All I’m suggesting is since price action via volume isn’t a thing these days, aka shitadel moving the needle however they want, isn’t it dangerous to be so low price wise?
GME has 100m in cash for buybacks. The split will not affect the stock going to zero because there’s the same amount of holders, just like if you had one piece of bread, cut it into 6 slices, still worth the same. Your neighbor(Shitadel) still wants your bread regardless of how much it’s sliced up.
I know the value of your position is the same technically with more shares but the price is extremely lower. So if nothing stops shitadel from lowering the price then we are just that much closer to zero.
Don't forget that some hedgies have been accumulating shorts for years before the sneeze already. So if the price goes anywhere near the all time low (divided by the split rato), these old shortsellers would be able to close at a profit and shift their heavy bags to the new shortsellers who are trying to bring it to zero.
But if they knock it to zero then they don’t have to cover correct? If they bankrupt the company and claimed that GameStop was never worth anything to begin with.
Been wondering the same thing also especially since nobody knows if the split will actually force close positions. I’m not sure how the split is good for the retail holders that’s been here holding unless it makes the shorts close
Well typically a price goes up after a split so it’s a great thing as it can cause fomo. But in this case since shitadel can move the needle as wanted wouldn’t it be dangerous to be at a lower price? Idk so that’s why I’m asking.
IMPORTANT POST LINKS
A split lowers the price, but not so low as to get into cellar boxing territory.
All I’m suggesting is since price action via volume isn’t a thing these days, aka shitadel moving the needle however they want, isn’t it dangerous to be so low price wise?
GME has 100m in cash for buybacks. The split will not affect the stock going to zero because there’s the same amount of holders, just like if you had one piece of bread, cut it into 6 slices, still worth the same. Your neighbor(Shitadel) still wants your bread regardless of how much it’s sliced up.
I know the value of your position is the same technically with more shares but the price is extremely lower. So if nothing stops shitadel from lowering the price then we are just that much closer to zero.
Hmmm, rc ventures can still buy. Im pretty sure gme still has a buy back with a bit of money in it....
The lower it goes, the easier it is to buy and lock up the float.
The number of shares in the float is multiplied by a split. So the dollar value of the float is not affected by a split.
Don't forget that some hedgies have been accumulating shorts for years before the sneeze already. So if the price goes anywhere near the all time low (divided by the split rato), these old shortsellers would be able to close at a profit and shift their heavy bags to the new shortsellers who are trying to bring it to zero.
The short position multiplies with the split, and the value of the short position divides accordingly.
Was worried that the price can just be manipulated super low if we lower it for them seeing how shitadel can control the needle.
Price being low does not mean they can/are covering. They can never cover, it would destroy them.
But if they knock it to zero then they don’t have to cover correct? If they bankrupt the company and claimed that GameStop was never worth anything to begin with.
Been wondering the same thing also especially since nobody knows if the split will actually force close positions. I’m not sure how the split is good for the retail holders that’s been here holding unless it makes the shorts close
Well typically a price goes up after a split so it’s a great thing as it can cause fomo. But in this case since shitadel can move the needle as wanted wouldn’t it be dangerous to be at a lower price? Idk so that’s why I’m asking.
Guess this guy has never heard of a reverse split, I doubt GameStop will ever have to do one
You’re correct… inform me