The $GME gamestonk thread

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by mbardu, Jan 27, 2021.

  1. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Yes at least we agree, what you are doing is nitpicking.
    Choose to put the arbitrary distinction of where the short squeeze ended in your mind (if it happened at all), and when supposedly the "rest" of the price action played out in order to argue on a technicality, I hardly see the point, but up to you. Cool, you're quoting the example of VW now, where they quadrupled in 2008. And that was in an era where the market was waaay less gamma-heavy, and didn't move nearly as quickly as it does today. And you know what, at 140% short, GME was still way more shorted than VW. And they will hold that record for a while. But somehow despite being in an absolutely unprecedented situation, we should believe that we would have seen a short squeeze that should just have led to a 10-20 or even 50% upside? Just like your arguments on "HFs would never take such a risk and lose that much on a trade" after seeing 2 funds doing exactly that literally days ago. Do you believe your own arguments?

    No matter, I don't even care what technically drove the price higher. It's certainly not fundamentals, despite how you want to bring that in the discussion :lol: . It is clearly technical price action and gambling. But that's fine in my book. Do you know a single market where price is solely based on fundamentals? Hedge funds wouldn't even exist. What is just particularly shitty in that situation is that as the situation unfolded, it became apparent that even the gambling was super rigged, and that if you try to play the same game as the HFs, they won't tolerate it and change the rules. Clearly you don't mind, but again- many people do mind, and that's my only real point here.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
  2. StevenC

    StevenC Javier Strat 8 2022

    Messages:
    6,304
    Likes Received:
    6,715
    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    You should read the "Kiesel Never Again" thread.
     
  3. penguin_316

    penguin_316 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    179
    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Location:
    TX
    In regards to the investments, you ignored to acknowledge the fact that the US dollar is in a general death spiral and has been for 50 years.

    On top of that inflation of valuable assets are skyrocketing, your marginal yield over 10 years is irrelevant. It will buy marginally more than it did 10 years ago, if that...
     
    mbardu likes this.
  4. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    31,091
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    I mean, if your investment thesis is "this is a short squeeze," it matters HUGELY if the short squeeze was over on Monday, or on Wednesday. Doubly so if you bought on or after Monday

    Or, taking it a step further, if it doesn't matter why the price was increasing, so much that it was increasing, why have an investment thesis at all? Why target heavily shorted stocks in the first place, if what's driving it higher doesn't matter, just that the price IS going higher?
     
  5. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    31,091
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Nah, I didn't ignore it, I just don't agree with you that the US dollar "is in a general death spiral."

    I've read parts. Next time I have a shred of hope for humanity I need to debase, though... :lol:
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
    Jonathan20022 and StevenC like this.
  6. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    31,091
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Actually, here's something I can dig in a little on.

    I disagree that GME collapsed because "HFs wouldn't tolerate it and change the rules." That collapse was inevitable. What might surprise you a little, is I think the intial short squeeze was actually a good thing for market efficiency. It was a crowded trade, there are risks for being in a crowded trade, those funds didn't adequately account for those risks, and they took it on the chin for it. The flip side, of course, is that the run-up in GME's price was also an extremely crowded trade, and while arguably it's good for market efficiency that retail buyers are now seeing the risks (at least, I hope they are) of piling in on a crowded trade, it was a pretty avoidable risk and a lot of small investors are paying for that now.

    tl;dr - hedge funds should know better than to be a naked short with 120-140% short interest without some sort of hedge, but retail investors should also know better than to trade on "YOLO! Stonks => up! To the moon! Aboard the rocket ship!" and some sort of equilibrium where both parties think twice before doing that would be a good thing, IMO.

    I'm just glad I got one guy in this thread out of GME while he was ahead.
     
    Dineley likes this.
  7. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Two answers to that:
    • Although it's easy to refer to it like that for brevity, it's not a literal strict short squeeze, as it's combined with a gamma squeeze. Shorts were hurting all the same.
    • Momentum is a thing and momentum was clearly there until the blatant manipulations.
    One more example of rigged system here. There are plenty of funds who specialize in only momentum trading. People much more wealthy than either of us pay them big $$$ for their work. Nobody cares and nobody is implying (like you do) that they don't have an "investment thesis". Again, double standards. It's not fundamentals-driven investment we're talking about, it's just capitalizing on market price action. That's fine for hedge funds, but WSB-driven momentum though, we immediately have to shut it down because Citadel is hurting and IBKR thinks it should be worth 17$? Or demean it because it's not a hedge fund doing it?

    Again... R I G G E D.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
  8. TedEH

    TedEH Cromulent

    Messages:
    9,356
    Likes Received:
    6,644
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Location:
    Gatineau, Quebec
    What I got out of all of this is that now my phone autocorrects TO stonks instead of the correct word.
     
