“Casino-like swings in stock prices of GameStop reflect wild levels of speculation that don’t help GameStop’s workers or customers and could lead to market instability.”
The inconvenient truth is that should GameStop issue capital, this false as it would help workers + customers
And actually, my assessment was way too conservative: actually, the skyrocketing stock price has given the business free publicity, which benefits the company, its employees, and customers. I think the $30 billion question is why the company hasn’t issued equity yet.
So as counterintuitive as it may seem, the massive losses for short sellers has benefited the company, and may permanently alter its trajectory in a manner that benefits employees and customers. We shall see.
Exactly. $AMC is a parallel example and proof of what I’m saying. Elizabeth Warren couldn’t be more wrong. These companies, employees, and customers are BENEFICIARIES of these short squeezes. The biggest and likely only victims are short sellers. Maybe they should bail out shorts
What scares me is that this is real world microeconomics, and an example of equity price as currency for corporates. If these politicians don’t understand this, lord have mercy on us because I’m concerned they don’t understand macroeconomics, e.g. fiscal + monetary policy.
Actually let me qualify that: forget the politicians, it scares me more that many market participants don’t understand these dynamics either. Some actually think that it would be dilutive of gme to issue equity... 🤷♂️
The authorities have no choice but to look into this case. I don’t blame them, It’s a matter of public interest. I pray that they will be wise & seek sound counsel from those who understand these subjects truly + deeply well.
I don’t think any of us know how this will play out.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Notable how 'Cham the scam' doesn't address inequality between ordinary income vs capital gain tax rates (don't get me started on the inequality versus HF/PE 'carry').
If you're serious, you address reducing ordinary income, or at least eliminating differences between these.
Long $GME was a synthetic short Melvin position just until about Tuesday as of this week. It’s morphed into a short Robinhood position.
Exactly, it’s currently more like a macro knife fight, speculators vs speculators. Those citing revenue multiples, valuation, etc are either missing that or willfully omitting it.
I don’t personally know Melvin/Plotkin, and I don’t know if this is true, but if it is, it would partly explain why @StevenACohen2 backed him earlier this week. Not to mention that Plotkin probably made a lot of money for Cohen over the years.