/biz/ - Business & Finance

Shillies are only out in force because the final dockets are in and it shows

>NOL's preserved
>Shareholders MUST remain whole per rule 382
>625 hours of M&A activity billed

They are scrombled and in shambles

>>56486324
The more they drag it out the worse it is for them, for every sale they sent to the dark pools they open out more shorts. The lack of liquidity means it cant do pumps to entice sellers and has only one recourse which is to keep dumping because we keep buying and no one is selling. The fact insiders have bought quite a bit recently means the liquidity they do have is now even thinner as they can't give them fakes.

Oh I forgot you pivotted to "We don't want you to sell" as some kind of reverse psychology after we kept buying.

Guess what, we don't think about you. Like ever. But you think about us 24/7 eh Dougie?

>>56179647
I like to think Kais is just a troll on another level, he's not a serious thinker but he sets up some savage trolling lol

>>56145179
real talk, I think the only way this ends is with a a cash or stock dividend. Not like the split, which was a split BY dividend, but a cash or stock dividend paid to holders. This requires the full year profitability, which comes from what they are doing, the fact earnings was basically neutral was an epic signal the company has turned round entirely and is on the way back up. Only a dullard and retard would short a stock of a company which is positive, especially if they have to pay a dividend in cash or stock when you are short to the magnitude of which some of these risk takers are.

Now if they have to pay cash sure it's not the end of the world for them, but it would be used to auto buy more stock making them hurt even more but if it was a stock dividend then it would be a huge blow. The company would issue new shares, based on the profit > dividend so if you got $0.35 per share then (example) then you would get 1 whole share for every ~51 shares you own. Doesn't seem too bad, for every 51 shares short you owe one. Except they would need to deliver them to holders or close, which means they need to buy from market - uh-oh if no real shares left or they would need to buy from us or they would be making more synthetics.

Sure they could do that, but if GME did infact do 1:1 shares to NFT's (in their prospectus) or some kind of token - the overstock style market & token, well they have the market and a usecase for it for it's not JUST for causing the short squeeze but it's part of the business and as the SEC has called all crypto securities then it means that the issuance of tokenized shares is now regulated and now more FT funny business, it would be limited in circulation and would cause short to have to buy via the GME market or the NYSE to get the shares to deliver, again causing mad seething from them.