    Mathemagician, StevenC and Xaios like this.
  9. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Again, nobody argued that the collapse wouldn't come. Why continue with the strawman? Of course it was inevitable at some point, the stock price belongs below 30$ long term.

    But just check the 28th price action, exactly at 7 Pacific / 10 Eastern, exactly as retail and buying were being suppressed. Perfect 5 minute candles. Zero green, multiple gaps, a full -75% off within 2 hours. Tell me if this looks organic to you. Tell me if you can call that anything but rigged or manipulated.
     
  10. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Should hopefully also autocomplete to "stonks only go up brrp brrp" for completeness sake.
     
  11. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    31,091
    Likes Received:
    7,478
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    What straw man?

    Hey, again, I have no problem with hedge funds losing money. What you're calling momentum is what I'm calling chasing past performance, but hey, plenty of retail investors do that too. Thing is, though, momentum is a thing until it isn't, and if you want to make money trading momentum, then you kinda have to know when to get out of a trade.

    But, again, you're saying that this wasn't a short squeeze after all, now, but a momentum trade. That's kind of the point I've been making all along, this stopped being a short squeeze well before we started talking about it, and continuing to hold on while talking about short positions as justifications is a recipe to get hit just as hard as the hedge funds you're going after.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
    Jonathan20022 likes this.
  12. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    The straw man is that the stock was going to stay high obviously...
    Every reply, you keep arguing against an imagined case that somehow the stock was not going to collapse at some point. Everybody knows it was about to collapse at some point. The question was "how high is it going to go in the meantime with exponential retail buying added to the pile?".

    As for the meat of your reply, now you are arguing semantics. People started to call it a "short squeeze" because even though it didn't match the strict definition, there were too many shares short, and the price was rising sharply as a result. It had components of gamma squeeze, it had a lot of momentum, both intrinsic, and due to the hype surrounding it. Nothing is all black and white. But everyone started calling it a short squeeze so that's the term that stuck. Call it what you want though, but it was on a pretty uninterrupted trend until the blatant manipulation and retail buy suppression.

    If you want to look at the chart and see if it looks like organic price action to you, or for that matter any other rigged aspect of that whole debacle, please feel free to do so. Doesn't sound like any HF shenanigan bothers you though...only retail investors are somehow in the wrong. Otherwise, just arguing names for the sake of pedantry is beating around the bush and not changing what happened.

    Edit: and btw I'm not arguing the GME trade was a smart one, that should have had guaranteed returns for entrants at 100$+. Again, it was gambling. So the point about "that was not a great investment thesis" is pretty much moot. That's not the issue. My problem would be that it became a fundamentally unfair one because the only way for it to succeed (retail buying) was stopped halfway through by people with an interest in preventing the stock from going up, with no way for the longs to do anything about it. That's the rigged part. You may think a game with 1/10 chances of winning is a dumb move, and that's your call - but people who like to gamble and take those odds are right to be pissed if the dealer makes those odds 0/10 the moment it looks like they're winning.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2021
  13. TedEH

    TedEH Cromulent

    Messages:
    9,356
    Likes Received:
    6,644
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Location:
    Gatineau, Quebec
    If I'm following this, it kinda sounds like you're arguing against a point that Drew never made. It looks (to me) like you're arguing against this idea that Drew is somehow in favour of HFs "winning" and manipulating some unseen/unknown "rules" - but I don't think he ever made that point, or implied it. Nobody at any point said that investors were in the wrong.

    I know there was a block put on trading GME through some apps for a short while, but that's the fault of Robinhood/etc, not necessarily the funds themselves, isn't it? And as far as I'm aware, that was reversed shortly anyway. What manipulation or cheating etc. is otherwise going on? I'm asking that legitimately, 'cause I don't follow what about this situation makes it "rigged".
     
    Jonathan20022 likes this.
  14. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    No it's more that Drew is arguing over and over against a point I didn't make so I keep re-emphasizing my position.
    (this is keeping aside for a minute the side conversation and his flip-flopping on things like "we know the daily short interest if it serves my point, but we don't know if it serves yours", because anyway, that's only speculation on things we don't know for sure - and it doesn't change the core of the issue, only the minutiae).

    My point has never been "GME is a sound investment guaranteed to give you good returns" like it's being protrayed. That was impossible to say one way or the other for sure last week, and is looking less likely to "moon" by the day.
    My point instead is that it's a fun gamble (not investment) to watch, that has already been quite profitable to some, and could have been more profitable to more; but that above all and no matter which way it goes, it does show how that system is rigged.

    On that part, I've mentioned a few things already, and I'll leave aside the media bias (some have now changed their tone, but last week was extremely demeaning to retail until some people like Chamath pushed back), the explicit admission that some higher ups won't allow trading unless they personally feel its fair in their opinion, the fact that nobody actually denounces the reason of that whole mess (excessive to likely illegal shorting), and myriad other examples, but I'll just point you to the same data point I mentioned above.

