US Gambling Laws | State-by-State Guides for Legal Gambling
US Gambling Laws | State-by-State Guides for Legal Gambling
Which States Don't Have a Lottery? - States Without the
Will more US States Legalize Gambling in 2021?
Find What States Have Casinos | American Casino Guide
Which US states do not have legalized gambling? - Answers
Which Big USA States are Without Casinos? ǀ Coolcat Casino
Worst Gambling Laws: The 10 States on the No Gambling List
Which States in the USA Have No Casinos? - Legal Gambling
Legal Gambling States In The US - State By State Legal
Wanna bet? Here's where all 50 states stand on the
what states don't have gambling
what states don't have gambling - win
What a joke the NSW government is. This is their reply to what they are doing for the billion dollar gambling addiction they have. They don’t have the guts actually fix the problem and save the state from this. Poker machines and gambling have destroyed NSW and Australia!
Chad Blair: Here’s What Residents Of Other States Will Get A Chance To Vote On - Citizen initiatives are on the ballot regarding gambling, marijuana, prison reform and term limits. But Hawaii voters don’t have that right.
Note: BlackBerry is NOT a cyber security company. They are a security company. Revenue does not care about your AI driven autonomous machine learning EV car with DDs. People are using these terms loosely. A quick lookup for interviews with John Chen would prove that he explicitly avoids these terms as they do not define nor matter to the products/revenue of BlackBerry. QNX revenue does not depend on any of these terms, it's on installation on any device. This includes the space station, of which there is 1 of with obviously non-recurring revenue. Buying based on these basis would be gambling. Bull:
Business transformation: BlackBerry is now a software company, starting the transformation in 2015. The focus is security, the general term.
5 Products:
QNX: Embedded system OS.
Multi-OS housing: It has the capability to allow for multiple OSs on a single chip.
Real-time availability/software prioritization: Not all pieces of software operate on the same priority. Steering/braking would be higher priority than media, and QNX allows for that. Even if the thread/core is shared with other applications, when high priority software is requesting a resource it will be prioritized to ensure reliability.
Resource sharing: CPU, RAM, and GPU resource sharing between different applications capability. Two applications can share the same CPU core and bump each other based on prioritization.
Why not Linux? QNX has the highest certification for security available. Linux does not. CEOs would want to avoid liability and this certification allows for that.
Device agnostic: It can be installed on any device, not just cars. Any IoT and offline device can use QNX.
QNX Hypervisor: Consolidate multiple OSs on a single SoC using virtualization
SoC: System on a chip. Instead of using multiple ECUs, which is what car manufacturers currently do, they can use one single chip to run multiple high priority applications and multiple OSs. This is what Tesla does now.
Virtualization: Running an OS in a virtual environment. Think Linux environment inside of Windows. This helps with debugging for developers without having to have the actual hardware.
IVY: Scalable cloud-connected software platform for vehicles.
What is it a solution for? When a vehicle manufacturer wants a way to transmit the QNX/OS data safely, normalize it, and visualize it/interact with it. It also allows car manufacturers to own the data, unlike other OSs.
Scalable: AWS servers are capable of handling the load from many endpoints.
Software platform: There is currently no centralized software ecosystem for vehicles. IVY is providing that.
Non-BB developers would be able to use an SDK to develop applications on IVY for infotainment/general apps/others. IVY will also use ML to gain insight on unrecognized patterns by developers. An example of this is detecting if a car slipped, without having the developer connect multiple sensors to figure out if that event happened.
50/50 joint effort on revenue and effort to develop the ecosystem. Using AWS's knowledge in AI/ML for calculated sensors (slip, driver on seat, etc)
Usage by other vendors: A city can connect to the data from vehicles and detect when ice/slipping is happening. If brakes are getting overheated coming from a high elevation area. If a car had an accident, etc. An insurance company can provide an app to give discounts similar to the currently implemented OBD-2 readers. A maintenance provider can also connect to this data and check if an error is specific to maintenance, malpractice, or general misuse.
Spark: Endpoint management. Basically API security. Did not delve far into this, basic info.
Unified Endpoint Security: This is the endpoint where a laptop/phone/IoT device hits. It provides encryption and security around that. Continuous authentication is a part of it, where a device is learning the user behavior using ML and continuously checking if the behavior matches the original owner; if not, lock the device.
Unified Endpoint Management: Basically managing your API for devices.
Zero trust: I think this is specifically talking about continuous authentication. Basically, it's not an authenticate once and forget it. It's constantly tracking behavior to verify the user is the authenticated user.
AtHoc: Non-enterprise communication system.
Target customers: Government, healthcare, education, etc.
Solution: A communication system targeting non-enterprise businesses; specifically for Event management, cross organizational communication/collaboration, mass notifications.
Who does this benefit? You've seen the hacks in healthcare/educational/governmental sector. This is specifically for them.
SecuSUITE: Phone application to allow employees to use work related data in personal devices without cross communication (between personal and work data).
End to end encryption.
Separation of concerns between personal and work data. Employers CANNOT access your personal data.
Used by NATO; doesn't carry much value in my book but maybe in yours.
Customer oriented solutions: As you've seen in the products above, some products overlap and are just names to target specific customers. It allows customers to easily understand what product could solve their issue. Continuous authentication is a great example of this: Their customer complained that they kept re-authenticating, so they designed a solution allowing them to authenticate once and using ML they learned their behavior and can continuously check if the user is the owneauthenticated user. This kind of passion in leadership is good for business.
Liability: QNX has the highest security rating available. Most CEOs want to avoid liability when it comes to security, using QNX would help them avoid that in a similar way cloud services help them avoid being blamed for hacking.
Leadership: BBs leadership isn't one to play on famous words to drive the stock up. John Chen explicitly states this in his interviews and says they are a security company. Not cyber, doesn't mention AI or whatever. He explicitly avoids meme words and understands what the point of BBs business is.
Where I think growth can be made:
QNX in more cars. They can capitalize on the idea of less ECUs = less cost for OEMs + security.
IVY usage by OEMs along with QNX.
IVY ecosystem. Maybe application billing?
Professional services (support) for the products listed.
AtHoc increased market share in more governmental/healthcare/educational entities.
SecuSUITE for more enterprise customers with the idea being saving employers money from purchasing work phones for employees, and worrying about securing them.
Bear:
Revenue: It is not yet based on a subscription/usage basis. You can only produce so many cars, and they don't give an insight on how much do they charge per car for QNX. Anywhere from $2 - $20 is what was mentioned in transcripts. This is a growth area, but not at a trajectory that's excellent. IVY does work on a subscription/usage basis, but IVY can be used WITHOUT QNX. I'm worried about this, but still see it as an area that will generate revenue in the range of $400 MM - $600 MM at the price of $20 per 30M cars. The 30M per year is based on the listing of their customers and their yearly production rates. Keep in mind I stated any device, this does not include trucks or other IoT devices.
Market share: These are relatively new products. J.P. Morgan pointed this out as a priority for growth. This could end up not working out and growth never happens. This is a relatively low risk due to QNX and IVY providing SO MUCH value for car manufacturers Vs. other products in the market.
Patent revenue: They sold a chunk of their no longer relevant patents to Huawei. This makes up a small (<= 32%) of their revenue and is a one time sale. The coming quarter could be equal or less to the last quarter revenue due to either other sales making up the lost revenue from patents, or coming up short. It could come higher if they sold more services, but due to COVID and knowing that many car manufacturers have lowered their production due to chip shortage, the next quarter will most likely be lower.
VW.os: VW is making their own OS. VW.os is what they're calling it. They're currently using QNX, but that revenue could potentially stop. Personally I don't believe VW is capable of doing that. It's a marketing hype. Their companies are not capable of good collaboration or good implementation based on what I've read and researched (can't find article right now), but it's something to be concerned about.
QNX success: While IVY could be using QNX, it does NOT depend on it. There is potential for OEMs to use IVY without QNX. I think this is a low risk, but still risk. 19 OEMs are already using QNX.
Lack of Answers: I can't get much out of their earnings call. They don't delve into pricing for QNX, how they plan to grow it besides getting more car manufacturers and more cars post Corona. How they plan to do recurring revenue. A breakdown of each revenue segment would be helpful, but I don't see that either and there is hesitancy to delve into it.
Prediction: I think QNX can become a $1B revenue per year alone. $2B revenue per year as a company is not far fetched. Without a subscription/usage based model, it is difficult to see how growth can go beyond that. BB is good in 2-5 years, not this year. I can see their revenue growing to potentially $2B - $4B revenue per year. They did mention trying to figure out a subscription/usage based billing, if done then the revenue would be much higher. I think $18 is a fair price on the high end. It could grow further than that, but expectations would be HIGH. Resources:
Position: 1,500. Disclaimer: I don't know everything, I may be incorrect about some things. This is based on what I've researched and to the best of my ability. Do your own DD. Obligatory this is not an investment advice. Edit: This is the only sub with a lot of discussion. I appreciate y'all. 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 Edit 2: One day later, marked closed $18.03. Crazy.
Gamestop Big Picture: The Short Singularity Pt 3 - WTF edition
Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor. This entire post represents my personal views and opinions, and should not be taken as financial advice (or advice of any kind whatsoever). I encourage you to do your own research, take anything I write with a grain of salt, and hold me accountable for any mistakes you may catch. Also, full disclosure, I hold a net long position in GME, but my cost basis is very low (average ~$67--I have to admit, the drop today was too tasty so my cost basis went up from yesterday)/share with my later buys averaged in), and I'm using money I can absolutely lose. My capital at risk and tolerance for risk generally is likely substantially different than yours. In this post I will go a little further and speculate more than I'd normally do in a post due to the questions I've been getting, so fair warning, some of it might be very wrong. I suspect we'll learn some of the truth years from now when some investigative journalist writes a book about it. Thank you everyone for the comments and questions on the first and second post on this topic. Today was a study in the power of fear, courage, and the levers you can pull when you wield billions of dollars... Woops, excuse me. I'm sorry hedge fund guys... I meant trillions of dollars--I just briefly forget you control not just your own but a lot of other peoples' money too for a moment there. Also, for people still trading this on market-based rationale (as I am), it was a good day to measure the conviction behind your thesis. I like to think I have conviction, but in case you are somehow not yet familiar with the legend of DFV, you need to see these posts (fair warning, nsfw, and some may be offended/triggered by the crude language). The last two posts might be impressive, but you should follow it in chronological order and pay attention to the evolution of sentiment in the comments to experience true enlightenment. Anyway, I apologize, but this post will be very long--there's just a lot to unpack.
Pre-Market
Disclaimer: given yesterday's pre-market action I didn't even pay attention to the screen until near retail pre-market. I'm less confident in my ability to read what's going on in a historical chart vs the feel I get watching live, but I'll try. Early in the pre-market it looks to me like some momentum traders are taking profit, discounting the probability that the short-side will give them a deep discount later, which you can reasonably assume given the strategy they ran yesterday. If they're right they can sell some small volume into the pre-market top, wait for the hedge funds try to run the price back down, and then lever up the gains even higher buying the dip. Buy-side here look to me like people FOMOing and YOLOing in at any price to grab their slice of gainz, or what looks to be market history in the making. No way are short-side hedge funds trying to cover anything at these prices. Mark Cuban--well said! Free markets baby! Mohamed El-Erian is money in the bank as always. "upgrade in quality" on the pandemic drop was the best, clearest actionable call while most were at peak panic, and boy did it print. Your identifying the bubble as the excessive short (vs blaming retail activity) is money yet again. Also, The PAIN TRADE (sorry, later interview segment I only have on DVR, couldn't find on youtube--maybe someone else can)! The short attack starts, but I'm hoping no one was panicking this time--we've seen it before. Looks like the momentum guys are minting money buying the double dip into market open. CNBC, please get a good market technician to explain the market action. Buy-side dominance, sell-side share availability evaporating into nothing (look at day-by-day volume last few days), this thing is now at runaway supercritical mass. There is no changing the trajectory unless you can change the very fabric of the market and the rules behind it (woops, I guess I should have knocked on wood there). If you know the mechanics, what's happening in the market with GME is not mysterious AT ALL. I feel like you guys are trying to scare retail out early "for their own good" (with all sincerity, to your credit) rather than explain what's happening. Possibly you also fear that explaining it would equate to enabling/encouraging people to keep trying to do it inappropriately (possibly fair point, but at least come out and say that if that's the case). Outside the market, however...wow.
You Thought Yesterday Was Fear? THIS is Fear!
