Jump to content

SON Wall$treetBets


Faulkner

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Administrator

 

7 shares of GME and 30 AMC?!!  Damn!!  I guess you're really hoping for the short squeeze to happen way more than I am.  LOL.  I was actually thinking of getting some AMC but I went with the one share of GME instead - I wanted to part of this.

Please register in order to view this content

  I do have shares of BB though.   I'm excited for tomorrow.  I hope it will be a good day and if it is, next week could be really, really good. 

 

 

So I was wondering why/how GME went from $500 to about $110 so quickly and I saw people talking about a "short ladder attack" - it was a term I never heard before, and I found this article from 2014:  Anatomy Of A Short Attack: https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/11442671-gerald-klein/3096735-anatomy-of-a-short-attack

 

-------

 

Typical tactics include the following:

 

Flooding the offer side of the board - Ultimately the price of a stock is found at the balance point where supply (offer) and demand (bid) for the shares find equilibrium. This equation happens every day for every stock traded. On days when more people want to buy than want to sell, the price goes up, and, conversely, when shares offered for sale exceed the demand, the price goes down.

 

The shorts manipulate the laws of supply and demand by flooding the offer side with counterfeit shares. They will do what has been called a short down ladder. It works as follows: Short A will sell a counterfeit share at $10. Short B will purchase that counterfeit share covering a previously open position. Short B will then offer a short (counterfeit) share at $9. Short A will hit that offer, or short B will come down and hit Short A's $9 bid. Short A buys the share for $9, covering his open $10 short and booking a $1 profit.

 

By repeating this process the shorts can put the stock price in a downward spiral. If there happens to be significant long buying, then the shorts draw from their reserve of "strategic fails-to-deliver" and flood the market with an avalanche of counterfeit shares that overwhelm the buy side demand. Attack days routinely see eighty percent or more of the shares offered for sale as counterfeit. Company news days are frequently attack days since the news will "mask" the extraordinary high volume. It doesn't matter whether it is good news or bad news.

 

------

 

 

So freaking shady. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh yeah. I'm planning to buy a little more tomorrow.  I can't stand these hedge fund SOB's. I used to work at a brokerage firm (lower level) and my husband still does IT for a market data firm. I wouldn't recommend being in these stocks with money you need. This could go either way and as a rule betting against the rich in this country is a mistake. I just revile these guys so much for their shady dealings that I don't care if my shares go to 0. They shall not pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I read a story this morning where a young man, I believe he is 22, wanted in on this event and took out a 2nd mortgage on his parents' house to invest $70k.  The price has dropped dramatically so he's now waiting, seeing, hoping and praying.  His parents have no idea he took out a 2nd mortgage (if he's not POA, not sure how this was even possible). 

 

This is a dangerous game to play!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

 

Many people don't believe this.  They're using the media to try and trick people to sell.   "Oh, they closed their shorts and the stock is not soaring.  I guess there's no short squeeze. I'm going to cash out now."    HOLD!

Please register in order to view this content

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

 

Did you buy more today?   Some of these stocks are my "entertainment/vacation money" that's just been sitting in my account because there's nothing to do and nowhere to go.  I have other stocks that I'm long, my real investments.  There's one I have that I really like.  The company is called Lightspeed POS (ticker: LSPD).  Last week I was up %100 but it's gone down a little bit this week, but I'm still up big.  To me, it could be the next Shopify. Their stock got hit in March 2020 at the beginning of the lockdowns and it dropped to $9 USD (they were in the 20-30$ range before March).  Now it's at $69.   Their next earnings report is coming up in February

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep. 121% of the float is still shorted. That's what matters.

I bought more AMC. Will buy more GME if there is a ladder attack this afternoon, but with the price in the $300 I don't want to buy. There is too good a chance that one of the tricks these guys have up their sleeves will work. LSPD sounds good.

 

Good luck to everyone today!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I dabble in swing trading and in one day, several months ago, I made $1,700 off of one stock.  It can be pretty lucrative but time consuming (I do it at work...lol).  It's best to have a few accounts in different places because you are often selling and there's a 2 day settlement period that ties up the funds.  The downside is that even if you reinvest, the gains will be taxed.  

 

If you want to earn some money while we are stalled due to Covid, this is a good way to do it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

 

I should've bought AMC when it went to $7 yesterday.  I missed that boat. 

 

 

 

In Canada, we have a thing called a Tax Free Savings Account, and you can open up a TFSA Trading account.  So any gains you make in that account is tax free (sweeeeet!!!).  If you invest in a stock on an American exchange, you only pay tax on the dividends.   That 2 day settle period sounds bad. I want my money right away in case I want to buy something else with it.  LOL. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Basic script work; if it hadn't been for Jane Elliot and Rena Sofer, it could've been for any random character.
    • Because you are posting these things like they are true facts.  And they aren't. But whatever, Donna, you will just keep doing you.   Most people actually are trying to talk about GH in this thread.  Not random twitter/facebook/internet rumors you bring here.  I am just wasting my time even responding.    
    • This is a common theme with long running actors and preposterous storylines. Firstly they may relish the chance to play something different after years as that character-Ok I have an evil twin, possessed by the devil etc-at least it's something new to play. Secondly, no matter how dumb the plot it keeps them frontburner and valued to the show and the audience. Better than being a talk to. Thirdly, as VW stated in the end they don't have the power to dictate story and too much complaining can backfire and set them up in a negative light. Not a good position to be in with your employers. So they just buckle up and give it their all or act out the script till it's over.
    • Your use of the word "apparently" would need to include a source. Just your use of the word doesn't make it true or valid. Where would you get the idea that something has happened if you hadn't already received an indication from somewhere else, specifically a valid source (including Tabyana herself)? By using the word "apparently," you are implying this was mentioned somewhere, either in a publication or similar.
    • I think Hotel would have the similar demos as Dynasty W 19-49 would have been strong. St Elsewhere survived b/c it attracted wealthier/urban viewers and The Equalizer was probably stronger with men and younger viewers. So each had their own niche-good counter-programming. As for Aaron Spelling's influence over ABC in terms of scheduling, I don't know if he would have been happy with Charlie's Angels moving to Sunday, The Colbys scheduled on Thursdays or Matt Houston moved to Fridays. I think he just had to roll with the punches.
    • Thank you @Broderick. That information was so helpful. I watched the first episode of the "Mansion of the Damned" storyline. I was extremely confused by Margaret Colin's Paige and her relationship to other characters. Your post helps me understand what's happening. The rest of the show was easy to understand and I'm enjoying it. Hunter's Nola is a good character for me since I know Kim Hunter from other work.  I must have seen clips of Edge of Night before because I remember seeing April. 
    • How is it back tracking when it was in fact the word I originally used? It's not.
    • You know what is a great way to stop these unclear "rumors"?  Just stop posting them and then back tracking with words like "apparently".   Anyhow, I didn't find the Tracy/Lois scenes as good as I hoped.    
    • Jason, in thinking this over, I realize that we look at this space, differently. To me it is a potentially collaborative space. Now that I've realized this, what I should have said, "I'm having a problem because what I'm seeing is not matching up with your descriptions. Maybe these files I just got are misdated. Maybe it's something else. I will keep you posted. Meanwhile this episode, its edit, is ready, even though I might have to issue a corrected date later. But, people can enjoy the performances now. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy