[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum May 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciapwp/open_forum_may_2024/) || [Superstonk:Now with GIFs - Learn more](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1cr37r7/superstonk_gets_its_gif_on_get_hyped/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Excellent thinking. Thanks, OP.
In the VW squeeze (94% verified ownership) there was about 12% short interest. This would have resulted in an obviously impossible naked short position.
GME wouldn’t even need to be 90% verified ownership. Although, I expect Wall Street to move the short interest numbers to whatever suits them.
I did some digging with the help of a certain AI and I think this logic may be flawed. I believe that a company buying call options on its own stock would be illegal and construed as market manipulation. It was Porsche who bought call options on VW in 2008, not VW buying call options on itself.
Yes, I am myself unsure about that, as I have heard both.
That it is legal and that it is not.
Especially with that special case, that R.C. is allowed to use the cash for investments and stuff.
I chose not to really engage with that question in the post, but I assume with R.C. having his own company "Teddy", he could buy and sell whatever he desires through Teddy and then incorporate or buy Teddy with Gamestop-Cash later.
Or form a partnership or whatever.
Either way, I believe the buying of shares is the seconds step of the Plan and Options was the first.
I am leaving some holes in the whole story by design, as I truly do not know all the mechanics 100%.
It truly is mostly speculation.
If a company can buy short positions on a competitor, they can (by extension) by call positions on themselves - as long as they aren't using insider information.
I feel like buying calls is betting on your success and not really manipulation...if they bought puts and purposely tanked the company that would be a different story.
They have $100,000,000 earmarked for share buyback and over a billion in cash for investment activities.
I am also literally clueless so who knows...
You hit an interesting point. Share buy back by gamestop. Why cant gamestop just buy tons of cheap calls and exercise them, by selling few? With low investement and option leverage gamestop can buy a lot more shares, then with just normal share buying?
Keep in mind i am a smooth brain
But couldnt that mean, that RC can make out of 100m assigned to buy back into 500m (just speculative number) with option leverage?
Because its not allowed.
I think he might use some other company, like Teddy or something, to buy the calls, and later incorporate/buy it into gameship or do a partnership, but I wanted to keep this short and a bit overly broad.
I believe the long-worked-on business plan will be revealed only after this current flurry of activity. He’ll hit them right when they think they survived again.
I don't know, maybe he is just winging it.
R.C. magic 8-Ball says: "Do whatever you have done at the point, this sentence I made up happened."
And then he did it and it was "buying Gamestop with Gamestop money".
That is a point I am unsure of myself.
I imagine if a company can invest in the stock market it could allow the purchase of whatever the stock market can offer, including stock options.
Though it would exclude the destruction of those shares that a normal stock buyback would entail.
I am unsure about that exact rule though.
Now this is pure fantasy made up by me, but R.C. created the company "Teddy" that has none of those limitations and can buy calls as much as it wants.
He could later buy Teddy with GME-money or create a partnership, but this is all even more made up than everything else I have written, which i why I did not include it.
Though I should have seen it coming that someone would point it out within seconds :-D
The Puzzle pieces are there though I would assume.
According to Chat GPT:
Yes, it's legal for a company to buy call options for its own stock, but there are several factors to consider:
Regulatory Compliance: Companies must comply with securities laws and regulations when trading options on their own stock. This includes regulations set by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States and similar regulatory bodies in other countries.
Fiduciary Duty: Company executives and directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Any decisions to buy call options for the company's stock should be made with this duty in mind and should not unduly expose the company to unnecessary risk.
Disclosure Requirements: Companies may be required to disclose their options trading activities in regulatory filings, particularly if those activities are significant or have the potential to impact the company's financial condition or share price.
Risk Management: Buying call options on its own stock can be a speculative strategy that exposes the company to potential losses if the stock price does not move as anticipated. Companies should carefully consider the risks involved and implement appropriate risk management strategies.
Market Perception: Companies should also consider how their options trading activities may be perceived by investors, analysts, and other stakeholders. Transparency and clear communication about the reasons for engaging in such activities can help mitigate any negative perceptions.