    January 28th 7 Pacific / 10 Eastern.
    • Just as the stock was mooning to 500$. RH and other brokers abruptly stop the buying of GME outright, essentially stopping the momentum and retail.
    • For the next two hours, without any buying, there is a systematic orchestrated sale that make the stock lose 75% of its value (400+ to about 100) with no counter move whatsoever. As soon as it reaches 110, RH liquidates GME positions of large stock holder (and only GME stock, even for people with large accounts and other holdings). No possibility to buy back of course. Even including the positions of people who were not trading on margin. Only GME? Even on non-margin? Come on...
    • As this happens and completes- which should send the price mechanically even lower (selling more and more at market value as in liquidation pushes the price down), instead the price shoots right back up again, so that all those shares bought for cheap (~100) without the consent of their holder triple in value back to 300$, without any way for retail to participate in the "rally" (they're now locked out of buying, remember). Again, without any counter move whatsoever
    This just doesn't happen. Lose 75% of its value, then gain +200%, without any resistance whatsoever? In ~3 hours? Never seen it happen before, but happy to see similar ones if anyone has examples that come even close.

    As for "how is that related to RH", well maybe not directly, or at least that would be hard to prove. And RH was not even the only broker involved, nor do they need to actively participate if the suspected ladder attacks are done well. Just interesting tidbit about RH is that they are essentially owned under the same parent company (Citadel) that is set to lose the 3B they gave Melvin Capital if that fund was to go under. So there's certainly incentive there. And that was a very real possibility considering that the fund was down 53% in January.
     
  15. MrWulf

    MrWulf SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    840
    Likes Received:
    665
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    A cursory look in r/wsb shows that they are still holding and some are anticipate a short squeeze 2.0

    Idk how they can keep that level of confidence and i kind of admire that
     
    spudmunkey likes this.
  16. Demiurge

    Demiurge Intrepid Jackass

    Messages:
    5,196
    Likes Received:
    2,544
    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Location:
    Worcester, MA
    ^Sometimes people forget that their online communities don't have as much influence in the outside world as they think. In other news, I'm still shocked that Ibanez hasn't folded from failing to produce that $599 Prestige line with fanned SS frets, Fluences AND BKPs together, and Evertune Edge.
     
  17. Avedas

    Avedas SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,370
    Likes Received:
    1,465
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Location:
    Tokyo
    I think GME is very bullish overall and a great long term play. They just announced their new CTO which was an excellent move. I think Ryan Cohen will effectively take over the company within 2-3 years.

    However anyone who bought in the triple digit prices and is still holding is certifiably insane lol. I'd love to be proved wrong on that, but I just don't see it. There is no way that company is even worth $40 based on fundamentals without seeing tangible changes and delivery from the company. I think they'll do really well once short attention moves away from them. I wish I sold earlier but I still made multiple times my investment so I can't complain too much! Learned a lot about trading and my own tolerances and biases.

    I'm only slightly disappointed that what I thought was a great stock pick that I got into early enough turned into a total meme parade. I wanted to feel smart for once.
     
    ElysianGuitars likes this.
  18. penguin_316

    penguin_316 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    929
    Likes Received:
    179
    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Location:
    TX
    Here is the DXY and it goes back to 1986 on the monthly. Zoom out and use monthly candles. Homie that’s a death spiral, I can’t even take you seriously anymore. Also, if we go a hair lower we will be in a legitimate point of no return down to the levels last seen in May of 2008.

    The dollar is indeed in a death spiral, relative to other currencies and is easily verified via the DXY index. Now, it still retains value as the worlds reserve currency....but for how long.
     
  19. mbardu

    mbardu SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,342
    Likes Received:
    2,886
    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Location:
    California
    Nobody has attempted to, or will try to prove you wrong on fundamentals. Even 40$ is quite aggressive indeed.

    How big of a millionaire are you if you got into early :) ? Meme or not meme, those who got in at the same time as Burry / DFV made absolute bank.
     
    Dineley likes this.
  20. spudmunkey

    spudmunkey SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,045
    Likes Received:
    9,090
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Location:
    Near San Francisco
    I have been seeing some really perplexing chatter from my right wing family members on social media. They keep sharing memes and podcasts videos talking about how the left is responsible for the fall out from Wall Street bets.

    One meme starts with "they stopped counting 5 states when it wasn't going their way. They stopped free speech when it wasn't going their way" which is...*sigh*, whatever...but then it continues, "they shut down stock drawing when it wasn't going their way".

    Is this actually a narrative from right-wing media that the shit show following the GME rally was liberals and 'big tech'?
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2021

Share This Page