paper, or metal, or ether.

Physical property is not intrinsically better than intangible representation. In fact it has many drawbacks, which is why humans developed that 'evil paper'.

Your nostalgia troll is quaint but ill-contemplated.

[Kierland]

Funny how the guy that seems to think it’s a free market is talking about quaint. How quaint. And paper is generally evil because people are evil and paper is way easier to manipulate.

Had a sell order at 250$ so made a few bucks on the Reddit nerds.

[Bill in Houston]

So it’s all beyond your comprehension as well.
Noted.

[Kierland]

Fuck off you obtuse twat. I clearly understand what you are TRYING to say. You’re just wrong.

[Bill in Houston]

Your trade today, did you manipulate someone? Were you manipulated?

How do you know?

Please provide any evidence of market manipulation. You know that ubiquitous evil stain on the public markets.

[Kierland]

It’s called a ladder attack. Now fuck off simp. Or suck some more capitalist cock you brainless asshat.

[Bill in Houston]

^^^^^ that's your evidence!

Holy shit, move over Rudy, you got you some competition.

Go ahead and wave a white flag if you got nothin, or keep digging deeper with your BS. Either way you've kicked your own ass.

[Kierland]

Because you say so. Great argument fuckhole.

[dan's college room mate]

^^^^^ that's your evidence!

Holy shit, move over Rudy, you got you some competition.

Go ahead and wave a white flag if you got nothin, or keep digging deeper with your BS. Either way you've kicked your own ass.

Bill,

Do you work in that business?

I hear a lot about how the evil hedge fund guys manipulate shit. The midget talks about shorting more than 100%.

What exactly is that?

As much as I enjoy seeing “the little guy” get over, it does seem in this case, if there’s anyone doing shady shit, it is the little guys.

And what happens going forward, now that every time anyone considers taking a short position, they have to worry about being ambushed by a bunch of troll traders?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kierland]

It’s when a company shorts a stock they in effect create two stocks. The one you let someone borrow and that borrowed share. It’s like the second day of finance school. Crack a book you orange POS.

Name one thing the retailers did shady you Corp Kleto Fuck. They were in a public chat, you know like the opposite of the shade your Corp master plan to fuck you while sitting under?

[Kierland]

And what happens going forward, now that every time anyone considers taking a short position, they have to worry about being ambushed by a bunch of troll traders?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Checks and balances. Why do you hate America?

[Mikey]

A lot of naïveté in this GameStop thing. I guess the stock dropped 60% today and a lot of newbies are left holding the bag, hanging onto their shares and hoping the stock will bounce again. Fat chance. This was an obvious one time deal. The business could never justify the price in the long run, and it was bound to crash once the excitement wore off. Anybody who got in and didn’t get out is a sucker.

So, some smart day traders made big $$, and some hedge funds and innocents got fucked. Well it was interesting to watch, anyway.

[Mikey]

What I haven’t seen discussed anywhere (haven’t really been looking) and would be the best consequence from this fiasco, is if there were a bunch of current and/or laid off GameStop employees holding basically worthless company stock, they may have had a chance to salvage some of their savings.

[Kierland]

It’s hard to tell who has a bag to hold. If WSB is correct and there are still a ton of shorts then it could still go up. This has zero to do with valuation. Think VW short squeeze. Difference is this is not one hedge vs the other so there my be enough shares that leaked out while the market was shut for the retailers (of not illegal then fucked up for sure) to save the hedge and screw the retailers.

This helped a lot of people and not just at GS.


As for silver, there is no silver to be had and yet the price is falling. Bill calls this a free market, you know, where demand is high and supply is low so the price drops. Fuckin idiot he is.

[Mikey]

Where it eventually lands had everything to do with valuation. It’s a true zero sum game. For every dollar that’s made, somebody is losing one. Not saying none of them deserve it, but it is what it is.

[Bill in Houston]

Both of you have a bit of reality in your take.

But both of ya some stupid shits too.

Kierland thinks she knows what supply:demand is; as if she can will it. What an ignorant fukk.

If she knew truth, understood truth, lived in reality, there could be comprehension. Sadly, nah.

Mikey is a bit more pragmatic, though still a bit misguided. I don’t hate either troll.

The zero sum theory is wrong because there can be a win-win scenario:

Participant A owns security x which she purchased at Y.

Participant A wishes to sell security x, in order to purchase a property in Malibu, or where-the-fuck-evah,for Y+Z.

Along comes Participant B (here’s where I’m sure to lose Kierland), in an open market/non-coerced transaction. B agrees to purchase the security offered by A at a MUTUALLY agreed price Y+Z.

OK. I’ve now disposed of anything Kierland has offered ( nothing ), and will proceed with Mikey.

Participant A is a winner. Presumably because she purchased security x and subsequently sold it for a gain.

Participant B bought security x and holds it in expectation of a subsequent gain.

Win: fucking:Win.

Now. If y’all wanna get difficult, I’ll go there.

