- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:11 pm to slackster
quote:
There are around 29 million shares potentially exposed on Friday between $40-$70, but on a stock that routinely trades 200+ million shares a day, it’s hard to see this gamma squeeze materializing. However, what do I know?
So let's take this and expand on it... per Oretex there is roughly only 80M short shares. These short positions have cost the institutions roughly $2 billion in June... @ $60 per share that would be only $4.8 billion... we know the price was in the $40' last week yet nobody is covering and with a volume of 200+M volume per day.. why don't they get out of their short position over a week or so? In another 2 weeks they will have lost enough to have covered the entire short position if this continues....
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:15 pm to PennyPacker
quote:
So let's take this and expand on it... per Oretex there is roughly only 80M short shares. These short positions have cost the institutions roughly $2 billion in June... @ $60 per share that would be only $4.8 billion... we know the price was in the $40' last week yet nobody is covering and with a volume of 200+M volume per day.. why don't they get out of their short position over a week or so? In another 2 weeks they will have lost enough to have covered the entire short position if this continues....
If the shorts have the liquidity they may try to outlast the retail boom. It’s akin to holding onto GE for the last decade.
Ultimately it’s not an apples to apples comparison. Delivering shares has a relatively set timeline. You can be short for a long time if you have the liquidity.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:16 pm to theOG
quote:Gamma? That's just the start, so hard to say. But. $59 will look like small potatos, especially when FOMO rear ups.
What does that look like to you in dollars per share?
Something else to keep in mind, NSCC 002 goes into effect on Monday.
Think about it like this. You are putting a jigsaw puzzle together............now you are down to the last 4-5 pieces. It's all coming together at the same time. Price is up, tons of calls expiring in the money, new SEC rules going into effect that limit the games institutions can play concerning pricing. I truly believe, and put a bunch of money on this belief, that we are about to see something that has rarely been seen.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:18 pm to PennyPacker
quote:Go back and look at the famous Volkswagen squeeze. Far less shares were covered that instigated that epic squeeze.
So let's take this and expand on it... per Oretex there is roughly only 80M short shares. These short positions have cost the institutions roughly $2 billion in June... @ $60 per share that would be only $4.8 billion... we know the price was in the $40' last week yet nobody is covering and with a volume of 200+M volume per day.. why don't they get out of their short position over a week or so? In another 2 weeks they will have lost enough to have covered the entire short position if this continues....
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:23 pm to slackster
quote:
Ultimately it’s not an apples to apples comparison. Delivering shares has a relatively set timeline. You can be short for a long time if you have the liquidity.
Yes you can and when it was a few million a week no big deal but losing $2 billion in 2 weeks gets pretty damn expensive when you could theoretically get out for $4 to $6 billion. The problem is right now covering is more costly than losing $2 billion in 2 weeks. Think about that for a minute, that alone should tell you why we are still holding... for now.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:32 pm to Rize
quote:
I’ll be 40 in two weeks and AMC is the first stock I have ever bought. Jumped into crypto too.
So what do you have your retirement funds in?
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:32 pm to greygoose
quote:
Gamma? That's just the start, so hard to say. But. $59 will look like small potatos, especially when FOMO rear ups.
Something else to keep in mind, NSCC 002 goes into effect on Monday.
Think about it like this. You are putting a jigsaw puzzle together............now you are down to the last 4-5 pieces. It's all coming together at the same time. Price is up, tons of calls expiring in the money, new SEC rules going into effect that limit the games institutions can play concerning pricing. I truly believe, and put a bunch of money on this belief, that we are about to see something that has rarely been seen.
What does that look like to you in dollars per share?
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:33 pm to PennyPacker
quote:This is just one reason why so many people are speculating that there are billions of synthetic shares.
So let's take this and expand on it... per Oretex there is roughly only 80M short shares. These short positions have cost the institutions roughly $2 billion in June... @ $60 per share that would be only $4.8 billion... we know the price was in the $40' last week yet nobody is covering and with a volume of 200+M volume per day.. why don't they get out of their short position over a week or so? In another 2 weeks they will have lost enough to have covered the entire short position if this continues....
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:34 pm to greygoose
quote:
Go back and look at the famous Volkswagen squeeze. Far less shares were covered that instigated that epic squeeze.
But Porche owned over 30% of the shares and government owned over 20%. The shares weren't in the hands of the many, they were in the hands of the few. Easier to hold and squeeze.
My argument is cost to cover is still grossly more expensive than to keep the short positions... that speaks volumes
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:36 pm to PennyPacker
quote:But over time, it costs nothing to hold, but it costs a ton in interest to not cover.
My argument is cost to cover is still grossly more expensive than to keep the short positions... that speaks volumes
Edit: AND we don't have regulators looking over our shoulder.
This post was edited on 6/15/21 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:56 pm to greygoose
quote:
But over time, it costs nothing to hold, but it costs a ton in interest to not cover
Exactly... that's why the longer they keep paying hundreds of millions per day to stay in their short position, it solidifies my belief in how expensive this will be for them to cover!! In essence them not covering should make us more determined to hold... but what do I know.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 9:59 pm to PennyPacker
quote:More than some here. This is a strategy that is completely alien to most. Many very smart people have admitted, retail has changed how the game is played, and that's a good thing!
but what do I know.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 10:23 pm to greygoose
quote:
This is just one reason why so many people are speculating that there are billions of synthetic shares.
