$Bitcoin (BTC.CC)$ let's go for another 51k

$AMC Entertainment (AMC.US)$ what to hell happened to knocking on 30

$RIOT 211231 26.00C$
holding!

$AMC Entertainment (AMC.US)$
This email was recommended by lilly @moomoo Lily cs@fututrade.com . I used support@moomoo.com several times with zero response. let's see how this one goes.

$Meta Materials (MMAT.US)$ amazing and awesome

$Meta Materials (MMAT.US)$ mmat and amc are my favourite stocks. but rn i feel like cutting losses for mmat...

$GameStop (GME.US)$ $AMC Entertainment (AMC.US)$ The SEC report on GameStop is prob something not widely circulated by apes. It came out 2 months ago. I’m going to explain the most important finding they made. To be able to do that, I have to explain some basics that many don’t grasp about how short interest reporting works. Here’s the calendar from the beginning of the year.
Short interest is reported for 2 days every month. Once for a day in the middle of the month after the fact and once at the end. This is a snapshot of short interest of a single day. That info is plublished a week or more after that date.
So for instance, what short interest was on Jan.15 was published on Jan 27. When that data was disseminated, it was 12 days old. These 2 numbers are the only short interest data from the Fed. To speak about daily changes in short interest as sites like ORTEX do if complete bullshit.
On Jan 28, everyone was going crazy about the short interest report that came out the previous day without understanding that it reflected only what it was almost 2 weeks earlier.
Jan 15 short interest was 88%. I was certain that had decreased greatly but I knew that Jan 29 short interest numbers wouldn’t be published until Feb 9. So nobody knew that it had actually plummeted. When it was published it showed short interest was only 30% meaning most of the buying to cover happened between Jan 16-Jan29.
However, as I said, that was unknown by retail at the time. From just an observers viewpoint, it’s impossible to differentiate the price action of short positions buying shares to close their position and massive buying demand with the buyers not selling, reducing supply, and bidding up the price. I had a hunch that the crazy price action was more from regular buyers rather than shorts buying to close their position. The Jan 29 short interest figures published Feb 9 confirmed it. This graph is from the SEC report that I link at the end. Fig 6 in the report.
The aqua is total volume and the orange is the volume that was purchased to close existing open short positions. The price exploded because people THOUGHT there was a squeeze and they bought without selling pushing up the bid price. This wasnt a squeeze per se. Why? The volume from the demand created by shorts covering wasn’t the primary force driving the price up. Instead, it was a minor factor at best. If it were a Squeeze, the orange portion in the graph would be much greater than the aqua part. Demand and volume that wasn’t purchased to close short positions was what drove the price 🚀l.
This is the SEC conclusion on page 26
Read the SEC report. Many of you will dismiss the real numbers as SEC lies and that the Federal government is knowingly publishing false data(which is a HUGE accusation BTW). if that describes you, please don’t comment and I recommend blocking me for both of our sakes. What puzzles me the most about these people is that on one hand they accuse the SEC of being fraudulent yet that’s who they need to enforce the regulations and hood violators accountable.
your welcome for me taking the time to explain what happened. It takes time to do it and I don’t care if you disagree. I don’t gain anything from whether you believe it. The impetus to write it is to help non apes understand the truth because I personally appreciate when someone else does that for me.
Here’s the report from the SEC report. https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market-struction-conditions-early-2021.pdf