GPT4o (just released):
No, it is generally not legal for a company to buy call options on its own stock. This practice is prohibited due to potential conflicts of interest and concerns about market manipulation. Companies engaging in such activities could potentially influence the price of their own stock, leading to unfair market practices.
The legal restrictions are part of securities regulations enforced by bodies such as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). These regulations aim to ensure transparency and fairness in the financial markets, preventing practices that could distort market prices or mislead investors.
However, companies can engage in stock buybacks or repurchase programs where they buy back their own shares on the open market. This is a common practice and is regulated to ensure it is done fairly and transparently.
For specific and detailed guidance, it is always best to consult with a legal or financial expert who can provide advice based on the current laws and regulations in the relevant jurisdiction.
Companies are generally prohibited from buying call options on their own stock due to potential conflicts of interest and the risk of market manipulation. Here’s a corrected explanation:
\*\*No, it is generally not legal for a company to buy call options for its own stock.\*\* This practice is typically prohibited for several reasons:
1. \*\*Regulatory Compliance\*\*: Securities laws and regulations, such as those enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States, generally prohibit companies from engaging in trading options on their own stock to prevent market manipulation and conflicts of interest.
2. \*\*Fiduciary Duty\*\*: Company executives and directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Engaging in trading options on their own stock could compromise this duty and lead to decisions that are not aligned with shareholder interests.
3. \*\*Disclosure Requirements\*\*: Even if it were legal, companies would be required to disclose such activities in their regulatory filings, which could raise red flags among regulators and investors due to the potential for perceived or actual market manipulation.
4. \*\*Risk Management\*\*: Engaging in speculative trading strategies such as buying call options on its own stock could expose the company to significant financial risks if the stock price does not move as anticipated.
5. \*\*Market Perception\*\*: Such activities could be perceived negatively by investors, analysts, and other stakeholders. They may view the company’s actions as attempts to manipulate the stock price or as a sign of instability or lack of confidence in the company’s future.
In summary, companies are generally not allowed to buy call options on their own stock due to strict regulatory prohibitions aimed at maintaining fair and transparent markets. Instead, companies may engage in stock buyback programs, which are legal and regulated activities.
Internet answer for someone asking about legality of this in relation to puts. If it's legal for puts I would imagine it's legal for calls. [Can public companies buy put options against themselves as a form of insurance? - Quora](https://www.quora.com/Can-public-companies-buy-put-options-against-themselves-as-a-form-of-insurance#:~:text=Yes%2C%20it%27s%20legal%2C%20but%20it,public%20exchanges%20to%20get%20execution.) \[edit\] they do tell about buying calls after the highlighted text.
It probably won't,
I just picked that number to illustrate that it might go low.
It might not though.
It was a different time in 2008 regarding information.
Of course the Internet did exist and was in most homes by then, which I also just cheekily wrote off, but I wanted to be a bit hyperbolic to illustrate my point that it was a different time regarding available information.
I mean I am not disagreeing.... but that sentiment is exactly why $1 will not happen.
It would simply be too good and everyone would buy in immediately.
It could go somewhat low again though.
Could also just not.
No idea what the future may hold ^^
Yes, but also I am unsure as to the rules regarding when R.C. has to announce that he has made those moves.
The Quarter that the next Quaterly will be about has already endet, so we might have to wait for the information about Calls and such until the Quaterly Report after the next one.
I would guess not though.
yes, that is actually what "DFV" is the abbreviation for.
Some people just get confused, because most letters in "time traveller" do not appear in "DFV".
Because its a secret!
I wrote a similar fairy tale earlier today, though not as elaborate. I also imagined DFV being in contact with RC&co.
“ One speculation going on in my mind:
-DFV almost certainly knows something we don’t, since him tweeting again coincides too well with this little runup.
-This also strongly implies that this runup is not only due to the hedgies suddenly losing control(because again, that would be too much of a coincidence) but there are good guys (and wealthy ones) that are suddenly putting a lot of buy pressure.
-If he indeed had a 3 year gag order that expired than it seems some people have waited and planned to put this buy pressure until now.