Ok short-side people, my hat is off to you. Just when I thought shouting fire in a locked theater was fear mongering poetry in motion, you went and took it to 11. What's even better? Yelling fire in a theater with only one exit. That way people can cause the financial equivalent of stampede casualties. Absolutely brilliant. Robin Hood disables buying of GME, AMC, and a few of the other WSB favorites. Other brokerages do the same. Even for people on 0% margin. Man, and here I thought I had seen it all yesterday. Side note: I will give a shout out to TD Ameritrade. You guys got erroneously lumped together with RH during an early CNBC segment, but you telegraphed the volatility risk management changes and gradually ramped up margin requirements over the past week. No one on your platform should have been surprised if they were paying attention. And you didn't stop anyone from trading their own money at any point in time. My account balance thanks you. I heard others may have had problems, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt given the DDOS attacks that were flyiing around Robin Hood. Seriously WTF. I'm sure it was TOTALLY coincidence that your big announcements happen almost precisely when what has to be one of the best and most aggressive short ladder attacks of all time starts painting the tape, what looked like a DDOS attack on Reddit's CDN infrastructure (pretty certain it was the CDN because other stuff got taken out at the same time too), and a flood of bots hit social media (ok, short-side, this last one is getting old). Taking out a large-scale cloud CDN is real big boy stuff though, so I wouldn't entirely rule out nation state type action--those guys are good at sniffing out opportunities to foment social unrest. Anyway, at this point, as the market dives, I have to admit I was worried for a moment. Not that somehow the short-side would win (hah! the long-side whales in the pond know what's up), but that a lot of retail would get hurt in the action. That concern subsided quite a bit on the third halt on that slide. But first... A side lesson on market orders Someone printed bonus bank big time (and someone lost--I feel your pain, whoever you are). During the face-ripping volatility my play money account briefly ascended to rarified heights of 7 figures. It took me a second to realize it, then another second to process it. Then, as soon as it clicked, that one, glorious moment in time was gone. What happened? During the insane chop of the short ladder attack, someone decided to sweep the 29 Jan 21 115 Call contracts, but they couldn't get a grip on the price, which was going coast to coast as IV blew up and the price was being slammed around. So whoever was trying to buy said "F it, MARKET ORDER" (i.e. buy up to $X,XXX,XXX worth of contracts at any price). This is referred to as a sweep if funded to buy all/most of the contracts on offer (HFT shops snipe every contract at each specific price with a shotgun of limit orders, which is far safer, but something only near-market compute resources can do really well). For retail, or old-tech pros, if you want all the contracts quickly, you drop a market order loaded with big bucks and see what you get... BUT, some clever shark had contracts available for the reasonable sum of... $4,400, or something around that. I was too stunned to grab a screencap. The buy market order swept the book clean and ran right into that glorious, nigh-obscene backstop limit. So someone got nearly $440,000 PER CONTRACT that was, at the time theoretically priced at around $15,000. $425,000 loss... PER CONTRACT. Maybe I'm not giving the buyer enough credit.. you can get sniped like that even if you try to do a safety check of the order book first, but, especially in low liquidity environments, if a HFT can peak into your order flow (or maybe just observes a high volume of sweeps occurring), they can end up front running your sweep, pick off the reasonable contracts, and slam a ridiculous limit sell order into place before your order makes it to the exchange. Either way, I hope that sweep wasn't loaded for bear into the millions. If so... OUCH. Someone got cleaned out. So, the lesson here folks... in a super high volatility, low-liquidity market, a market order will just run up the ladder into the first sell order it can find, and some very brutal people will put limit sells like that out there just in case they hit the jackpot. And someone did. If you're on the winning side, great. It can basically bankrupt you if you're on the losing side. My recommendation: Just don't try it. I wouldn't be surprised if really shady shenanigans were involved in this, but no way to know (normally that's crazy-type talk, but after today....peeking at order flow and sniping sweeps is one of the fastest, most financially devastating ways to bleed big long-side players, just sayin'). edit *so while I was too busy trying not to spit out my coffee to grab a screenshot, piddlesthethug was faster on the draw and captured this: https://imgur.com/gallery/RI1WOuu Ok, so I guess my in-the-moment mental math was off by about 10%. Man, that hurts just thinking about the guy who lost on that trade.* Back to the market action..
A Ray of Light Through the Darkness
So I was worried watching the crazy downward movement for two different reasons. On the one hand, I was worried the momentum pros would get the best discounts on the dip (I'll admit, I FOMO'd in too early, unnecessarily raising my cost basis). On the other hand, I was worried for the retail people on Robin Hood who might be bailing out into incredibly steep losses because they had only two options: Watch the slide, or bail. All while dealing with what looked to me like a broad-based cloud CDN outage as they tried to get info from WSB HQ, and wondering if the insta-flood of bot messages were actually real people this time, and that everyone else was bailing on them to leave them holding the bag. But I saw the retail flag flying high on the 3rd market halt (IIRC), and I knew most would be ok. What did I see, you ask? Why, the glorious $211.00 / $5,000 bid/ask spread. WSB Reddit is down? Those crazy mofos give you the finger right on the ticker tape. I've been asked many times in the last few hours about why I was so sure shorts weren't covering on the down move. THIS is how I knew. For sure. It's in the market data itself. editSo, there's feedback in the comments that this is likely more of a technical glitch. Man, at least it was hilarious in the moment. But also now I know maybe not to trust price updates when the spread between orders being posted is so wide. Maybe a technical limitation of TOS I'll admit, I tried to one-up those bros with a 4206.90 limit sell order, but it never made it through. I'm impressed that the HFT guys at the hedge fund must have realized really quickly what a morale booster that kind of thing would have been, and kept a lower backstop ask in place almost continuously from then on I'm sure others tried the same thing. Occasionally $1,000 and other high-dollar asks would peak through from time to time from then on, which told me the long-side HFTs were probably successfully sniping the backstops regularly. So, translating for those of you who found that confusing. First, such a high ask is basically a FU to the short-side (who, as you remember, need to eventually buy shares to cover their short positions). More importantly, as an indicator of retail sentiment, it meant that NO ONE ELSE WAS TRYING TO SELL AT ANY PRICE LOWER THAN $5,000. Absolutely no one was bailing out. I laughed for a minute, then started getting a little worried. Holy cow.. NO retail selling into the fear? How are they resisting that kind of price move?? The answer, as we all know now... they weren't afraid... they weren't even worried. They were F*CKING PISSED. Meanwhile the momentum guys and long-side HFTs keep gobbling up the generously donated shares that the short-side are plowing into their ladder attack. Lots of HFT duels going on as long-side HFTs try to intercept shares meant to travel between short-side HFT accounts for their ladder. You can tell when you see prices like $227.0001 constantly flying across the tape. Retail can't even attempt to enter an order like that--those are for the big boys with privileged low-latency access. The fact that you can even see that on the tape with human eyes is really bad for the short-side people. Why, you ask? Because it means liquidity is drying up, and fast.
The Liquidity Tide is Flowing Out Quickly. Who's Naked (short)?
Market technicals time. I still wish this sub would allow pictures so I could throw up a chart, but I guess a table will do fine.
Date
Volume
Price at US Market Close
Friday, 1/22/21
197,157,196
$65.01
Monday, 1/25/21
177,874,00
$76.79
Tuesday, 1/26/21
178,587,974
$147.98
Wednesday, 1/27/21
93,396,666
$347.51
Thursday, 1/28/21
58,815,805
$193.60
What do I see? I see the shares available to trade dropping so fast that all the near-exchange compute power in the world won't let the short-side HFTs maintain order flow volume for their attacks. Many retail people asking me questions thought today was the heaviest trading. Nope--it was just the craziest. What about the price dropping on Thursday? Is that a sign that the short-side pulled a miracle out and pushed price down against a parabolic move on even less volume than Wednesday? Is the long side running out of capital? Nope. It means the short-side hedge funds are just about finished. But wait, I thought the price needed to be higher for them to be taken out? How is it that price being lower is bad for them? Won't that allow them to cover at a lower price? No, the volume is so low that they can't cover any meaningful fraction of their position without spiking the price parabolic almost instantly. Just not enough shares on offer at reasonable prices (especially when WSB keeps flashing you 6942.00s). It's true, a higher price hurts, but the interest charge for one more day is just noise at this point. The only tick that will REALLY count is the last tick of trading on Friday. In the meantime, the price drop (and watching the sparring in real time) tells me that the long-side whales and their HFT quants are so certain of the squeeze that they're no longer worried AT ALL about whether it will happen, and they aren't even worried at all about retail morale to help carry the water anymore. Instead, they're now really, really worried about how CHEAPLY they can make it happen. They are wondering if they can't edge out just a sliver more alpha out of what will already be a blow-out trade for the history books (probably). You see, to make it happen they just have to keep hoovering up shares. It doesn't matter what those shares cost. If you're certain that the squeeze is now locked in, why push the price up and pay more than you have to? Just keep pressing hard enough to force short-side to keep sending those tasty shares your way, but not so much you move the price. Short-side realizes this and doesn't try to drive price down too aggressively. They can't afford to let price run away, so they have to keep some pressure on at the lowest volume they can manage, but they don't want to push down too hard and give the long-side HFTs too deep of a discount and bleed their ammo out even faster. That dynamic keeps price within a narrow (for GME today, anyway) trading range for the rest of the day into the close. Good plan guys, but those after market people are pushing the price up again. Damnit WSB bros and Euros, you're costing those poor long-side whales their extra 0.0000001% of alpha on this trade just so you can run up your green rockets... See, that's the kind of nonsense that just validates Lee Cooperman's concerns. On a totally unrelated note, I have to say that I appreciate the shift in CNBC's reporting. Much more thoughtful and informed. Just please get a good market technician in there who will be willing to talk about what is going on under the hood if possible. A lot of people watching on the sidelines are far more terrified than they need to be because it all looks random to them. And they're worried that you guys look confused and worried--and if the experts on the news are worried....??! You should be able to find one who has access to the really good data that we retailers can only guess at, who can explain it to us unwashed masses.
Ok, So.. Questions
There is no market justification for this. How can you tell me is this fundamentally sound and not just straight throwing money away irresponsibly??(side note: not that that should matter--if you want to throw your money away why shouldn't you be allowed to?) We're not trading in your securities pricing model. This isn't irrational just because your model says long and short positions are the same thing. The model is not a real market. There is asymmetrical counterparty risk here given the shorts are on the hook for all the money they have, and possibly all the money their brokers have, and possibly anyone with exposure to the broker too! You may want people to trade by the rules you want them to follow. But the rest of us trade in the real market as it is actually implemented. Remember? That's what you tell the retailers who take their accounts to zero. Remember what you told the KBIO short-squeezed people? They had fair warning that short positions carry infinite risk, including more than your initial investment. You guys know this. It's literally part of your job to know this. But-but-the systemic risk!! This is Madness! ...Madness? THIS. IS. THE MARKET!!! *Retail kicks the short-side hedge funds down an infinity loss black hole\*. Ok, seriously though, that is actually a fundamentally sound, and properly profit-driven answer at least as justifiable as the hedge funds' justification for going >100% of float short. If they can be allowed to gamble INFINITE LOSSES because they expect to make profit on the possibility the company goes bankrupt, can't others do the inverse on the possibility the company I don't know.. doesn't go bankrupt and gets a better strategy from the team that created what is now a $43bn market cap company (CHWY) that does exactly some of the things GME needs to do (digital revenue growth) maybe? I mean, I first bought in on that fundamental value thesis in the 30s and then upped my cost basis given the asymmetry of risk in the technical analysis as an obvious no-brainer momentum trade. The squeeze is just, as WSB people might say, tendies raining down from on high as an added bonus. I get that you disagree on the fundamental viability of GME. Great. Isn't that what makes a market? Regarding the consequences of a squeeze, in practice my expectation was maybe at worst some kind of ex-market settlement after liquidation of the funds with exposure to keep things nice and orderly for the rest of the market. I mean, they handled the VW thing somehow right? I see now that I just underestimated elite hedge fund managers though--those guys are so hardcore (I'll explain why I think so a bit lower down). If hedge fund people are so hardcore, how did the retail long side ever have a chance of winning this squeeze trade they're talking about? Because it's an asymmetrical battle once you have short interest cornered. And the risk is also crazily asymmetrical in favor of the long side if short interest is what it is in GME. In fact, the hedge funds essentially cornered themselves without anyone even doing anything. They just dug themselves right in there. Kind of impressive really, in a weird way. What does the short side need to cover? They need the price to be low, and they need to buy shares. How does price move lower? You have to push share volume such that supply overwhelms demand and price therefore goes down (man, I knew econ 101 would come in handy someday). But wait... if you have to sell shares to push the price down.. won't you just undo all your work when you have to buy it back to actually cover? The trick is you have to push price down so hard, so fast, so unpredictably, that you SCARE OTHER PEOPLE into selling their shares too, because they're scared of taking losses. Their sales help push the price down for free! and then you scoop them up at discount price! Also, there are ways to make people scared other than price movement and fear of losses, when you get right down to it. So, you know, you just need to get really, really, really good at making people scared. Remember to add a line item to your budget to make sure you can really do it right. On the other hand.. What does the long side need to do? They need to own as much of the shares as they can get their hands on. And then they need to hold on to them. They can't be weak hands either. They need to be hands that will hold even under the most intense heat of battle, and the immense pressure of mind-numbing fear... they need to be as if they were made of... diamond... (oh wow, maybe those WSB people kind of have a point here). Why does this matter? Because at some point the sell side will eventually run out of shares to borrow. They simply won't be there, because they'll be safely tucked away in the long-side's accounts. Once you run out of shares to borrow and sell, you have no way to move the price anymore. You can't just drop a fat stack--excuse me, I mean suitcase (we're talking hedge fund money here after all)--of Benjamins on the ticker tape directly. Only shares. No more shares, no way to have any direct effect on the price whatsoever. Ok, doesn't that just mean trading stops? Can't you just out-wait the long side then? Well, you could.. until someone on the long side puts 1 share up on a 69420 ask, and an even crazier person actually buys at that price on the last tick on a Friday. Let's just say it gets really bad at that point. Ok.. but how do the retail people actually get paid? Well, to be quite honest, it's entirely up to each of them individually. You've seen the volumes being thrown around the past week+. I guarantee you every single retailer out there could have printed money multiple times trading that flow. If they choose to, and time it well. Or they could lose it all--this is the market. Some of them apparently seem to have some plan, or an implicit trust in certain individuals to help them know when to punch out. Maybe it works out, but maybe not. There will be financial casualties on the field for sure--this is the bare-knuckled capitalist jungle after all, remember? But everyone ponied up to the table with their own money somehow, so they all get to play in the big leagues just like everyone else. In theory, anyway. And now, Probably the #1 question I've been asked on all of these posts has been: So what happens next? Do we get the infinity squeeze? Do the hedge funds go down? Great questions. I don't know. No one does. That's what I've said every time, but I get that's a frustrating answer, so I'll write a bit more and speculate further. Please again understand these are my opinions with a degree of speculation I wouldn't normally put in a post.
