mfb said:
I get the impression that it is far more mixed.
Given that you presented my opinion as an all-or-nothing when it isn't, we may disagree less than you have indicated.
Many people are in for irrational reasons, but that doesn't mean they are into harm the hedge funds.
That's a twisted and inverted phrasing so I can't tell if you agree or disagree. Untwisting: do you agree that many people are in it to harm the hedge funds?
Irrational belief that they are likely to make more money is another option.
Agreed. I mentioned that.
Yes I have browsed reddit last week.
Good to know...
I don't think I have enough information to make or judge such a statement, so I won't.
Ok...so, your statement that I quoted was a throw-away, then? Completely lacking in meaning or value?
Far lower than the current price, obviously. That's not the question. You don't need a stock to multiply its value by 100 to profit from it.
That's exactly the question. Again, I think you're disagreeing to agree. But here's what you said:
"They identified a stock that was shorted like crazy, expected that to break down, invested, and made money when the short squeeze came as expected."
And here's what I just quoted from reddit:
"IF HE'S STILL IN, I'M STILL IN"
Do you honestly believe someone who makes a post like that set a mental value for GME stock? I don't think you do. I don't think someone who says that even knows what "shorted like crazy" means, and I suspect you don't think they do either.
Well, at least you posted the statement without a qualifier. It certainly didn't read like a statement about a more limited group.
Well;
1. I've made other posts in this thread that provide context/explanation to my position.
2. Market movers don't make up the entirety of people buying/selling stocks.
I'm not playing this silly game again.
Frankly, I consider your last few responses to me silly games. You're in attack mode for a reason I think I know, attacking to defend a position you won't state. I think it would be a lot easier for both of us if you would explicitly state your opinion in response to my explicitly stated opinion and then we could peacefully/respectfully agree to disagree.
The posts on the sub are not representative of actual stock transactions.
If you have information to support that, I'd like to see it. Perhaps more to the point, some post actual screenshots from their portfolio trackers...or so we're led to believe. If you have information that those are falsified, I'd really love to see it.
Note: I'll not assume your statement was meant to be absolute. Hint.
[edit]
Well, at face value that's false -- this entire incident is openly reported/acknowledged to be based on reddit hype. Unless you are claiming that the reddit hype is a follower of a movement that started elsewhere, but I don't think you are.
Users in WSB are not anywhere close to a wall, and they don't trade on a literal street either. Sure, both of them have a historic origin, but if you say "Wall Street" today you neither refer to the fort that gave the street the name, nor the physical street that gave the stock exchange its common name.
So you acknowledge it is an actual street, named for an actual wall, and presumably you are aware that the New York Stock Exchange is located on that street (and GME is traded on the NYSE). And many of the investment firms who trade there are located there. So you chose to pick this argument because people can access the market remotely? Seriously? Why are you doing this? I don't want to be in such an argument.