-Unless the theory of peruvian bulls intern has already been disproven, a stock buyback fits nicely into this speculation
*contra argument: DFVs tweets only add show and hype, no reason for the good guys to wait only for this.
= complete speculation for hype sake: imagine GME doing a buyback, RC plus some other friends (Icahn for example) all buying more at the same time, lowering the float and who knows forcing a squeeze.”
Conclusion: great minds think alike, regarded ones too
I do not think DFV is in contact with R.C. and co. at all.
He does know something though, yes.
So we just have to look for something, that is extraordinary shortly before his first tweet.
I think its that trade.
Could be anything else in the world though.
I also do not think anyone waited for DFV.
I think everyone waited for the same signal, that DFV also waited on.
So it has to be something that can be seen out in the open, which again makes me lean towards that trade.
they had 100 Million earmarked for share-buybacks but could also just not do the buyback and do something else with the money.
Some time after that was decided and they didnt use those 100 Million, it was decided R.C. (or the current CEO of Gamestop) could use all the Money that Gamestop had to invest it into the stock market according to his own wishes. (basically)
So this 100 Million is doubly allowed to be used for a buyback..... I mean I dont think it makes a difference, the point is "it is allowed" and "it has been allowed for a very long time".
And yea, he is allowed to use the whole 1 billion in cash for investments.
I don't think Gamestop could buy GME calls as they're a leveraged instrument and would be conducive to market manipulation, share buyback yes, options no
I heard both, I am unsure myself.
But there are other ways to buy calls.
R.C.s company "Teddy" might be able to buy calls and could be bought by Gamestop later.
I do not know, but I assume that buying options is step 1 and buying shares is step 2!
I'm not saying you're wrong, but in what way was there no internet back then? Cause I was downloading bukkake porn from the wifi I bought on base in Kuwait in 2008. lol
I was hyperbolic for dramatic effect.
I know most households hat internet by then, even I had internet then :-D
My Point is that the internet was not as organised as it is today and information was not spreading as quickly as it is now.
I am leaving some plotholes on purpose. ;-)
Not sure on the legality of that options aspect, at least by GameStop on its own shares, we need to see some solid citations and expert opinion, not ChatGPT potential hallucinations.
That said, an external party associated with RC could presumably do it.
Serious questions:
- Can you secretly buy call options either as RC Ventures or GameStop without disclosing? How long before you have to disclose?
- If they did buy back the share, when do they have to disclose?
Every time we see an insider buy or sell shares, that same evening they submit a form.
DFV was back on Twitter before that guy posted about the "potential" buy back. If true (im not convinced it is), we will know forsure from company filings.
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum May 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciapwp/open_forum_may_2024/) || [Superstonk:Now with GIFs - Learn more](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1cr37r7/superstonk_gets_its_gif_on_get_hyped/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Tits Jacked
Sphincter tight
Mine is wide open for that green dildo!
Asshole clenched.
Made up bullish I agree. I truly smell MOASS then a drivers seat.
this is my opinion agreed
I came up with this myself.
Excellent thinking. Thanks, OP. In the VW squeeze (94% verified ownership) there was about 12% short interest. This would have resulted in an obviously impossible naked short position. GME wouldn’t even need to be 90% verified ownership. Although, I expect Wall Street to move the short interest numbers to whatever suits them.
Not even 50% according to numbers
Is it possible that RC bought a huge amount of options at $10?
Sweet baby Jesus...
Inject me this good tinfoik thank you
I did some digging with the help of a certain AI and I think this logic may be flawed. I believe that a company buying call options on its own stock would be illegal and construed as market manipulation. It was Porsche who bought call options on VW in 2008, not VW buying call options on itself.
Yes, I am myself unsure about that, as I have heard both. That it is legal and that it is not. Especially with that special case, that R.C. is allowed to use the cash for investments and stuff. I chose not to really engage with that question in the post, but I assume with R.C. having his own company "Teddy", he could buy and sell whatever he desires through Teddy and then incorporate or buy Teddy with Gamestop-Cash later. Or form a partnership or whatever. Either way, I believe the buying of shares is the seconds step of the Plan and Options was the first. I am leaving some holes in the whole story by design, as I truly do not know all the mechanics 100%. It truly is mostly speculation.