The Market and the Economy. Main Street, Wall Street, and Washington
The pandemic has hurt so many people that it's hard to comprehend. Honestly, I don't even pretend to be able to. I have been crazy fortunate enough to almost not be affected at all. Honestly, it is a little unnerving to me how great the disconnect is between people who are doing fine (or better than fine, looking at my IRA) versus the people who are on the opposite side of the ever-widening divide that, let's be honest, has been growing wider since long before the pandemic. People on the other side--who have been told they cannot work even if they want to, who wonder if congress will get it together to at least keep them from getting thrown out of their house if they have to keep taking one for the team for the good of all, are wondering if they're even living in the same reality. Because all they see on the news each day is that the stock market is at record highs, or some amazing tech stocks have 10x'd in the last 6 months. How can that be happening during a pandemic? Because The Market is not The Economy. The Market looks forward to that brighter future that Economy types just need to wait for. Don't worry--it'll be here sometime before the end of the year. We think. We're making money on that assumption right now, anyway. Oh, by the way, if you're in The Market, you get to get richer as a minor, unearned side-effect of the solutions our governments have come up with to fight the pandemic. Wow. That sounds amazing. How do I get to part of that world? Retail fintech, baby. Physical assets like real estate might be a bit out of reach at the moment, but stocks will do. I can even buy fractional shares of BRK/A LOL. Finally, I can trade for my own slice of heaven, watching that balance go up (and up--go stonks!!). Now I too get to dream the dream. I get to feel connected to that mythical world, The Market, rather than being stuck in the plain old Economy. Sure, I might blow up my account, but that's because it's the jungle. Bare-knuckled, big league capitalism going on right here, and at least I get to show up an put my shares on the table with everyone else. At least I'm playing the same game. Everyone has to start somewhere--at least now I get to start, even if I have to learn my lesson by zeroing my account a few times. I've basically had to deal with what felt like my life zeroing out a few times before. This is number on a screen going to 0 is nothing. Laugh or cry, right? I'll post my losses on WSB and at least get some laughs. Geez, some of the people here are making bank. I better learn from them and see if they'll let me in on their trades. Wow... this actually might work. I don't understand yet, but I trust these guys telling me to hold onto this crazy trade. I don't understand it, but all the memes say it's going to be big. ...WOW... I can pay off my credit card with this number. Do I punch out now? No? Hold?... Ok, getting nervous watching the number go down but I trust you freaks. We're still in the jungle, but at least I'm in with with my posse now. Market open tomorrow--we ride the rocket baby! And if it goes down, at least I'm going down with my crew. At least if that happens the memes will be so hilarious I'll forget to cry. Wow.. I can't believe it... we might actually pull this off. Laugh at us now, "pros"! We're in The Market now, and Market rules tell us what is going to happen. We're getting all that hedge fund money Right? Right? Maybe. First, I say maybe because nothing is ever guaranteed until it clears. Secondly, because the rules of The Market are not as perfectly enforced as we would like to assume. We are also finding out they may not be perfectly fair. The Market most experts are willing to talk about is really more like the ideal The Market is supposed to be. This is the version of the market I make my trading decisions in. However, the Real Market gets strange and unpredictable at the edges, when things are taken to extremes, or rules are pushed beyond the breaking point, or some of the mechanics deep in the guts of the Real Market get stretched. GME ticks basically all of those boxes, which is why so many people are getting nervous (aside from the crazy money they might lose). It's also important to remember that the sheer amount of money flowing through the market has distorting power unto itself. Because it's money, and people really, really, really like their money--especially when they're used to having a lot of it, and rules involving that kind of money tend to look more... flexible, shall we say. Ok, back to GME. If this situation with GME is allowed to play out to its conclusion in The Market, we'll see what happens. I think all the long-side people get the chance to be paid (what, I'm not sure--and remember, you have to actually sell your position at some point or it's all still just numbers on your screen), but no one knows for certain. But this might legitimately get so big that it spills out of The Market and back into The Economy. Geez, and here I thought the point of all of this was so that we all get to make so much money we wouldn't ever have to think and worry about that thing again. Unfortunately, while he's kind of a buzzkill, Thomas Petterfy has a point. This could be a serious problem. It might blow out The Market, which will definitely crap on The Economy, which as we all know from hard experience, will seriously crush Main Street. If it's that big a deal, we may even need Washington to be involved. Once that happens, who knows what to expect.. this kind of scenario being possible is why I've been saying I have no idea how this ends, and no one else does either. How did we end up in this ridiculous situation? From GAMESTOP?? And it's not Retail's fault the situation is what it is.. why is everyone telling US that we need to back down to save The Market?? What about the short-side hedge funds that slammed that risk into the system to begin with?? We're just playing by the rules of The Market!! Well, here are my thoughts, opinions, and some even further speculation... This may be total fantasy land stuff here, but since I keep getting asked I'll share anyway. Just keep that disclaimer in mind.
A Study in Big Finance Power Moves: If you owe the bank $10,000, it's your problem...
What happens when you owe money you have no way to pay back? It's a scary question to have to face personally. Still, on balance and on average, if you're fortunate enough to have access to credit the borrowing is a risk that is worth taking (especially if you're reasonably careful). Lenders can take a risk loaning you money, you take a risk by borrowing in order to do something now that you would otherwise have had to wait a long time or maybe would never have realistically been able to do otherwise. Sometimes it doesn't work out. Sometimes it's due to reasons totally beyond your control. In any case, if you find yourself there you have no choice but to dust yourself off, pick yourself up as best as you can, and try to move on and rebuild. A lot of people had to learn that in 2008. Man that year really sucked. Wall street learned their lessons too. Most learned what I think most of us would consider the right lessons--lessons about risk management, and the need to guard vigilantly against systemic risk, concentration of risk through excess concentration of leverage on common assets, etc. Many suspect that at least a few others may have learned an entirely different set of, shall we say, unhealthy lessons. Also, to try to be completely fair, maybe managing other peoples' money on 10x+ leverage comes with a kind of pressure that just clouds your judgement. I could actually, genuinely buy that. I know I make mistakes under pressure even when I'm trading risk capital I could totally lose with no real consequence. Whatever the motive, here's my read on what's happening: First, remember that as much fun as WSB are making of the short-side hedge fund guys right now, those guys are smart. Scary smart. Keep that in mind. Next, let's put ourselves in their shoes. If you're a high-alpha hedge fund manager slinging trades on a $20bn 10x leveraged to 200bn portfolio, get caught in a bad situation, and are down mark-to-market several hundred million.. what do you do? Do you take your losses and try again next time? Hell no. You're elite. You don't realize losses--you double down--you can still save this trade no sweat. But what if that doesn't work out so well and you're in the hole >$2bn? Obvious double down. Need you ask? I'm net up on the rest of my positions (of course), and the momentum when this thing makes its mean reversion move will be so hot you can almost taste the alpha from here. Speaking of momentum, imagine the move if your friends on TV start hyping the story harder! Genius! Ok, so that still didn't work... this is now a frigging 7 sigma departure from your modeled risk, and you're now locked into a situation that is about as close to mathematically impossible to escape as you can get in the real world, and quickly converging on infinite downside. Holy crap. The fund might be liquidated by your prime broker by tomorrow morning--and man, even the broker is freaking out. F'in Elon Musk and his twitter! You're cancelling your advance booking on his rocket ship to Mars first thing tomorrow... Ok, focus--this might legit impact your total annual return. You need a plan, and you know the smartest people on the planet, right? The masters of the universe! Awesome--they've even seen this kind of thing before and still have the playbook!! Of course! It's obvious now--you borrow a few more billion and double down again first thing in the morning. So simple. Sticky note that Mars trip cancellation so you don't forget. Ok... so that didn't work? You even cashed in some pretty heavy chits too. Ah well, that was a long shot anyway. So where were you? Oh yeah.. if shenanigans don't work, skip to page 10... ...Which says, of course, to double down again. Anyone even keeping track anymore? Oh, S3 says it's $40bn and we're going parabolic? Man, that chart gives me goosebumps. All according to plan... So what happens tomorrow? One possible outcome of PURE FANTASTIC SPECULATION... End of the week--phew. Never though it'd come. Where are you at now?... Over $9000\)!!! Wow. You did it boys, and as a bonus the memes will be so sweet. \)side note: add 8 zeros to the end... Awesome--your problems have been solved. Because... .. BOOM Now it's EVERYONE's problem. Come at me, Chamath, THIS is REAL baller shit. Now all you gotta do is make all the hysterical retirees watching their IRAs hanging in the balance blame those WSB kids. Hahaha. Boomers, amirite? hate when those kids step on their law--I mean IRAs. GG guys, keep you memes. THAT is how it's done. Ok, but seriously, I hope that's not how it ends. I guess we just take it day by day at this point. Apologies for the length. Good luck in the market! Also, apologies in advance for formatting, spelling, and grammatical errors. I was typing this thing in between doing all kinds of other things for most of the day. Edit getting a bunch of questions on if it's possible the hedge funds are finding ways to cover in spite of my assumptions. Of course. I'm a retail guy trying to read the charts and price action. I don't have any special tools like the pros may have.
The Sacred Grove and Grod's Law: How Path of Exile's fundamental itemization design conflicts with its own crafting system
Edit: Actual TL;DR - There is none. It's a complicated issue and I'm hoping you will take the time to read the post if you want to engage in the discussion. That's why the post is tagged 'discussion'. I made a lengthy comment after reading this post yesterday. What a crazy helmet! But it was the top comment chain in that thread that caught my attention, particularly this comment:
Annoyance leads to a group that is willing to put up with it getting all the rewards but hating the game because it's annoying and a second group that doesn't put up with it but hates that they're missing out on the stuff the first group is getting. Everyone loses.
My thoughts on this subject probably merit its own discussion thread, so here it is. This reminds me of Grod's Law:
Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use
Years ago on the Giant in the Playground forums (a community for the D&D 3.5 edition tabletop roleplaying game), an argument broke out when a user recommended balancing the absurd power of magic using classes by making them meticulously track their material components for each spell. For those unaware, material costs for spells that didn't have an explicit monetary cost listed were generally just flavorful; holdovers from Gary Gygax's day at the helm, basically little Easter eggs in the game. Like Detect Thoughts required you to use 2 copper pieces to cast, e.g. 'penny for your thoughts?', and Fireball required you to use bat guano (known to be high in sulfur content) and saltpeter (chemically combined they create an exothermic reaction IRL). Anyway, your wizard or whatever was expected to buy a spell component pouch for a few gold and that pouch was assumed to have all the basic material components they'd need for most spells in limitless quantity. Spells in D&D can be incredibly powerful and versatile in their use, and the most powerful builds in the game all involve casting magic. Well, this user suggested balancing those spells by making wizards have to spend time gathering their individual material components. Want to cast Fireball? Spend a few days scraping bat shit off the cave floor, etc. The problem with this rationale is that it doesn't really solve any problems. Wizards are still just as powerful, but now the player has to go out of their way, detracting from the campaign and story, so they can scrape their spell juice off the dungeon floor. Grod argued the following:
The disruptive munchkin ignores it, argues it, or forces the rest of the group to suffer through it. His power remains the same, and he gets more annoying to play with.