[Kierland]

Where it eventually lands had everything to do with valuation. It’s a true zero sum game. For every dollar that’s made, somebody is losing one. Not saying none of them deserve it, but it is what it is.

Yeah that is not how a Short Squeeze works. It is not a zero sum game because there are more than 100% of the stocks out there. You are thinking of buying and selling real things. That is not what is going on. This is a market with artificial stocks being sold. That is why it shot up and may shoot up again. Bill also has no idea what he is talking about which is why he has to try and distract you by calling me a girl and banging out a stupid analogy that is neither relevant nor particularly enlightening. Trying to say we have free markets is the height of stupidity and it will be fun to see him try and wiggle his way out of this one.

[Mikey]

Participant A is a winner. Presumably because she purchased security x and subsequently sold it for a gain.

Participant B bought security x and holds it in expectation of a subsequent gain.

Win: fucking:Win.

Now. If y’all wanna get difficult, I’ll go there.

This scenario completely ignores the options and hedge-fund part of the equation which, I'll admit, it beyond my ability to analyze without more in-depth knowledge of how this stuff works. And I don't have the time or interest to go there at this point.

However, in your simplified scenario, you are assuming that the security in question either increases in value, subsequent to B's purchase, for participant B to have any gain. An expectation of subsequent gain is not a gain.

If the security returns to its previous value, which is probably a safe assumption in the GameStop case, then B's loss will equal A's gain, ignoring any transactional costs. Hence a zero sum game. No net gain is realized here, unless the security maintains a value greater than whatever your baseline is.

[Mikey]

"A" buys a share at $20 and sells it when it hits $300. "A" realizes a profit of $280. "B" purchases the share for $300 with an "expectation of a subsequent gain" but the stock is now sitting at $100. How is that a gain for "B"? He has lost $200 of value and is screwed. Do you really think he'll ever realize $300+ for this share? The only net gain in this transaction is the $80 increase in the share price. That may or may not last.

[Bill in Houston]

Trying to say we have free markets is the height of stupidity and it will be fun to see him try and wiggle his way out of this one.

You were asked to provide evidence of market manipulation. All you’ve done is impersonate Giuliani.

Get fucked.

[Kierland]

Dead body? What dead body? I don’t see a dead body.

Sin,
Helen Keller in Houston

Run like a little bitch and scream how fair and balanced the markets are why you do it. Or fuck yourself in your own ass. I couldn’t care less which you do cause they are both the same.

It was evidence of an illegal ladder attack. Deal with it bitch.

[Kierland]

"A" buys a share at $20 and sells it when it hits $300. "A" realizes a profit of $280. "B" purchases the share for $300 with an "expectation of a subsequent gain" but the stock is now sitting at $100. How is that a gain for "B"? He has lost $200 of value and is screwed. Do you really think he'll ever realize $300+ for this share? The only net gain in this transaction is the $80 increase in the share price. That may or may not last.

If there are still enough shorts then yes, but because the market is so opaque, nobody but the insiders know the answer to that question.
If WSB has enough longs (and options) and WS still has too many shorts (depending on the price of the shorts and WSB’s resolve) then the price will indeed go way the fuck up. I just bought back in on the dip. So I have a few free shares cause I still have the original seed money from my first buy in.

[smackaholic]

WTF is a ladder attack?

I suspect it has to do with buying shares which gets the attention of others who buy, it goes up more, then they short it knowing it’s now overvalued.

Is that about it?

I can see how it might be a little shady, but not sure it’s illegal.

I said what all the Reddit guys did was shady because they collaborated and bought a stock they already knew was overvalued, but they did it anyway knowing that there’s strength in numbers and they could hold on long enough to fukk the hedge fund.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mikey]

WTF is a ladder attack?

I would imagine that it might look something like this, although this is technically a bike fence attack.

[Kierland]

No it is when kleptos sell small amounts to each other at just under the market to have the price fall trying to ladder the price down. And they don’t then short it. They then hope to drive people out so they can watch price fall and cover the shorts. You really are a soft brained idiot.

I know you love the big guys so I am not surprised you think the small guys are the shady guys. Shady, you know In Broad Daylight. How is that shady? And it wasn’t overvalued it was undervalued.
You know nothing and yet you keep on talking.

[Mikey]

And it wasn’t overvalued it was undervalued.

Based on what? Their -$4.18 EPS? Their -29% revenue growth for the past 12 months, annualized at -7% for the past 5 years?

Based on the tremendous growth potential of their business model?

Just wondering.

[Mikey]

I'll stick with the more "conventional" long term route like Enphase, which some feel is overvalued by gaining over 8,000% in market value in the past two years, but has seen 42.1% revenue growth in the past year (annualized at 12.7% for five years) and 281% annualized cash flow growth over the past five years.

I guess you could say that GME is "worth" whatever the current price is, but I wouldn't expect that to last too long. Good luck making some $$ with it.