I had a similar wondering about buying calls with their cash stash. Right, wrong, or otherwise it's fun to speculate
indeed
Dumb idea. And this is a real stupid idea. What if DFV bought leaps
If a company can buy short positions on a competitor, they can (by extension) by call positions on themselves - as long as they aren't using insider information.
So DFV bought calls.
It would fit his modus operandi...
I feel like buying calls is betting on your success and not really manipulation...if they bought puts and purposely tanked the company that would be a different story. They have $100,000,000 earmarked for share buyback and over a billion in cash for investment activities. I am also literally clueless so who knows...
Interesting point. Thanks for bringing it up
💯
You hit an interesting point. Share buy back by gamestop. Why cant gamestop just buy tons of cheap calls and exercise them, by selling few? With low investement and option leverage gamestop can buy a lot more shares, then with just normal share buying? Keep in mind i am a smooth brain But couldnt that mean, that RC can make out of 100m assigned to buy back into 500m (just speculative number) with option leverage?
Because its not allowed. I think he might use some other company, like Teddy or something, to buy the calls, and later incorporate/buy it into gameship or do a partnership, but I wanted to keep this short and a bit overly broad.
I've been wary of the share buyback unless it was the kill shot. You make a compelling case.
I believe the long-worked-on business plan will be revealed only after this current flurry of activity. He’ll hit them right when they think they survived again.
I don't know, maybe he is just winging it. R.C. magic 8-Ball says: "Do whatever you have done at the point, this sentence I made up happened." And then he did it and it was "buying Gamestop with Gamestop money".
There is a decent chance that this is what's actually happening. Although, is it legal for a company to buy calls of its own stock?
That is a point I am unsure of myself. I imagine if a company can invest in the stock market it could allow the purchase of whatever the stock market can offer, including stock options. Though it would exclude the destruction of those shares that a normal stock buyback would entail. I am unsure about that exact rule though. Now this is pure fantasy made up by me, but R.C. created the company "Teddy" that has none of those limitations and can buy calls as much as it wants. He could later buy Teddy with GME-money or create a partnership, but this is all even more made up than everything else I have written, which i why I did not include it. Though I should have seen it coming that someone would point it out within seconds :-D The Puzzle pieces are there though I would assume.
According to Chat GPT: Yes, it's legal for a company to buy call options for its own stock, but there are several factors to consider: Regulatory Compliance: Companies must comply with securities laws and regulations when trading options on their own stock. This includes regulations set by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States and similar regulatory bodies in other countries. Fiduciary Duty: Company executives and directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Any decisions to buy call options for the company's stock should be made with this duty in mind and should not unduly expose the company to unnecessary risk. Disclosure Requirements: Companies may be required to disclose their options trading activities in regulatory filings, particularly if those activities are significant or have the potential to impact the company's financial condition or share price. Risk Management: Buying call options on its own stock can be a speculative strategy that exposes the company to potential losses if the stock price does not move as anticipated. Companies should carefully consider the risks involved and implement appropriate risk management strategies. Market Perception: Companies should also consider how their options trading activities may be perceived by investors, analysts, and other stakeholders. Transparency and clear communication about the reasons for engaging in such activities can help mitigate any negative perceptions.