The inappropriate powergamer figures out how to circumvent the restriction. His power remains the same.
The reasonable player either figures out how to circumvent the restriction (rendering it moot), avoids the class (turning it into a ban) or suffers through it. His power remains the same and/or his enjoyment goes down.
The new player avoids the class or suffers through it. His enjoyment goes down.
Tie this back into PoE already!
Yes, sorry. Thanks for putting up with my rambling. I kinda feel like harvest is like this - A terrible implementation of a mechanic that GGG (i.e. Chris Wilson) hates (i.e. thinks is 'bad' for the game). It highlights a massive problem with itemization and crafting in this game. Way too much character power is tied up in gear as compared to skills and passives. And Harvest crafts are so powerful because other crafting tools in PoE are are way too random, but the power creep in items over the years has made it way too appealing (various influence mods for example). Crafting most items is a gamble, plain and simple. Gambling is just not appealing to many people, and it can get expensive very fast. It's layers upon layers of RNG for even the chance of getting a decent item, some of which can be build-enabling, and there are very few deterministic methods of getting what you want. It's far easier to just buy a powerful item like that from someone else. Of course, that can't be done for SSF players, but even in trade league it can be problematic when GGG balances the game around meta-builds (supply and demand means you might not get to enjoy playing your build because upgrades are too expensive). GGG wants the game to be like this. They want you to engage in the skinner box of gambling RNG they've designed. Harvest just doesn't jive with how they want you to build your character, but it's immensely popular for anyone who hates gambling and wants to build their character in a predictable and targeted way. Their solution was to leave it in the game but make it as cumbersome and obnoxious to engage with as possible, so it becomes a massive opportunity cost to do so. You find a grove in a map. Cue 20 to 30 minutes of reviewing your stash and gear for possible upgrades and reviewing craft options for valuable ones that might be sold on TFT, etc. It completely disrupts the flow of the game and you can barely save enough valuable crafts for one or two side builds. When you finally do get one of the few good craft options, you might not even have something to use it on! Ultimately it's far more time-efficient to sell your good crafts (using 3rd party mechanisms, of course) and just keep playing the game.
How does this affect me, SaneExile?
The system affects the game exactly how Grod proposes:
The inappropriate powergamer figures out how to circumvent the restriction. His power remains the same.
PoE isn't a collaborative tabletop game like D&D, so "inappropriate powergamer" is, well, an inappropriate name for this group. Optimizing gameplay in PoE is perfectly reasonable and encouraged. But people who trade crafts in large volume on TFT or are in massive guilds throwing around thousands of exalts are not your average optimizer, and are not affected by this cumbersome barrier to entry. They find the optimal solution and just incorporate it into their gameplay and profit off it massively.
The reasonable player either figures out how to circumvent the restriction (rendering it moot), avoids the class (turning it into a ban) or suffers through it. His power remains the same and/or his enjoyment goes down.
Reasonable player -> average PoE player. The distinction between these two groups can get fuzzy, but it's hard to argue that someone playing 40 hours per week and someone playing 10 hours per week can achieve the same levels of effectiveness. Practice makes perfect, and practice takes time. Those in large communities are, likewise, not really playing the same game as the solo players (e.g. aura-bots, trade groups, etc.). For some, efficiency is measured in chaos per hour. For a few, it can be exalts per hour. This group is very much the former.
The new player avoids the class or suffers through it. His enjoyment goes down.
Class -> game mechanic. In this case, I'm sure a lot of people just pretend the Sacred Grove doesn't exist. Harvest is a thing that other people do. And if they do choose to engage with it, its cumbersomeness and complexity means their overall enjoyment of PoE is diminished. I couldn't even begin to explain the system to someone new to the game, at least in a reasonable manner that doesn't sound like a college economics lecture.
Conclusions
So, average people either suffer through harvest's implementation because it's so damn useful, or they avoid it and suffer FOMO or other gambling-induced psychological issues because the power-players in the community are cranking out incredibly OP gear on the trading market. Lose-Lose. This isn't unique to harvest, it's just the most obvious with this crafting system in the game. Crafting in general is fucked up, when you really consider how it's designed to prey on gambling addiction. This might not be a problem in the short term (obviously you don't need the helmet posted above to make specters work), but in the long term it throws off the balance of the game through power creep. The Raise Specters gem was meganerfed this league, but it's definitely still playable, and with items like this, it's not even that much weaker than before. Essentially, the power of the skill was offloaded from the gem to PoE's itemization system, and the barrier to OPness is that much higher. The rich get richer and the average market has one less meta build. GGG really fucked up Harvest, but it's only because Harvest highlighted just how fucked up crafting in this game is. Super powerful crafts have always been something only the PoE rich engage with regularly and with any significant profit. Harvest, for its league at least, let more casual players engage with that system. And the power creep ended up being so massive that they hamstrung it every chance they got. Ultimately, GGG's implementation ends up hurting the whole game because of Grod's Law - the benefits of it are minimized while the annoyance is maximized. It's possible we can benefit from some stopgap solutions, like more horticrafting station space, tradeable crafts (like beasts), etc., but many of these come with their own host of issues. They're just bandaids on the crafting mechanic as a whole, which is a product of the itemization design. TL;DR, thanks for coming to my TEDTalk. General disclaimer that this is my personal opinion of the state of the game, one that I've put way too much time into. It's still fun in a lot of ways, but the more I play the more I see problematic design features creeping their way into the game. Edit: Well this took off. I've been trying to address arguments from you all as best I can, but there's one I noticed in particular keeps coming up and I think my main post didn't clarify my stance as well as it could've: I'm not against the idea of RNG. Randomness in itself is not a problem for this genre or most games in general. I am however very much against the argument that, 'well the entire game is randomness so more randomness is fine.' I've tried to address that in this comment, which I'll link instead of reiterating.
Not another fairy-tale ending - a word of warning for those entering the crypto scene
For myself, life over the past few years has seemingly gone from bad to worse - and before I go into the details -this isn’t a “pity-post” or a sympathy searching exercise, this is simply a warning, and hopefully a lesson to others who are entering the crypto scene. My crypto journey began back in earnest at the start of that famed 2017 “bull run” – I had a little bit in savings and had done my due diligence – this really was the future, and it could potentially set me and my family up for life. I bought in with every bit of money I had to spare. All told, it was about £6,500, and the price of Bitcoin sat at just under £9,000. This was exciting. The price continued to increase and I religiously opened and closed the Coinbase website to see the price soar by the hundreds and into the thousands. Work took a backseat and I became consumed with the markets, red and green candles being the first and last things I saw in the day. I wanted more. I became envious of those that had bought into cryptos years before. So I looked at alternate avenues to increase my Bitcoin holdings… this was going to be the making of me! Sadly it turned out to be quite the opposite. Scams, Scams everywhere… The first venture I looked into was a third party bitcoin mining platform which promised exponential growth. It sounded too good to be true (spoiler: it was). I used a credit card to buy more Bitcoin. First mistake. I maxed the card and sent around £6,000 in Bitcoin to a mining company known as Crypterra. The reviews were good, the discord was active, people were seeing payouts – it was all looking legitimate. But of course it wasn’t. Payouts dried up. The devs went silent and the site disappeared and re-appeared sporadically before going offline indefinitely. It was over and I had lost most of the £6,000 from my credit card. Robots are the future? The price of Bitcoin was still holding strong and I’d made small gains with my original investment which was still untouched. Perhaps I could increase by Bitcoin gains elsewhere and pay off the credit card I had maxed out. Again, I looked into ways to bolster my Bitcoin reservesI looked into trading platforms, cryptocurrency bots in particular. How hard could it be? As long as the price of Bitcoin went up, it should balance out any losses as I learned the ropes. There were a few that caught my eye. And following what I thought was sage “youtuber” advice – I dove into the world of trading with bots – linking up a Binance account and setting up my automated systems to work their magic and trade whilst I was asleep/working/sitting on the toilet, you name it. As you can imagine, these bots weren’t the holy grail they were promoted to be, and I was losing Bitcoin left, right and centre. I became more and more “experimental” with the strategies… doubling my stakes, tripling my stakes to recoup what I had lost. I didn’t see it as real money (despite paying with hard earned money to fund these accounts) – it was magic internet money, just ones and zeroes – so the reality of it didn’t hit home how much I was actually losing. Shock horror, I lost it all. Taking it to the bookies… I had effectively been gambling my money away, and in my increasingly agitated state I sought out other communities to try and regain my money. Sports-betting communities, gambling communities, Twitter “tipsters” and Facebook groups who had all the inside knowledge. I was down over £12,000 from my savings and the £6,500 from the credit card combined. I decided to open another two credit cards. One to fund my betting account and the other for backup. I quickly went through the first card’s funds, but I was ‘still learning’, this was ‘Ok’ – next time I would get it right. The second card (third in total) was quickly exhausted, and I was now close to £20,000 in the hole from when I started, all within just a few months. The hole grew ever darker As I write this now I am actually afraid and embarrassed to share the total losses I have made over the past few years (it’s actually much worse than I could have ever imagined). I have no-one to blame but myself; the greed, stupidity and at times, pure arrogance have lead me down this path. A path which at the moment seems irreversible for me. To see the price of Bitcoin now makes me feel physically sick – if only I had been patient. If only I hadn’t chased my losses, if only I hadn’t played with money that wasn’t mine - I wouldn’t be in this predicament. As the debt mounts ever higher and interest rates on credit cards are crippling me, it will be an incredibly long time before I have any financial stability again. It has made me mentally unwell and I’m still figuring out the next steps which I know include professional support and removing my head from the pile of sand in which I have buried it. I sincerely hope that those who read this account of my situation don’t fall into the same trap. The world is once again hyped for crypto, and with it come the pitfalls and scams and false promises of financial freedom and becoming rich. Don’t try and cheat the system, don’t chase your losses and don’t use money that isn’t yours in the first place. TLDR: To put it succinctly, the above is a very short overview of the financial hole I have found myself due to greed, arrogance and stupidity over the past few years. Hopefully a warning to others. Don’t chase losses, don’t look for the next get rich scheme and don’t invest money that isn’t yours to start with. Basically, don’t ruin your life like me. If only I had just held. EDIT: A quick edit to say thank you to everyone who has taken the time to read the above and replied in the comments. I've had some very honest and insightful responses and some incredibly useful suggestions about how I can bring myself back from this dilemma. I'll be seeking professional help both for the gambling and the debt management and hopefully get myself on the right track for the sake of my own sanity and that of my family's.
4️⃣2️⃣0️⃣ POT STOCK 4️⃣2️⃣0️⃣ 💎🤚 ROCK SOLID HOLD 💎🤚 🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀 Sundial Growers produces high quality cannabis products in their individual controlled modular grow rooms at a 470,000 sq ft state-of-the-art Health Canada licensed facility in Olds, AB, eh. With a large portfolio of brands, they have products at every price point from low to high-end, flower to topicals and a crap ton of money. In the beginning of February, they announced the completion of a $0.75 public offering for a cool $100 milly. Simultaneously, they launched another offering. BuT tHaT's GoInG tO DiLuTe tHe MaRkEt! ThE sToCk HaS A 1 BiLlIoN dOlLaR fLoAt. Doesn’t that fucking suck? No, it doesn’t, and I’ll tell you why: it’s good. These offerings allowed these guys to load up on mad cash and sky's the limit with this new found cash money 420 swag 69. They are sitting on something like $600+ milly. That is a lot of fucking money. So what are they going to spend it on? Acquisitions? Expansion? Whatever it is, I trust the fuck out of their management team. "Sundial's current balance sheet and liquidity enable management to focus on delighting consumers while providing significant optionality to participate in North American consolidation," said Sundial's CEO, Zach George. Fuck yea George, delight me. more rockets🚀🚀🚀🚀 Last week, this thing was in delisting territory, making this a tough gamble even at the low $1 ranges. Fast forward, we're like 1 day away from compliance, aka that is no longer a problem. brushshoulderoff We saw some crazy movement last night and premarket this morning, potentially shorts covering some naked calls, as we saw a lot of call action at $1.50, $2, $2.50, and $3 this week. Then, we opened and saw some major sell-off. That’s fine, because we got to see how this reacted to this once volume leveled out. Good news, we’re chilling around $3 which is where we will likely do battle today. Now, we’re also seeing people go full HAM on $5 2/19 calls for the next leg of our journey. ALL OF THIS MOVEMENT IS HAPPENING WITHOUT THE CATALYST. That's why I'm 💎🤚 AF RN. You know what else excites me about this banger? When I go to purchase this stock in Fidelity, do you know what happens? MESSAGE DW34-FUCKING-02: The price of this security has been highly volatile. Consider the potential risk of loss and closely monitor any purchase you make. Uhh, can you say BONER JAMZ 2021? $SNDL TO THE MOON BABY 🚀🌙 But don’t take my word for it. Seriously, don’t. I’m not a financial expert and this is not advice, merely my meaningless pea brained opinion. Do your own research and shit. Or don’t, I’m not your fucking dad. POS: 2000 @ $1.11 and added 13 $5 C 2/19 on today's dip Edit: Market is red and esp weed. Add when sad. I'm down here scoopin up dips and buyin value contracts.
GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 3 Hello all, Before I begin I would like to address something I have been encountering on my posts in the comments section. I keep receiving some hate concerning my opinions and I want to be crystal clear that they are just that; opinions. I also want everyone to know that is is meant to be a dialog. I am not trying to pump this stock because truthfully, this goes far beyond us retail investors at this point. What I want is a dialog between all sides to examine this truly fascinating phenomenon that is occurring. I would also like to clarify something, I am not a bagholder. I do currently hold bags because I own 336 shares at a $194.34 cost basis, however, that total amount is house money that was used from my profits on the first go around. I also understand some people are tired of hearing about this because it's the same regurgitated form of someone else's post as it keeps circulating in an attempt to retain hype and drive future buying; this is not what this post is about. As investors and individuals involved in the world of finance, this situation should absolutely intrigue us whether or not we are involved. I am here to present my logic on the situation but encourage healthy discussion and debate. This brings me to my first claim. This is not over. Now, I am not claiming that a squeeze will still occur, I am simply claiming it is not over, for better or for worse. Several things need to take place for this to be completely over, at which point I will either post my gains or my losses from the adventure. When I say "it" I am referring to this entire phenomenon, not one short squeeze. I do not think these events, "it", is over. This is largely due to retail and institutional purchasing not really changing all that much since we found the bottom and established support at a staggering $60. This support was lost today and found new support at $50. There was very interesting ATH action and I'm not sure what to make of it. Millions of bag holders (not just WSB) are still holding and in fact, averaging down, thereby purchasing more. These same bag holders are absolutely refusing to sell for such massive losses and in turn are becoming long term investors on the stock if another squeeze isn't to occur. People are picking up speculative positions in the off-chance of another squeeze. Others are determining this as a fair value for the company, not fundamentally, but based on the future prospects of Ryan Cohen and team. Finally, it is nowhere near leaving the global stage with important upcoming dates that we will discuss later. To examine why it isn't over let's look at both sides of the argument:
Bulls claim it's not over for many reasons that you can find in the hundreds of other bullish posts, so I won't bore you with those details. My argument on the bull side is more along the lines of what I listed above.
Bears claim it is over because there was a 2250% price increase over the course of two weeks, therefore this must be a short squeeze.
I think we can all agree, bear or bull, that something happened. A 2250% increase certainly isn't nothing. The question is...what? I see several possibilities and would like to discuss them in the comments.
The shorts in fact covered and this was a short squeeze.
The shorts partially covered and this was a partial short squeeze, but the price increase was mainly hype and gamma squeezes.
The shorts didn't cover anything and this was a globally hyped price increase in conjunction with several gamma squeezes.
Some combination of the above 3.
First, the data: Based on morningstar the short interest is showing 78.46%. Now, I think the website is having some issues storing cookies because it will show the outdated 226% unless you open it up in incognito. Market watch is showing 41.95% This spread is interesting for sure, my thoughts are some of these calculations are including "synthetic longs" introduced by S3. It is extremely possible to manipulate these numbers via illegal methods and even legal methods using options. Please see this SEC document to explain how this would work. I am not trying to convince anyone to fit my narrative, but these things occur far more commonly than one would expect. The reasoning is because the fines for committing the crime are far less costly than letting the event take place. Please see FINRA's website for the long, and frequent list of fines being dealt out due to manipulation. A common culprit? Lying about short volume. Let's use the absolute worst case scenario being reported of 41.95%, which mind you is still extremely high for one stock: The shorts in fact covered and this was a short squeeze What's interesting here is even if the shorts 100% covered all of their positions, they very well could have shorted on the way back down. Why wouldn't you? It would be insane to not open a short position when this hit nearly $500 especially if you lost half of your companies money; what better way to get it back? For the remainder of this thesis, I will be assuming that some of the short positions that exist are newly opened positions at a higher price unless someone has a counter-claim as to why that wouldn't be possible/probable. That would mean 226% was covered on the way up and another 41.95% was reopened on the way back down. Based on the volume and price changes throughout the past two weeks this simply doesn't pass the math check. The shorts partially covered and this was a partial short squeeze. Again, using 41.95% this is highly likely and the most reasonable case. Some, probably the worst positions, were covered on the way up. I think this is precisely what happened, we had some partial shorts covering but for the most part it was gamma squeezes, hype, and FOMO whereby the price started climbing so rapidly it became smarter for the shorts to just wait out the bubble than to actually cover all of their positions. Again, we fall into a "what-if" scenario regarding shorting on the way back down. The shorts didn't cover anything and this was a globally hyped price increase in conjunction with several gamma squeezes. This scenario does not pass the math check using the 41.95% figure. If the data is being manipulated then this becomes very interesting because if some of the worst positions are still open then that means all of these HF's losses that were reported were strictly interest and they are simply waiting this out for as long as it takes making back their losses on their newly opened short positions in t $300-$400 range. Sadly, this puts us in the guessing range yet again. We can do the math and see it's possible this scenario exists, however, we would be comparing it against losses reported by the entities that were being squeezed. There are way to many what-if's for me to me consider this a possibility, but I can't write it off completely. Some combination of the above 3. Truthfully, this isn't worth examining just yet. There would be far to many "what-if's" to address, this is something that could be address at the later dates that we will get to shortly. Now, I've heard it a lot regarding the 02/09 data. "It's two weeks old". Well, that is always the case. The FINRA short data is always two weeks old and suggesting that we can't pull any information from it at all is asinine. Where it gets quite murky, is the data includes 01/27 information. This was a day unlike any other in this saga. I will take this moment to address the following upcoming catalysts and when I truly think this will be done; one way or the other. Today's data 02/09, was very important because if it showed an extremely low percentage then we know shorts have exited and did not re-enter and this is completely done. Given the data does not reflect that, we now must turn to several events that could act as catalysts for either a further squeeze or a complete shutdown. 02/19 - In my last post, I discussed the Failure To Deliver (FTD) conundrum. I do need some help figuring out the exact expiration date. From here "The close-out requirement states that a participant of a clearing agency needs to take immediate action to close 4 out a fail to deliver position in a threshold security that has persisted for 13 consecutive settlement days by purchasing securities of like kind and quantity." The exact date is slightly irrelevant because I highly doubt all of these FTD's are going to deliver on the same exact day. This site, while it isn't an official channel seems to be doing a good job of tracking data. If you want to learn more about FTD's and the implications there please visit that site or review my last post which has links to follow for further reading. 02/18 - Keith Gill aka u/DeepFuckingValue will testify before congress and RH CEO Vladimir will be attending. This can go several ways which can lead to an SEC trading halt on GameStop or with evidence that proves foul play occurred. Who knows? It will certainly be interesting and I don't even to speculate on the market reaction to this even because it could go a ton of different ways; it will be an important date nonetheless 02/24 - The next FINRA short interest information will be made readily available to the public. This will be far more interesting and helpful information because it won't include the insane volatility of January, but it will also highlight the newest short positions. This data will help further drive where I think this is all going to end. It's possible that shorts opened new positions at $50 thinking it was going back to $12. Let's not speculate too much here either, it's just another dataset that will bring light to the direction this is headed. 03/25 - GameStop ER. This is big too for several reasons. First, this will include the console sales cycle which historically has done well for GameStop. A typical buy the hype, sell the news event. It will be interesting to see how the market reacts leading up to this ER, maybe people won't even touch GME leading up to then due to the recent volatility, but if they do, and if there is still a lot of short interest, this too could force shorts to begin covering. Another critical part of this ER is Ryan Cohen. This will be the first time this new board addresses the public with their plans for the future and for the first time since this entire adventure began, the "dying brick and mortar" narrative will finally begin to change in the public eye. That is still the common misconception regarding GameStop, that it is a dying brick and mortar retailer where nothing has changed. This hasn't been the case for around 6 months now, but this will be the first time it is publicly address. The headlines surrounding GameStop's future plans will be very interesting to read and the markets reaction will be far more interesting. I have been asked a lot what my PT is and when I expect the squeeze to happen, but let me be clear. Very seldom do squeezes "just happen". In fact, short squeezes are far more common than one would think, they just typically happen over months, if not years and the shorts cover on dips so you don't even notice it's happening. In order to force a squeeze, you need to hold a decent amount of shorts underwater. Soon one will crack and start closing their position, this leads to a series of shorts closing their positions skyrocketing the price until more and more shorts need to cover. This is rare. I hope this narrative of purchasing heavily shorted companies comes to a close soon because a lot of people are going to lose a lot of money simply buying up companies because they are heavily bet against. Catalysts and massive changes need to occur like overhauling your entire business as is the case with GameStop. Normally, shorts will close their positions one at a time, covering on dips and you don't even notice it's happening. In times where you see a price rise of seemingly no news could very well be shorts closing their positions because their research led them to realize this company is on the road to recovery. I digress. Given the most recent data and the multiple upcoming catalysts I am still very bullish on a GME short squeeze. My post from quite some time ago illustrated the importance of catalysts regarding a short squeeze, this is still very much the case. The first run was interrupted and the second run won't happen with magic, it requires a catalyst. Another post was titled For those who do not understand the inevitable GME short squeeze, was at the time "inevitable" because math. That is no longer the case. It is no longer inevitable but it is still possible. I want to be clear: This is not nearly as close to a sure thing as it once was and it depends on a lot of different factors. One of the largest is the people. Granted, a lot of what's happening now is in the hands of institutions but millions of retailers holding their positions to the grave certainly helps the institutional buyers have more faith in their play to continue a squeeze. SO WHAT DO I THINK I think shorts certainly covered some of their positions, but not all. I also firmly believe a significant amount of short positions were opened on the way back down by both HF's and individuals. Some certainly positioned high, but based on sentiment, it appears a lot of people think GME is fairly valued around $20 (which I disagree with but let's use that for the time being). That would mean shorts would have no problem opening positions at 100,70,60, even $50. 42% is still very high which means a squeeze is inevitable so long as the company continues in a positive path. However, squeezes typically aren't as abrupt as people think. They are actually quite common, in fact another position I'm heavily invested in is SPCE and they have been going through a squeeze for several weeks and will continue to squeeze so long as news continues to be positive. How would we get an abrupt short squeeze? A massive bull run. The new shorts that entered at lower levels wouldn't be too hard to catch, however, they are probably low volume, so when they buy to close, it won't be large enough volumes for massive peaks, but a bull run very well could lead to these lower tiered shorts closing, triggering a gamma squeeze. If gamma squeezes are made week over week then shorts at the higher end would have two options:
Close early and take profits
Wait it out because they are positioned so well that interest means nothing and they don't think there is any hope of us rising to those levels.
In the first case, them closing early would be a nice short squeeze to probably several hundred dollars, but it wouldn't break $1000. To break $1000 we would need a big bull run to catch the shorts, trigger gamma squeezes, and keep momentum until they are caught and underwater. This is highly unlikely unless there is another global sentiment. NOTE: ALL OF THESE ASSUMPTIONS I AM MAKING ARE BASED ON THE 42% REPORTING. IF IT IS IN FACT 78% THEN THE POSSIBILITY IS TREMENDOUSLY INCREASED FOR THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN. SO WHEN DOES IT ALL END My though is if by the end of March these catalysts were not enough to reignite the hype and squeeze, then it will essentially be over except in the case of a few circumstances:
A VW/Porche moment occurs where a large buyer picks up a large portion of the company.
Some other currently unknown catalyst appears seemingly out of thin air
The data was in fact manipulated. Regardless of what the data says, if the shorts did in fact lie about their short int to take the fine over being squeezed, then they will be squeezed regardless.
It is quite possible, that these catalysts and moments aren't enough to force a squeeze anymore especially if the shorts have repositioned really well. I will retain the mindset that this fateful January 2021 was not a short squeeze. However, that does not mean it will ever actually happen. SO WHAT IS YOUR PLAY HOOMAN? Well, I am long on GME which is why I didn't mind hopping back in even at outrageous prices. I will continue averaging down and don't plan on selling for quite some time, probably several years. The reason for this is I believe in Cohen and his team to turn this into something unexpected and I imagine an eventual ROI. Once this is all said and done and I think either the shorts truly have covered or they simply got away with it (Beginning of April), I will be posting my DD for GME as a long play regardless of the squeeze mechanics. Thank you all for joining me on this wild journey. I hope we can discuss some of these points in the comments like adults and truly try to grasp this wild situation we are all in. There are extremes on both sides from "get over it, the squeeze happened" to a cult like mentality on the other extreme. I hope through discussion we can find the moderate approach and further understand the market mechanics at play. Thanks for your time WARNING: Until the squeeze business is over for good, this is a very volatile and risky play. Joining now for the hope of a potential round 2 squeeze should only be done in a speculative manner with money you are willing to lose. This is more akin to a gamble than it is investing. I think the current market price is fair given the future prospects of the company but do your own DD, I will not be releasing any until this squeeze is put to rest. TL;DR: I am still bullish on this scenario even at 42%, if it really is 78% then I am extremely bullish. There are a plethora of upcoming catalysts that could reignite the squeeze but even if none are powerful enough, with Cohen's new direction we could expect good news for quite some time forcing shorts to exit on a more spread out timeline. Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor. I do not wish to sway your opinion in either direction. I simply seek to examine this interesting and volatile situation via crowd sourcing. What you do with your money is entirely up to you.