Hahahaha we’re back to billions of synthetics again huh? Figured you’d ignore the share count after a week or so.
492 million retail shares, at best. 130 million institutional shares, at best. 120 or so million synthetics, at best, but sure, let’s go with the billions BS again.
This post was edited on 6/15/21 at 10:24 pm
Posted on 6/15/21 at 10:31 pm to PennyPacker
quote:
Yes you can and when it was a few million a week no big deal but losing $2 billion in 2 weeks gets pretty damn expensive when you could theoretically get out for $4 to $6 billion. The problem is right now covering is more costly than losing $2 billion in 2 weeks. Think about that for a minute, that alone should tell you why we are still holding... for now.
Covering is expensive, obviously, so those that don’t have to do it will avoid it. The “problem” I keep asking is how is it supposed to work when there are more retail shareholders than there are synthetics and/or naked shorts?
That math is simply problematic for retail - there aren’t enough evil hedges out there to buy everyone’s stock, so most will ultimately sell to other retail. Not that big of a deal for current longs, but very problematic for the saps that take it off their hands.
Eta- to be clear, I understand why your holding. I’m not really trying to argue against that. I’m far more interest in how this exit plan is supposed to look. Where will the buyers be after the squeeze?
This post was edited on 6/15/21 at 10:35 pm
Posted on 6/15/21 at 10:50 pm to Chucktown_Badger
quote:
So what do you have your retirement funds in?
401k with work and Edwards Jones account. I back door a Roth every year with my Edwards Jones guy.
Posted on 6/15/21 at 11:17 pm to slackster
Covering is expensive but paying interest is too.. thats why the numbers don't add up. If they don't cover in the next 10 days with the amount of money they are paying... do we really know what we think we know? Because that math doesn't add up, I don't care who you are.
Honestly who the hell knows...some people will enter the game late... some will hold too long... I have my plan but everyone has a plan until they are punched in the mouth. I will watch some indicators(numbers), volume, etc. based on all the prior squeezes that I have researched. I don't expect that I will sell on the apex.... I doubt I am that lucky. However, I know numbers and I know people so I feel good at the moment. Everyone needs to do whats best for them... this is a play not a traditional investment so crazy shite can happen. Buyer beware!
quote:
I'm far more interest in how this exit plan is supposed to look
Honestly who the hell knows...some people will enter the game late... some will hold too long... I have my plan but everyone has a plan until they are punched in the mouth. I will watch some indicators(numbers), volume, etc. based on all the prior squeezes that I have researched. I don't expect that I will sell on the apex.... I doubt I am that lucky. However, I know numbers and I know people so I feel good at the moment. Everyone needs to do whats best for them... this is a play not a traditional investment so crazy shite can happen. Buyer beware!
Posted on 6/15/21 at 11:21 pm to slackster
Covering is expensive but paying billions in interest is too.. thats why the numbers don't add up. If they don't cover in the next 10 days with the amount of money they are paying... do we really know what we think we know? Because that math doesn't add up, I don't care who you are.
Honestly who the hell knows...some people will enter the game late... some will hold too long... I have my plan but everyone has a plan until they are punched in the mouth. I will watch some indicators(numbers), volume, etc. based on all the prior squeezes that I have researched. I don't expect that I will sell on the apex.... I doubt I am that lucky. However, I know numbers and I know people so I feel good at the moment. Everyone needs to do whats best for them... this is a play not a traditional investment so crazy shite can happen. Buyer beware!
quote:
I'm far more interest in how this exit plan is supposed to look
Honestly who the hell knows...some people will enter the game late... some will hold too long... I have my plan but everyone has a plan until they are punched in the mouth. I will watch some indicators(numbers), volume, etc. based on all the prior squeezes that I have researched. I don't expect that I will sell on the apex.... I doubt I am that lucky. However, I know numbers and I know people so I feel good at the moment. Everyone needs to do whats best for them... this is a play not a traditional investment so crazy shite can happen. Buyer beware!
Posted on 6/16/21 at 12:01 am to PennyPacker
quote:
I will watch some indicators(numbers), volume, etc. based on all the prior squeezes that I have researched.
What should we be looking for? Volume is still thru the roof.
Posted on 6/16/21 at 6:53 am to elprez00
quote:
What should we be looking for? Volume is still thru the roof.
This is not squeeze volume for AMC... go look at the volume when it went from $5 to $20 around Jan 27th. If my memory us correct it was 1.2B and their are more shorted shares now.
I think looking at short volume with Ortex as well.
There will probably be big swings in price in a given day... like crazy swings ($100+-). I think we will know when it starts, then you need to decide when you should pull the rip cord. I can't tell you that, too me there isn't one right answer. Its your right answer and then be happy with it. Good luck.
Page 218 of 276
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News