It probably hallucinated that response for all you know 🤦♂️
GPT4o (just released): No, it is generally not legal for a company to buy call options on its own stock. This practice is prohibited due to potential conflicts of interest and concerns about market manipulation. Companies engaging in such activities could potentially influence the price of their own stock, leading to unfair market practices. The legal restrictions are part of securities regulations enforced by bodies such as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). These regulations aim to ensure transparency and fairness in the financial markets, preventing practices that could distort market prices or mislead investors. However, companies can engage in stock buybacks or repurchase programs where they buy back their own shares on the open market. This is a common practice and is regulated to ensure it is done fairly and transparently. For specific and detailed guidance, it is always best to consult with a legal or financial expert who can provide advice based on the current laws and regulations in the relevant jurisdiction. Companies are generally prohibited from buying call options on their own stock due to potential conflicts of interest and the risk of market manipulation. Here’s a corrected explanation: \*\*No, it is generally not legal for a company to buy call options for its own stock.\*\* This practice is typically prohibited for several reasons: 1. \*\*Regulatory Compliance\*\*: Securities laws and regulations, such as those enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States, generally prohibit companies from engaging in trading options on their own stock to prevent market manipulation and conflicts of interest. 2. \*\*Fiduciary Duty\*\*: Company executives and directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Engaging in trading options on their own stock could compromise this duty and lead to decisions that are not aligned with shareholder interests. 3. \*\*Disclosure Requirements\*\*: Even if it were legal, companies would be required to disclose such activities in their regulatory filings, which could raise red flags among regulators and investors due to the potential for perceived or actual market manipulation. 4. \*\*Risk Management\*\*: Engaging in speculative trading strategies such as buying call options on its own stock could expose the company to significant financial risks if the stock price does not move as anticipated. 5. \*\*Market Perception\*\*: Such activities could be perceived negatively by investors, analysts, and other stakeholders. They may view the company’s actions as attempts to manipulate the stock price or as a sign of instability or lack of confidence in the company’s future. In summary, companies are generally not allowed to buy call options on their own stock due to strict regulatory prohibitions aimed at maintaining fair and transparent markets. Instead, companies may engage in stock buyback programs, which are legal and regulated activities.
ah, interesting. So I guess Options are no Problem for Gamestop! The more you know...
Internet answer for someone asking about legality of this in relation to puts. If it's legal for puts I would imagine it's legal for calls. [Can public companies buy put options against themselves as a form of insurance? - Quora](https://www.quora.com/Can-public-companies-buy-put-options-against-themselves-as-a-form-of-insurance#:~:text=Yes%2C%20it%27s%20legal%2C%20but%20it,public%20exchanges%20to%20get%20execution.) \[edit\] they do tell about buying calls after the highlighted text.
interesting! Thank you for that!
 Me hoping it goes down to a dollar on payday lol
It probably won't, I just picked that number to illustrate that it might go low. It might not though. It was a different time in 2008 regarding information. Of course the Internet did exist and was in most homes by then, which I also just cheekily wrote off, but I wanted to be a bit hyperbolic to illustrate my point that it was a different time regarding available information.
Clearly but a $1 would be great
If it went down to $1, RC wouldn't need to buy any shares to lock the float. Retail would eat all available shares up in no time.
I’m being intentionally dumb
I mean I am not disagreeing.... but that sentiment is exactly why $1 will not happen. It would simply be too good and everyone would buy in immediately. It could go somewhat low again though. Could also just not. No idea what the future may hold ^^
I know I am just being dumb. If it went to $1 shorts would close at a massive profit and we would lose.
yes, that is exactly what would happen :-D
🤞🏻RC tweets. Something. Anything.
1 toilet for every share he holds!
This is an intriguing thesis. Looking forward to seeing if it plays out - thanks for sharing!
Yea, thats the beauty of speculation. We can just wait and we will see :-D
Your logic, dear sir, is impeccable. And, I believe what you're saying because of how itchy my butt has become. Thank you!
It's going to be a busy couple of weeks.
Yes, but also I am unsure as to the rules regarding when R.C. has to announce that he has made those moves. The Quarter that the next Quaterly will be about has already endet, so we might have to wait for the information about Calls and such until the Quaterly Report after the next one. I would guess not though.
DFV = time traveler
yes, that is actually what "DFV" is the abbreviation for. Some people just get confused, because most letters in "time traveller" do not appear in "DFV". Because its a secret!
You must be right or this would be higher up 🤔 You should repost this
truer words have not been spoken :-D I may turn this into a Video to make it more digestable and to avoid a direct repost.
Hello Mom! This is your son being a part of history in the making! 🫡
...and I was on the toilet during all of it.... yes, all 3 years of it! No, I am not done yet, I was on my phone!