Going to be editing this with info as I come across it. Please DM me if you have anything to add. Many of you have reached out and I've complied a lot of evidence. I realize now that these pumps originated in Discord groups, but this is something I am still actively looking into and won't be including here. Users of wallstreetbets (and also places like Stockwits, amcstock, and Youtube chats) attempted a coordinated pump on AMC (& GME) today, Feb. 3rd. These comments are still avaible. The fact they are still up and that I found them very easily means that the mods are not able to moderate their community well enough to stop coordinated pumps. There is not evidence that shows the mods were in on coordinated pump, but the fact that they were unable to stop it taking place shows that the subreddit has grown far too big to be managed by a team of 35 mods. There is evidence that some mods owned both AMC and GME, and it is possible they held these shares while the coordinated pump was happening in threads they were supposed to be moderating (proof of GME ownership at the bottom). Coldcutcombo69 was mod on WSB during the AMC coordinated pump. Here is them claiming that they were a mod on WSB. This image of mods before and after the day of the pump confirms they were a mod during the AMC pump-and-dump. Coldcutcombo69 posted a picture of them having a sell order on their AMC stock that never hit, making it possible they owned AMC shares during the coordinated pump. Coldcutcombo69 also posted some kind of DD thread about AMC two days ago, promoting the stock here. The content of this post has been removed. This post promoting AMC was made while Coldcutcombo69 was a moderator. Coldbutcombo69 was a moderator during the AMC coordinated pump. They are no longer a moderator as of the time of this post, only a few hours later. They confirmed this here. A WSB mod was posting comments and threads promoting AMC while possibly still holding AMC shares, and a pump-and-dump occurred in the daily threads that they (along with others) were supposed to be moderating. turdled is currently a WSB mod. They said, "We don't comment or promote trades. That's up to the subscribers and their upvotes/downvotes to decide." View it here. turdled's claim was false. Coldcutcombo69 had been a moderator for 25 days. During that time they posted comments and threads promoting AMC, while providing evidence that they actually owned AMC shares. A moderator (who may command more respect in a community of 8.5 million people) promoting a stock is wrong, and the mods clearly believe that is the case since they said they don't do it. But at least one of them did. It could be that Coldcutcombo69 was removed because they were promoting AMC, but they had been doing this for days and were only removed a few hours ago. ZJZ (a well known moderator) posted this today and was removed as a mod. The head mods also removed more mods, cutting the number of mods from from 62 mods to 37. Coldbutcombo69 was cut from the mod team at this time. It seems very suspicious to me that the head mods removed a bunch of mods from their positions after the events of today, especially because one of those ex-mods had been promoting AMC so much while being a mod. Note: there is some kind of extended purge happening within the mod team right now. The mod team started at 62, then was cut with ZJZ to 37, then 36, now it's down to 35. EDIT: Two new mods have been added, bringing the count back up to 37. One of them tried posting something in a WSB thread, but their comment was deleted by the auto-mod because they have never posted in WSB before. Here is some proof of what's going on there. ZJZ has exposed that there are bad actors on the mod team, using their power on the sub to try and make cash off movie deals and crypto scams. This at least adds weight to the points im raising in this thread. EDIT: There was a thread on WSB by a moderator trying to explain what happened with the mod team. You can see that thread here. There is a lot of push back in the thread. The mod's claim is that the profit from the movie deal would have been given to charity. This may not be true, as Discord logs show another mod asking what their profit will be from the movie deal, asking "What's our cut.". Infighting with the mods seems to be a continued issue with a mod changing the subreddit description from the classic "like 4chan found a bloomberg terminal" to this. This change was instantly reverted. MOD UPDATE 2/4: It seems that the moderator team has changed again. 23 mods now remain. OPINION_IS_UNPOPULAR is now listed as the most senior mod, and they have allowed this thread to stay up. The mod reports that the Reddit admins have stepped in. Statement from Reddit admins, according to OPINION_IS_UNPOPULAR: "After reviewing this situation based on input from both current and past moderators, we have decided to remove several moderators at the top of the list that were creating instability in the community." Source. NEW INFO: I've also been sent a good amount of evidence from multiple people indicating these types or coordinating buying and selling schemes were happening on places like Youtube, Twitch, and Discord. All of these groups seem to be composed of WSB/WSB spinoffs users. These users would spam hash tags, spam and raid Twitch channels, and coordinate these social media pushes with timed buying and selling of GME/AMC/BB/NOK. It is possible (and looks likely to me) that the timed pumps you see below were organized by a Discord group. I have collected a lot of evidence on this front, but this evidence of the real organizers of the pump is something I might have to pass along to someone who is more experienced at dealing with this stuff. The AMC Pump Here is evidence of the coordinated pump by users on WSB. The coordinated pump effort occurred in the daily thread, but also spilled out into some posts. Note: I have yet to see any comments/posts that moderators made showing them participating in the coordinated pump effort. It is not known if they knew about these comments or not. "AMC 1 pm LET FUCKING GO" - WildPhoenix55 58 upvotes. Posted around 12:00 PM CST. Not removed as of 8:40 PM CST. "AMC 2 DA MOON @ 1PM EST" - OutlandishnessOk4137 Posted around 12:00 PM CST. Not removed as of 8:40 PM CST. "watching that 1pm movie" At 1 PM, we’re going to the Moon! Get ready! 🚀 🚀 🚀Discussion *Note that this thread was 6 days ago. Still strange that it was not taken down Comments in this thread talking about 1 PM pump EVIDENCE THE 1 PM PUMP WORKED: 1 PM seems to be the main time that was set. You can actually see the coordinated pump spike the price of AMC up to $9.70 right after 1 PM. You can also see the massive amount of volume increase during that time as well. Volume between 1:00-1:05 shot up to 8,725,700. This was the highest volume for a 5 min period all day. Check it out here. It was also reported to me that some users received DM's about the pump. If you are reading this and received any kind of DM like this, please message me. After seeing the first pump work successfully, they tried it again 1 hour later. Here are a swarm of comments made coordinating the pump for 2 PM. "2 shares at 2 pm AMC!!" EDIT: This account has been deleted. You can view a picture of this post here. "Everyone buy 2 shares of AMC and 2pm let’s rush these heggies 💎💎💎💎🚀🚀🚀""AMC at 2 !!!!""2 AMC shares @2pm rush""AMC at 2. Let’s give them some payback🚀""do i buy now or at 2""Buy AMC at 2pm Eastern, 11am Pacific. 2pm is when it’s happening." The 2PM coordinated pump was not as successful. It could be that some users were confused with the time differences. Either way, there was still a marked increase of volume during the 5 min period of 2:00-2:05 which also resulted in the stock re-testing its daily high. Check it out here. You can actually watch a Youtuber Trey's Trades see the pump at 2 PM in action. He is reading comments on a WSB spin-off subreddit amcstock. You can see people spamming chat for people to buy at 2 PM. Here is the video. The fact that this guy's stream chat is filled with a pump-and-dump scheme and he did nothing about it is pretty telling. I've backed up the comments and info here. If you find anything else suspicious about this, please DM me. I want to make it clear that there isn't evidence that the mods participated in the pump. But the pump-and-dump (which is illegal) happened under the watch of the mod team. They may have tried to stop it, but 8.5 million people is a lot. If they didn't think they could keep the place running without illegal things happening in the comment sections, they should have set the sub to private and put in proper pre-cautions first. EDIT: This pump also occurred for GME and users in the GME thread were able to comment about it. None of these comments are removed and they exist in very large numbers. They are mostly heavily downvoted, but the fact they are able to stay up means the mods failed at their job. Comment 1Comment 2Comment 3Comment 4Comment 5Comment 6Comment 7Comment 8Comment 9Comment 10Comment 11 The volume spikes do show an uptick in volume around 1PM and around 2PM, but they are not as strong as the AMC boost in volume. The volume during these times were high, but they weren't the highest points in the day for GME. EDIT: I want to make it clear to people who are saying "those are just bot accounts." Bots are still controlled by humans. If bot spam cannot be caught and deleted, that means 8.5 million people are exposed to pump-and-dump schemes run by bots. It does not reflect any better on the mods if the comments are made by humans or made by bots controlled by humans. It is now a day later, and still none of the comments have been removed by a moderator or moderator bot. UPDATE: Wall Street Bets has completely removed any post talking about ZJZ and his post about the head mods trying to engage in crypto scams and strange movie deals. (EDIT: This has changed, see above.) The rising sections is now completely filled low-effort, small text posts that are only pushing $GME. Here are those threads. Low-effort threads like these are explicitly against WSB rules. Why are mods letting rule-breaking, ticker spamming posts stay up? Example 1Example 2Example 3Example 4Example 5Example 6 WSB mods are banning users for mentioning ZJZ and his post. (EDIT: This has changed, see above.) Mods Removing Negative GME Posts I started digging into this when I posted to Wall Street Bets with a post containing some information about GME. The post pushed back against some of the "GME revolutiuon" talking points. It was a pretty tame post, meet all the guidelines for posting, and contained enough content to warrant staying up. The post was removed by the mods, but you can still see it up here. The content of the post was a combo of these two comments I made. This comment here and this comment here. Somebody in the comments recommended I make the contents of the comment into a separate post- which I did until it was removed. The moderators removed this post, the removal states: "Moderators remove posts from feeds for a variety of reasons, including keeping communities safe, civil, and true to their purpose." I sent a DM to the mods asking why exactly the post was removed. I have not been given a reply. Does the content of the post I made (pt.1 / pt.2) break any of their rules? Why would the mods remove a post containing that info? Even worse, the exact contents of the post I made exist in comment form and are still up. If the info somehow breaks their rules, why leave it up in the comment section? Why haven't they removed the comments that contain the EXACT wording I used in my post? It seems very strange to me that a post I made that contained some research to counter act the "GME Revolution" narrative would be singled out removal for "keeping communities safe, civil, and true to their purpose." The front-page of Wall Street Bets is FILLED will positive memes and DD that supports GME. There is not a single negative post about GME on the entire front page that I can find. Why not leave up some negative DD and let the community downvote/upvote it? The mods will let the comment section of threads get filled up with misinformation (GME SI being 226% is a common one that is easily debunked, yet is posted every 5 min in daily threads). People are gambling their life savings on outdated information yet when I make a post to push back against some of the common GME arguments, it gets removed. Mods removing negative GME posts is unethical because WSB mods own GME shares. jamsi is a mod on WSB. They left this comment: "I just received this e-mail from Robinhood. I am no longer using Robinhood for any of my purchases. Only keeping my $GME - not selling." Here is the comment. Swedish_Chef_Bork_x3 is a mod on WSB. They left this comment: "Another $2k locked and loaded to buy in tomorrow. Feels like fucking Helm’s Deep in here. I have tomorrow off work, gonna get drunk and hope I don’t sleep through my alarm.". Here is the comment. rawbdor is listed as a mod under the Moderators section of Wall Street Bets. rawbdor posted a comment saying: "The price is going to plummet hard no matter what we do. The real question is, will they be able to steal our shares in the process. They can drop the price all they want on low volume. But they'll never be able to buy it back unless you sell it to them." A link to that comment is here. This comment makes it pretty obvious that rawbdor owns some shares in GME, right? Saying things like our shares implies they own some. ITradeBaconFutures is also listed as a mod. They made it clear that "Mods did not trade GME". You can find that comment here. turdled is listed as a mod. They said, "We don't comment or promote trades. That's up to the subscribers and their upvotes/downvotes to decide." View it here. One mod claims that mods don't trade GME, when its obvious from the three examples above that they did. Another says they don't comment or promote trades, which is also a lie. Other mods have been doing that. They also "promote" trades when they remove content that argues the other side of GME. If the only content they allow on the front-page is GME Positive content, they are promoting that content. WSB has a mod team of 35 accounts moderating 8.5 million people. CNBC gets about 200k viewers at peak hours, while WSB has almost a million viewing it at a time when the market is open. The mods could simply send me a DM and explain why my post was removed. They haven't. Market manipulation is bad. It's bad when investment firms do it and its bad when retail investors do it. The mods could DM me right now and say "Hey, here is the reason the post was removed." They haven't. If they do send me a DM, I will post an update here. TL;DR Now-former WSB mod ZJZ, in a removed & locked post, accused dormant top mods of coming back to siphon media coverage, potential movie rights, and springboard a cryptocurrency, while suppressing other mods Coldcutcombo69, a moderator on WSB, was posting comments and threads promoting AMC. A coordinated AMC pump happened in the daily threads and comments that this moderator (and others) were tasked with moderating. This mod was removed as a moderator after this thread was posted. Coldcutcombo69 held AMC stock before the pump, but it is unclear if they held or sold that stock around or after the time of the coordinated pump. Today, several users, but no mods, in a discussion thread attempted to push buys of AMC at 1 & 2 PM EST. Those times would later coincide with high volumes of stock trades for the day. Similar coordination was attempted by users (no mods) for GME. WSB's front page is filled with only positive coverage of GME (here's a snapshot), while they removed my post containing negative GME DD with no legitimate reason given. Mods are holding GME contradicting another high level mod's comment that "mods did not trade $GME". Mods made a false statement that they don't promote stocks, as one of them clearly did. You can also see the other mods comments about GME as also promoting stock. Tervia's comment here has good info on Reddit moderation.
