/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>29335125
Pic related was Fidelity retail buys/sells
it was pretty much the same (around 4/1 ratio in favor of buy) on monday.
Idk if you lack numbers intuition or something, but, it's literally impossible for them to have covered 67% of float on that single trading day and not have the price skyrocket.
There wasn't even enough non-short volume for that that day, and there were no significantly large off-market trades reported.

You can go look it up if you give a shit about having an accurate grasp on reality.

>>28213777
>You notice how it's only the retarded poor normies getting tricked into buying this worthless stock? If it truly was something significant other companies would've already bought millions worth of shares but yet they don't
But actually they did. Look at short volume vs non-short volume history of GME over the last weeks. It is being heavily accumulated. It is only going down in price because it is being naked shorted even more than it is being acculumated. The hedgies are digging themselves into a deeper and deeper short position trying to scale the long side into capitulation.

Fuck I realize I wrote this in a really difficult to understand way.
Essentially, there was only 10.7M non-shorting volume that day on the open market, and off-market trades reported were insignificant, yet they supposedly net covered ~30M shares that day. That day they also shorted with 16.35M new shares, meaning they must have covered ~46.35M (nearly the entire float) in one day on a paltry 10.7M volume to reduce their short interest from 122% to ~60%.

That is impossible. The only explanation is that they shorted with shares they did not borrow from anyone, and covered with shares they don't have. Illegal operations known as naked shorting and naked covering.

The way the securities trading system works, you don't actually have to settle trades until 3 days after the trade. That means delivering your end of the trade. In this case they have to deliver stock. If you don't settle your trade, what you're missing shows up as Failed To Deliver.
Meaningful amounts of Failed To Deliver indicate stock counterfeiting (selling or "returning" (covering with) stocks you pretend to have). There is already ample evidence of this occurring from official government december numbers.
The action on monday is likely to show up as tens of millions of shares Failed To Deliver towards the end of this week as they fail to settle, because apes had diamond hands and did not sell them enough to be able to deliver when they have to settle the trades from monday.

pic related. fidelity tuesday and monday indicated retail is buying, not selling.

>>27641073
Based

>>27610856
Currently more share being held now than shares in existence

>>27606751
Post the nose

>>27598233
>>27598316
Through monday, supposedly short% went down from 122% to the mid 50s while price plummeted and the volume was less than 1.5X the shares supposedly covered. We have records from the sec for preceding weeks that show consistently high (mostly 1-2% of float) Failed To Deliver, which indicates a churning hidden short against clearing houses where they are always effectively in 3 day stonk debt. This is done by selling and covering with stonks that they don't have, so they try to get enough to settle within the 3 day time period but still fail to settle it all.

I believe that they went totally insane on monday and expanded this by over 10 million shares. Probably more, since it would take almost 30m shares to cover as much as they supposedly covered. That's over 60% of float.

The play was to hope longs capitulate and sold en-masse through later on monday, tuesday wednesday and maybe thursday so they could get the shares required to settle. This didn't happen. Ape hands were sufficiently diamond for this to not have happened. We can see that by the volume being too low for that and GME price not having plummeted.

pic related fidelity tuesday. approx same ratio on monday, but iirc with less total of both buying and selling.