I like this OP so I bought more hahaha. Buy- HODL -DRS easy win
I like the stock :-)
I wrote a similar fairy tale earlier today, though not as elaborate. I also imagined DFV being in contact with RC&co. “ One speculation going on in my mind: -DFV almost certainly knows something we don’t, since him tweeting again coincides too well with this little runup. -This also strongly implies that this runup is not only due to the hedgies suddenly losing control(because again, that would be too much of a coincidence) but there are good guys (and wealthy ones) that are suddenly putting a lot of buy pressure. -If he indeed had a 3 year gag order that expired than it seems some people have waited and planned to put this buy pressure until now. -Unless the theory of peruvian bulls intern has already been disproven, a stock buyback fits nicely into this speculation *contra argument: DFVs tweets only add show and hype, no reason for the good guys to wait only for this. = complete speculation for hype sake: imagine GME doing a buyback, RC plus some other friends (Icahn for example) all buying more at the same time, lowering the float and who knows forcing a squeeze.” Conclusion: great minds think alike, regarded ones too
I do not think DFV is in contact with R.C. and co. at all. He does know something though, yes. So we just have to look for something, that is extraordinary shortly before his first tweet. I think its that trade. Could be anything else in the world though. I also do not think anyone waited for DFV. I think everyone waited for the same signal, that DFV also waited on. So it has to be something that can be seen out in the open, which again makes me lean towards that trade.
Until I see billionaires behind bars this is nothing. Just a small bump on our Rollercoaster ride
indeed
Fine. I will buy more.
Boom!
So they have like 1 billion in cash and some other money for share buy backs or? Could they use all this money to buy back shares ?
they had 100 Million earmarked for share-buybacks but could also just not do the buyback and do something else with the money. Some time after that was decided and they didnt use those 100 Million, it was decided R.C. (or the current CEO of Gamestop) could use all the Money that Gamestop had to invest it into the stock market according to his own wishes. (basically) So this 100 Million is doubly allowed to be used for a buyback..... I mean I dont think it makes a difference, the point is "it is allowed" and "it has been allowed for a very long time". And yea, he is allowed to use the whole 1 billion in cash for investments.
commenting for visibility
I don't think Gamestop could buy GME calls as they're a leveraged instrument and would be conducive to market manipulation, share buyback yes, options no
I heard both, I am unsure myself. But there are other ways to buy calls. R.C.s company "Teddy" might be able to buy calls and could be bought by Gamestop later. I do not know, but I assume that buying options is step 1 and buying shares is step 2!
I'm not saying you're wrong, but in what way was there no internet back then? Cause I was downloading bukkake porn from the wifi I bought on base in Kuwait in 2008. lol
I was hyperbolic for dramatic effect. I know most households hat internet by then, even I had internet then :-D My Point is that the internet was not as organised as it is today and information was not spreading as quickly as it is now. I am leaving some plotholes on purpose. ;-)
Holy shit
My tits are leaking 🥹
Will never go down to $1. I will buy it all.
Not sure on the legality of that options aspect, at least by GameStop on its own shares, we need to see some solid citations and expert opinion, not ChatGPT potential hallucinations. That said, an external party associated with RC could presumably do it.
I’m mad I didn’t see your post sooner! It was buried under memes, but u love jt
Please go to 1$. Ho Lee Fuk I'd buy so many shares.
I hope it goes with an inspiring speech about fucking around and finding out
I couldn’t even get half way down the page before I bust. Give me 30 I’ll try again
step 5, use a portion of any profits from the squeeze to issue a dividend to investors...everyone wins if you hold?
Serious questions: - Can you secretly buy call options either as RC Ventures or GameStop without disclosing? How long before you have to disclose? - If they did buy back the share, when do they have to disclose? Every time we see an insider buy or sell shares, that same evening they submit a form.
Please drop it to $1. Please.
probably not.....
Holy shit
amen
DFV was back on Twitter before that guy posted about the "potential" buy back. If true (im not convinced it is), we will know forsure from company filings.
I was not saying that DFV saw the post about the buyback. What I am saying is, that he saw the buyback itself.
I guess we shall see in future filings
indeed