Copy/Paste (2. ACTION below) INTO YOUTUBERS comment sections and upvote Dragonball Youtuber List (their social media link are on the top right on their channel pages):
#WEWANTCHANGE DBL COMMUNITY ->1 Go to dbl legends reddit or raiyuden(youtuber) and share your feedback) ->2 Adjust your google playstore rating to 4,3,2 or 1 star (based on your opinion) ->3 Write Reviews (your opinion) :
->4 MOST IMPORTANT: Keep the Rating until changes are IMPLEMENTED!!!! EMPTY PROMISES ARE WORTH SHIT. ->5 Tell everyone you know to do the same, even if they are happy with the game right now. The devs can't do shit until the management/investor guys (that 100% don't play the game) receive our feedback where it hurts.
Make sure you mobilize your community with a positive message. Tell them what you like to see and also make sure to lead by example. Even if you just show your community that you rate the game down to 3 stars, your community will follow. Talk about the movement, talk about the suggestions made here.LEAD BY EXAMPLE
COLLECT FEEDBACK PRINT IT OUT AND DELIVER IT in waves directly to dimps headquarter in OSAKA, japan. Some gache youtubers even rented a car with a digital billboard and parked in front of the headquarter. Media even reported about it and that forced the management to step in front of the community to promise changes.
The YOUTUBER that puts in the most effort to deliver a positive change, most likely will beswarmed with new subscribers and will be hailed as saint. So put your money were yourmouth is and get creative.
Use your connections and tell the devs, to forward our message to the management.
Only money speaks. Lower reviews result in lower player spending and reduced new player downloads. THESE ARE THE ONLY METRICS THE MANAGEMENT/INVESTORS CARE ABOUT. So we have to talk to them in the only language they understand. FEEDBACK WILL ONLY BE USEFUL, IF THE THREAT OF LOWER MONTHLY REVENUE is accompanied with it. Use that fact to your advantage.
Lastly, you guys should form some kind of alliance. So whenever the greed gets out of hand you can collectively intervene. YOU GUYS HAVE THE BIGGEST LEVERAGE TO MAKE THE GAME BETTER.
The customer is king for every business. We need to remind them of that.
The Good: For me, it's the the update cycles with new characters and the feeling of looking forward to always know, that there is always a character that is missing. Gameplay is alright. The Bad: Pay $100+ for full Zenkai7 (one unit balance patch), 14 star units, LF Zenkai with horrible rates, PVP is super fun /s - Compared to any other dragonball game the balance is shit. You have a huge roster an only a small portion is really playable. And only if you invest a lot of money to make them 6+ stars or zenkai (if they have one) - Gamemodes (events) outside of pvp are not fun, just grindy. - pvp is a shitfest, because balance is almost non existing and instead of having a huge character roster which to choose from (like any other dragonball game) old characters are just not usable (everything master pack 1,2,3,(4) that is not zenkai'd
Dragonball games had so many great game modes in the past (There is so much inspiration they can draw from dokkan, budokai 1-3, tenkaich1-3, raging blast 1-2, xenoverse 1-2, dragonball heroes, other gachas or even mmos) Seriously look at the game modes of old dragonball games.
2. REBALANCE
Remember the past - Every old character should have a farmable way to zenkai them. - Zenkai power lvl should always be about 25 to 30% below the newest 10 to 15 units, so they always are usable (like any other db game, for diversity) - A new farmable zenkai lvl should be introduced every few months, for the oldest characters. (z8-99) so every character stays somewhat relevant. These 3 points alone make legends a vastly different games, since you suddenly can work towards and use every character, like a real pvp game (fighter z) - Lastly an inspiration from seven deadly sins grand cross -> let us turn heroes>extremes> sparkings -> look at how they do it and why ( makes even bad characters somewhat usable)
3. INTRODUCE MORE SKILL/SKILL BASED Characters
Mor Skill mor fun - More Character mechanics to play around (UI Goku, cover change, cover rescue, gogeta red stance, blast armor etc.)- Character specific art cards. (There is way more you can experiment with, other than blast and strike, for example combine 2 blast for a heavy blast, or 2 strikes for a heavy combo -> strategic element)
SNDL and a Warning to all Penny Stocks Futures, post GME hype
*This is NOT Financial advice. This is strictly an opinion based post* TLDR, post-GME, WSB became a pack of brainless wolves who hunt down penny stocks and spam the yahoo conversations with the same tired "LeT's tAkE tHiS sToCk tO 100!!11!!" The group retardation is exponential when you also hear shit like "I'm down 100k but w/e we're still going to the moon". Not only retarded, but gluttons for punishment. It's as if losing money somehow temporarily "boosts" your group think morale before you reality sets in and you realize there's no way back out. Do you even know how a company is valuated? You can artificially pump all you want, it doesn't actually MAKE the company worth what you've inflated it to. I can't believe I have to explain this, but for serious investors in this who have done their DD, would project to sell at a set point (if they're risk averse). Anything beyond that point is pure volatility. a stock like SNDL would NEVER organically hit $100 with the current state of their business. Even with you retards pumping it up artificially, it would never hit $100 anyway because any reasonable person would start dumping once they see the kind of manipulation is at play. Case and point, the events of SNDL this fucking morning. Do you still think it'll go to $100? I used to take the word "retard" being thrown around here in jest; but now I'm pretty convinced that the folks ( as mentioned in my previous example above) are un-ironically retarded. Is this going to be the new thing now? Every Penny stock going to be pumped and dumped? You realize by doing this, you're no fucking better than the hedge funds you purportedly hate. You're acting as a hive mind to inflate then dump. This is why I think post GME, WSB has and will continue to decline unless something is done about this. So, for those actually looking to invest wisely here, if you ever see a penny stock being posted with no DD or futures to back it up, do yourself a favour and avoid the risk. Yes, you can probably get real lucky and ride the short term wave then dump, but if you're wanting to be a SERIOUS investor, just ignore the bullshit posted here. Making money is fun until you lose it all. On a more sober note, SNDL's futures are somewhat hopeful (my personal opinion) based on some POTENTIAL acquisitions, so I will be sticking around for a little bit. Am I taking a risk? Yes. This is still a speculative stock, and fortunately I don't gamble away a mortgage for something like this.
Some points to newcomers after reading some frightening comments over in dogecoin: ·If you don't hold the keys to the crypto, you don't own the crypto. If you can't even withdraw the crypto, you definitely don't own the crypto. RH doesn't sell crypto, period. They sell supposed unwithdrawable custodian rights to crypto, and we are hopefully now all aware that RH is full of crap. ·Setting price targets like that of Bitcoin (30k or whatever) is completely nonsensical. Bitcoin has 18M coins out of 21M total possible mined coins. Dogecoin has 128B coins right now, thats 7100x as many. DOGE also doesnt haven't a hard cap due to regularly halving rewards, so its not deflationary in the way BTC is. It would need a market cap of $4Quadrillion to hit Bitcoin levels. In other words, bigger than all equity markets combined afaik. Dollar cost average (DCA) sells on the way up unless you want to drop off the cliff of euphoria into a 50-90% loss like Jan 2018 for a lot of people here. Its already x8 in a week. Bull runs rarely take coins more than x20 or so in a single major rally, and rallies are normally spaced a couple of years or so apart. ·Don't chase rallies. Buying significant positions after a 800% rally is a good way to be left holding bags. You should be DCAing buys, not throwing all of your savings at it at once. Its also pretty stupid to be all-in on a 9B mcap coin. That's high risk gambling if you're dropping most of your assets into it. It will legitimately most likely throw you into a year or two long depression if you lose half of your savings on Fing Dogecoin. ·Crypto should not be a significant part of your investments. If you're throwing most of your assets in this, and especially at one coin at the end of a major rally, you're not only placing yourself at an insane amount of risk, but you put steady growth of the asset at risk when you inevitably panic sell once the momentum runs out or a big seller enters the market. Everyone in crypto has done this to some degree. Its easy to say diamond hands all you want, and convince a thousand other sardines to buy in, and then have a whale decide they want to sell $200M worth over the next month who doesnt give a shit how it effects you. People have their own motives, and most whales probably aren't on Reddit. The people posting six figure holdings aren't remotely close to whale territory. There's 15 addresses with more than 1 Billion DOGE, and more than 100 with over 100 Million DOGE. Those people could potentially wipe out a rally solo. ·Diversify your bonds. Have other investment vehicles, AND other coins. My favorite analogy is that of a castle. You want to build your castle with stable assets, this is your emergency cash fund, index/mutual funds, maybe some large cap stocks, real estate, bonds. That should comprise at least 50%, ideally 80-90%, of your assets. Speculative investments are the raiding party that you send out to loot shit once the castle is built. That's riskier stocks, options, cryptocurrency, etc. Yes, its possible to get lucky if you're solely doing speculative gambling, but its fucking reckless and stupid, and for every DeepFuckingValue, theres 20 people posting loss porn about how they took out a loan for a crypto/options play and got destroyed. It's rolling around with a small army with no defensive position. Really easy to get annihilated by shifting tides in the market, particularly when its all in ONE position. ·Time in the market > timing the market. Quit trying to get rich in 3 weeks, or you'll end up constantly desperate for get rich quick schemes because you never bothered to build a stable base. Having a large emergency fund, and a significant amount of assets because you played it safe is a peace of mind that you cannot know until you have it. Don't throw away the possibility of that in a few years because you wanted to YOLO into Doge and be rich next month. ·The diamond hand thing is really...unconvincing, in case you're wondering. If you're trying that hard to convince yourself and others that you can hang on, you won't. Because anyone who's trying to convince themselves of it is clearly not used to having investments go +100-2000%, especially at the speed that crypto does it, so you won't have any instinct for when to take profits. Greed will set in, and you'll convince yourself that it can survive any correction, and you'll still be waiting for the quick recovery once it drops 60-80% and sits there for 2 years. People who do well in this market have limited exposure, and thus can basically forget about their coins for months or years, because they have other investments and secure finances whether crypto does anything or goes to 0. Euphoria and blind optimism doesn't keep someone holding until something goes x100+. Indifference, apathy, and patience are the more frequent catalysts, because you arent checking Blockfolio every 20 minutes and goading yourself into a panic sell when it corrects hard or crashes. Living in an emotional state thats constantly tied to whether the market is red or green blows. Most of us in crypto experienced at least a little of that in our first year or so. In a away, its exciting because the risk doesn't let you focus on anything else, but its a horrific way to live. The mania eventually gives way into broke disillusionment if you don't have at least a partial exit strategy. Good luck and be safe. I'm sure this sub would really prefer not having to sticky the suicide hotline number again Edit: please take note of ajaxhacker who has posted numerous comments to this thread spamming amc, nok, gme. This is shilling 101. "We the people have spoken"...lmao. Okay buddy. If the people had actually spoken it would involve financial regulation, not trying to make a quick buck. You think we haven't seen this crap before? People were doing this nonstop in 2017 with crypto. Your know what happened? Whales gobbled up everyone, a few shrimp got minted into sharks, but mostly...the rich got richer. Institutions will happily take profits off these before all retail investors have the opportunity to. Who, once again, don't give a shit about "holding the line with their diamond hands" and you losing money, because they've been holding since fall of last year and are already +10s of millions or whatever. Don't be naive and don't get stuck holding bags. This type of sentiment is your worst enemy in trading and is one of the earliest and most painful lessons in speculative markets. These are the whales Im talking about: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-27/reddit-day-trader-army-fattens-fortunes-of-world-s-super-rich
A Look at the FDA Approval Process and How it Affects Your Investments
I’ve been wanting to do a post like this for a long time now. Now that healthcare has basically been the hottest thing for the last year (and somehow still getting even hotter), I thought it would be a good time. Many people try to buy into pharmaceutical companies around FDA approval targets without truly understanding what they’re getting into. Full disclosure, I am a doctor, but I will try to write this in layman’s terms as much as possible. If I get anything wrong, I’ll be sure to edit the post. To the best of my knowledge, everything I am about to say is researched (and therefore correct). I’m going to go through the entire FDA approval process as a timeline, and then at the end, talk about other things to consider when investing in pharmaceuticals (i.e., more nuanced stuff that requires/applies healthcare understanding). One caveat here is people use “phases” in multiple ways. The way I will use it is the way I see most often being used in press releases and DD on pennystocks. Preclinical: to begin, you must submit a proposal that basically states why you think a biologic compound will work. Without getting too technical, the preclinical is basically where you demonstrate a proof of concept. Here is a very generic example: Let’s say that HIV binds to GME receptor on cells. I have been doing petri dish experiments on a compound I created that prevents anything from binding to GME (this is in vitro if you ever see that term tossed around). I submit this evidence to the FDA and say that I think my compound will work in theory. TONS of things work in vitro and never progress beyond that. At this point, the FDA says, “okay we think your compound might work too, you can start human trials.”
