re: 4Chan breaks the "Gamestop Crisis" down for you, as only they can

quote:

---

false statements are not required

---

yes they are or you must be doing somehting other than talking about a stock. Posting you like a stock or explaining why you like something is not illegal under any statue.

quote:

---

if this was true, as an absolute, insider information could not be used to prosecute people. that's "freedom of speech" too

---

insider trading only applies if you receive a tip from someone on the inside a company.

If i go to you and say i heard such and such company is going to win a huge government contract and I am just a joe blow on the street and that company wins and the stock goes crazy.....well you are not going to be charged with insider trading.

In the case of gamestock, the companies took such a large position on the short that they were required to file a publically availble SEC filing. It was discovered as it is public knowledge and the link was posted with an explantation.

That is not insider trading, it was public knowledge. You must use non public knowledge to fall under that realm.

After that is was and has been post about like the stock or explanations on why they like it.

Now some on twitter screaming to go buy a certain stock.....well they might get popped. You are right about saying go buy such and such stock being technically illegal. Good luck getting a conviction though, but it wont matter in the end as we discussed.

quote:

---

not generally, but if your post about it also says something like "if we all buy it, the price will go up and their shorts will become expensive" probably is

---

BS. Not illegal in the slightest.

And your earlier case wasn't even close, lol.

If you are a lawyer, and not larping as one, you suck at it.

quote:

---

for the purpose of inducing the purchase or sale of such security by others.

---

Their transactions aren’t for the purpose of inducing the purchase or sale by others. Their transactions are designed to take advantage of the market conditions personally and they are sharing that information openly and freely for anyone that wants to do the same.

quote:

---

Their transactions are designed to take advantage of the market conditions personally

---

does this instance of taking advantage require others to purchase the stock to be successful? more directly, HAVE people been induced to purchase GME due to this?

obviously yes.

quote:

---

What, at the end of the day, is the real difference in a hedge fund and these guys?

They formed their own hedge fund and stuck it to the other hedge funds. The others got beat at their own game. Wah

---

Yep

Yep.

And it is a problem because one side is the only side who is supposed to be able to frick people out of their money.

quote:

---

does this instance of taking advantage require others to purchase the stock to be successful?

---

no

quote:

---

more directly, HAVE people been induced to purchase GME due to this?

---

sure, just like people are induced to buy stocks on information they think will make the stock price rise or people are induced to short stocks they think will fall.

The purpose of the trade wasnt to induce other buyers. The purpose of the trade was an evaluation of the market conditions and to invest in a stock that was over shorted. That strategy was openly shared, which transformed into an internet meme that went viral. Good luck to the SEC proving illegality.

Bloomberg article discussing the legality question


It doesn’t provide a clear answer and, because of the vagueness of the statute, I doubt anyone could.

quote:

---

So now you're equivocating on what is actually illegal vs. a politically motivated sham prosecution.

---

if they prosecuted message board posters, it would be a politically motivated prosecution with the same sham-like qualities