I found this to be a pretty good start: https://theactivistinvestor.com/The_Activist_Investor/How_to…_files/Activist%20Investing.pdf

Thank you. Yes total volume for 10y and avg daily FTD for the same period. A very good question! See:

• https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/wursjt/gme_outstanding_shares_turnover_compared_to_msft/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/wlrdlk/previous_research_found_that_tsla_and_bdlp_had/

Indeed GME was always on the top, but became the outlier during the sneeze in terms of volume. If I would redo the graph I think BBBY would have a similar position.

GME is certainly an outlier over 10y. One of a few. If one looks in specific years GME looks rather normal in this group of 300-400 outliers.

So, yes, GME is probably sold many times the outstanding shares, but so are a lot of other stocks, too.

Though, not many have RC.

Thank you jersan! I 90% agree with your comment. From the outside it looks like an unprofitable business, though sitting on a pile of cash only offering lofty promises. Once GME is profitable it will be easier to onboard new investors and also encourage old investors.

To the “explode” part rather want to stress that another main point of my post is: DRS is not enough. Not enough for what? Like I wrote in my post about price elasticity (https://lemmy.whynotdrs.org/post/206100 or https://www.reddit.com/r/whydrs/comments/16ijwv0/tales_of_the_death_of_the_liquidity_fairy_price/) I think there are two levels:

• Level 1: Disruptive price adjustment to valuation
• Level 2: MOASS with real price discovery and the closing of naked shorts

With the current system of stock market exchanges no matter what the company does, it is very unlikely we see level 2. The price might be adjusted for Level 1, but shorts won’t close. They rather will hedge and make even more money with derivatives.

If you think otherwise, try to dig into the “Tesla shortsqueeze” and check who actually lost, which hedge fund had to be closed because of the closing of naked shorts.

You mean how the former GameStop CFO fkd up the splividend and kind of allowed the DTC to handle it as a normal split? (See: https://www.reddit.com/r/FWFBThinkTank/comments/14p3fmp/deep_dive_into_how_the_dtcc_and_brokers_handled/)

He left GME immediately and returned to Amazon.

Did the old Transfer Agent let you know in advance?

Exactly, lets assume shorts would be margin called and must buy at any price (which surprisingly didn’t happen in Jan 2021 if you recall the SEC report). But will there be a seller for any price? In short, I don’t think so. Do you?

Honestly, I am not sure how MOASS will really look like. And of course any hedgie would tell you how it looks like, like with the Sneeze being the Squeeze in Jan 2021. Haha, there was a like 30 slide set in like 20 versions claiming in a later version that FTDs would be unwound no matter what, just remember reading this and nearly crying how hard hedgies tried but how dumb they thought us to be (it was promoted by rensole at the time and called “The FTD Squeeze theory and the coiling spring”). So the psychological part will certainly play a huge role here (“SELL NOW, [INSERT COMPELLING REASON HERE]!”).

This is why I always found concepts like buy, hold, DRS and the infinity pool very easy and compelling. I don’t fully agree with no cell no sell, because its system change not single scape goats in prison I want. But I like the message it sends.

Lets theorize:

• the amount of naked shorts gets larger every day (see short % of daily volume)
• to make naked shorts = 0 they need to either bankrupt the company or a lot of people sell so we get back to shares owned = shares outstanding
• you can 10x or 100x the stock price and people would rather buy than sell… WHAT???
• in a MOASS scenario price rises which leads to FOMO - THIS IS WELL TESTED! (see also the Sneeze which was nearly pure buy volume (https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market-struction-conditions-early-2021.pdf , p. 28)
• with the knowledge about DRS and infinity pool with a rising price, every DRSed share becomes more valuable. Its like bringing money to a bank with a niiiceee %age. For every seller there will (or might) be a buyer beside the one trying to cover the naked short.
• Ultimately, the price becomes infinity, no matter how much volume is traded. Perfect price elasticity.

DRSd shares could become like the Mona Lisa. There is just one (real share for each outstanding). There are estimates, but ultimately its Priceless. PED = ∞ at P = ∞.

This is a nice theory. Becoming true, it could brake the financial market.

Or to just put it another way round, this is real infinite loss expressed, which before were just words.

Oh it did stayed up in r/gme https://twitter.com/AmaniYubyoung/status/1692550742945435888

While superstonk deleted it. I asked why and they said I should link the source, I gave the source and they said I should provide the page number (since it’s 209 pages). Thats now 2 days ago, didn’t here back.

Cool you are here!

What are Kevins thoughts about pure DRS vs DirectStock. So we know a percentage of DirectStock is held at DTC for operational efficiency reasons. Since the Investor in book entry holds voting rights(1), what differences for the Investor would DirectStock vs pure DRS mean?

1: https://www.computershare.com/us/becoming-a-registered-shareholder-in-us-listed-companies#dspp

Do DSPP shares ever leave the DTC?

Awesome you guys made this, looking forward to #2.

So 22m DirectStock shares. Do they ever leave the DTC?

Thank you so much for the post. So important to be open minded … there is so much to learn. Oh man, this journey is wild and I love being part of it.

Regarding the float, that statement is false. Actually, the GameStop float was negative for many years as institutions alone held well over 100% of outstanding shares (see e.g. https://i.redd.it/c44cmb67mtf61.png).

Happy to.

Welcome. I was also blown away by it…

@Chives@lemmy.whynotdrs.org thanks for clarification.

Thinking about other ways to avoid brokers being able to unDRS I found that one may also just change account address details:

“So basically, brokers aren’t supposed to do this, but can, and if they do, there’s really nothing stopping them since there’s no check first to see if there was permission from the account holder. […] In the meantime, as suggested by the reps, if possible, change some account info so it doesn’t match what your broker has on file, like changing Street to St or adding a middle initial.” (https://www.reddit.com/r/computershare/comments/xfcpq3/comment/ioltp8n/)

Also on Twitter there is a discussion about “stop trades” and one of the things it would help with is brokers being able to unDRS. Either a new account or changing address details would do the trick also.

So, we know the price kept going down since this post, so the hypothesis was partly right:

Since nearly a year the price is boring af and sticks around $20-$25. Also the DRS numbers don’t show a steep increase, rather a steadily plateauing:

So everybody lost their interest? The splividend showed deep fukry, we had a profitable quarter, RC is now executive chairman, there is $1.3bn in cash - no bankruptcy in sight, although the new marketplace/nfts didn’t lift off yet.

So in this stagnation, is there an opportunity? This is what my head can’t stop thinking about.

Interesting, thanks Chives. What happens if you ask your broker to you yourself become NOBO?

Edit: changed “your broker to become NOBO” to “your broker to you yourself become NOBO”