Investor takeaway: the results of this phase mean absolutely nothing. If a drug failed in this phase, that would truly mean the company is incompetent in both their ability to assess the science, and in their ability to provide meaningful news to generate investor buzz.
Phase 1: Anything that passes preclinical is ready for human trials. We are talking very small trials, like less than 100 people. For smaller companies, this is their chance to get some hype about their pharmaceutical. For anyone who understands the process, this is truly meaningless. Again, working in vitro does not (and likely will not) translate to working in humans. This phase typically lasts several months and is primarily designed to ensure that the drug is safe. Here is a real life example, one that has already garnered a lot of attention: Atossa Therapeutics (ATOS) and their new breast cancer drug. Here is where medical knowledge (or solid research) can really help you. Their new breast cancer drug is called endoxifen. There are already multiple analogues (drugs that work in exactly the same way with minor differences in their chemical structures) on the market. Given the number of safe analogues on the market, it is likely (but not certain) this drug will be safe for human use. It is important to note here that phase 1 trials may be done on healthy participants without any disease, solely to test for safety. Accordingly, passage through phase 1 still may not demonstrate proof of concept on humans who have a particular disease. Let’s say that ATOS had announced its intention to start testing breast cancer treatment and initiate phase 1 trials. Like I said, the likelihood of success is pretty high given the success of previous analogues. On the other hand the downside is huge. Companies can essentially go bankrupt at this stage if their “sure thing” drug or medical device fails. Always be sure to look at risk vs reward. A drug that enters phase 1 only has around a 14% likelihood of making it all the way to FDA approval. Certain categories of drugs like those that treat cancer have even lower success rates (3.4%). While FDA drug approval does appear to be increasing more than 80% of drugs that enter this stage will never see market.
Investor takeaway: the road from here is super long and passing this phase really can’t tell you anything about its success in further stages. Many drugs are analogues and breeze through this phase, it is important not to get too hyped on them for that reason.
Phase 2: Unlike phase 1 that focuses on drug safety, phase 2 tests the efficacy of the drug you are studying. This phase will typically have less than 1,000 participants, but they will all have the disease of interest. In this phase, we are looking to ensure that the drug works (provides statistically significant improvement) and is relatively safe as far as side effects. To limit research bias, sometimes we will divide the participants and give some the drug and keep some as the control group (they may get a placebo or no drug at all). This is a pretty straightforward stage and lasts anywhere from months to years. It really depends on the drug being studied. I would never really expect a mainstream drug to get through this stage in under 6 months. The only conditions in which that would be logically feasible are either:
COVID (solely because of the politicization of the process) or
drugs treating conditions with extremely high mortality (because people won’t survive more than 6 months).
Lots of companies like to start releasing press releases close to FDA review of phase 2 results. Always be wary of those results. If my breast cancer drug was successful in 600 people and failed in 300, then while the numbers look good, the data may not be there. There is a lot that goes into statistical analysis and it isn’t quite as simple as more people did well than did poorly. It’s also important to realize that side effect profile is really important. Let’s say the aforementioned breast cancer agent ends up prolonging life in 80% of the study participants that received the drug. However, there’s also this nasty little side effect of developing a pulmonary embolism in 15-20% of people. That’s not insignificant and it is up to the FDA to decide whether or not the risk outweighs the benefit. Sometimes the FDA will order companies to redo this phase if the data are inconclusive. With cancer agents, this is common because the drugs are so toxic to so many parts of the body, so it really is about risk/benefit analysis. The important thing to look at in this phase when comparing the results of the treatment group to the control group is what is called the p-value. For those of you who took stats, you should know what this is. For those that didn’t, just know that in healthcare, results with a p-value >0.05 are considered insignificant. It’s also important to note that clinical and statistical significance are also key things to remember. Sometimes the benefit of the drug is so minimal that the side effect profile outweighs the benefits and the FDA will prevent the drug from moving forward. It’s also important to remember that if this is a drug entering a market where there are competitors, the FDA will look and see if this drug provides enough benefit over existing drugs before making a decision. One more nuance that pharmaceutical companies love to do is change the primary target. In the statistics world, that’s a pretty big no-no. If my initial proposal was that the breast cancer agent would prolong the life of my patients, and then suddenly I start talking about how it actually increases their pain-free time, this is a huge red flag. You can deduce that they likely didn’t meet their primary target and pivoted to something else they could meet. In any study you can find specific characteristic that makes you look good.
Investor takeaway: this is the first phase that companies can really release “meaningful” information. Because of this, many companies try to raise funds at this time to capitalize on the hype, be wary of the words used in their press releases and marketing.
Phase 3: Phase 3 is basically a repeat of phase 2, but bigger. It’s used to determine real efficacy of a drug. In raw numbers, we are looking at about 300-3,000 participants and up to 4 years of data. Phase 3 looks at the exact same things as phase 2: efficacy and side effects observed among a treated group (and sometimes compared to a control group). Statistical significance, that is, the thing that tells you whether the drug worked, is based heavily upon power. If you want to increase power, you can increase the sample size. In phase 3, the FDA is giving the drug a chance to sink or swim. They are once again looking to make sure you don’t discover any new, obscure side effects and to ensure that the phase 2 results were not a statistical anomaly/the drug really does work. Beyond sample size, the biggest difference between phases 2 and 3 is that we are observing a longer period of time for adverse events. Note the maximum time differences: up to 2 years for phase 2, and up to 4 years for phase 3. There are side effects that don’t manifest within the first 2 years. A very simple example is, actually cancer agents that cause cardiac fibrosis or pulmonary fibrosis after years of use. These are things that may have been masked in the phase 2 study because the duration. The other thing is that we may discover rarer, more deadly side effects in this phase. Let’s say in phase 2, we found that 2 of our 1,000 participants developed brain cancer. The phase 2 data may show that this was statistically insignificant and cannot be attributed to the drug (remember, sample size is very important). Maybe the phase 3 study will suddenly show that another 8 people developed brain cancer and it was due to the drug.
Investor takeaway: many drugs fail here, and not because they don’t work. They fail because they aren’t significantly better than what is available or the benefit is not enough to outweigh the risks. FDA approval isn’t simply contingent upon a drug working, there are many, many factors that come into play.
Phase 4: this is the big phase, thousands of participants, possibly multiple hospitals around the country/world. This phase further increases the power of the data and shows that the drug really, really does work and is actually safe. Getting to phase 4 is actually a pretty big deal. At this point, the company will apply for FDA approval including all of the information they have gathered at this point. In this stage, we are considering not only efficacy and safety, but also simplicity of use, and drug abuse potential. Drug abuse potential is a pretty hot topic right now because, well, opioid epidemic. Many opioids in the last few years have not received FDA approval solely because they are too easily abused. This entire application process takes 6-10 months for the FDA to review all the evidence and decide what happens. It is not uncommon for the FDA to request more data before approving a drug or further review. Many times they will request the company conduct a new study of x to determine y. This is normal but can seriously impede the approval timeline of a drug. This is where you have to remember opportunity cost. After approval it goes to market, yay!
Investor takeaway: you may think once the drug receives FDA approval that you are out of the woods in terms of your investment. You would be wrong.
Making it to market: When a drug finally hits market, there are two major things for investors to consider. Let’s start with the scary one, removal from the market. Remember how many times I’ve mentioned power, and sample size above? That becomes super relevant here. Depending on the drug, when it finally reaches market we may have many-fold more “participants” with which we can study the side effects of the drug. Sometimes drugs are pulled from the market because certain side effects emerge that flew under the radar during clinical trial phases. Sometimes the FDA sticks a black box warning on the drug (which really makes doctors stop prescribing it unless they have to). In either care, share prices tend to drop. They will plummet, though, if the FDA removes it from market. Market earnings: The last “opportunity” for investors in the approval process is the sales data after the first quarter of marketing. This is where the company shows their revenue from the sale of the drug. If you have medical knowledge, you can really thrive here. If you don’t, you are likely to get screwed because you probably won’t understand the nuances in what drives physicians to prescribe drugs and avoid others. Just because a drug works super well doesn’t mean it will ever be used. Examples of that are ACRX’s new sufentanil agents. Those will likely see poor sales data because from a clinical perspective, even though they are approved, and work, they will almost never be used. You would not know that without understanding the specifics of post-operative pain management. And finally, a disclaimer. Anything I said here, I can be totally wrong. Sufentanil could become the most popular agent on the market for reasons I don’t understand or couldn’t fathom. Maybe ACRX will have an insanely good marketing team. I am simply talking about making the best decision based on the available knowledge. Stock prices are fickle beasts and they don’t always respond the way we expect. A message to those who tend to hold on to their bags to gamble on FDA approval:
Yes, this really is gambling. Look at the statistics of how often drugs make it past each stage. You lost 40% on ATOS, you know what would be worse? Somehow their drug fails and now you have lost 80%. You see a drug running before FDA decision deadline, don’t buy it. No one knows how the FDA is going to respond and you are just as likely to lose your money than you are to make it. Honestly, you are more likely to lose money because there are three outcomes, and two cause you to lose money, one of which will potentially bankrupt your position. The FDA could either approve the drug (yay!), outright reject the drug (oof), or ask for more information. That last one is kind of misleading because it may not mean the drug has failed, but it definitely will destroy the hype built up and tank the share price. The extra information requested could take forever to get and you would, once again, have to consider opportunity cost.
If there is anything else you think I should have discussed, just let me know and I will try to add it. If this was helpful, please let me know. If so, I can start posting regular medical-based DD on the trending healthcare tickers from this sub!
This is a nice alternative for those players not located in a state with its own regulated form of domestic online gambling. States With Pending Online Gambling Legislation. Colorado; Connecticut; Illinois; Kentucky; Massachusetts; Michigan; Montana; New York; South Carolina; West Virginia; US States That Offer Domestic Sportsbooks. Arkansas; Delaware; Illinois; Indiana; Iowa Georgia's gaming law is the epitome of the Deep South's attitude towards most vice – they don't like it, they don't want you to like it, and they don't plan on doing much about it. The state's one legitimate gambling option is a small "casino cruise" with a few table games, gaming machines, and a tiny sportsbook and bar. What States Do Not Have a Lottery? So, what states don’t have a lottery? We’ll look at the current list of non-lottery states as of September 2019. Things are about to shift a bit, though. And it looks like it may happen before 2019 is over. Right now, there are officially six states that don’t have lottery play yet. They are: Alabama; Utah; Alaska However, to date, there are still some states in the US yet to legalize gambling. States like Kentucky, Georgia, Hawaii, South Carolina, Utah, and some others don’t have land-based casinos yet. Hawaii and Utah even fully outlaw any type of gambling. Casinos dot the map in many states, so sometimes all it takes is a short drive, or even a quick bus ride. However, there are still some US states without casinos such as: Utah. Hawaii. Florida – no commercial casinos, tribal casinos only. New Hampshire. Alaska – no commercial casinos, tribal casinos only. Currently there are only two states that do not permit gambling. Utah & Hawaii. Some states do not have any land based casinos within their state lines such as; Virginia, Vermont, Tennessee What US states don’t have casinos? The following US states do not have casinos . Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia do not have any land-based or tribal casinos. However, many states are still working on legislation to allow gambling within their borders. Here are five states without legalized gambling. A few of them may be working feverishly to open the gambling gates. Meanwhile, other states have clearly stated, “No gambling here.” 1 – Utah. Utah is one of the most absolutely beautiful states. In 2019, a bill was proposed that would have legalized sports gambling at the state's two horse-racing tracks, its 21 tribal casinos and potentially through mobile devices. That bill did not pass What States have casinos? Whether it be a native american casino, pari-mutuel casino, land-based casino, riverboat casino or a casino boat, there are 44 states that offer some form of casino gambling. Click here to see a list of U.S. Casinos by city. Click here to see Maps of Casino Locations in Every U.S. State
