Where in Las Vegas Is an 18-Year-Old Permitted to Gamble?
Where in Las Vegas Is an 18-Year-Old Permitted to Gamble?
US States That Allow 18+ Casino Gambling | States With 18
places an 18 year old can gamble? | Yahoo Answers
21 Things 18-Year-Olds Can Do Before They Can Legally Buy
50 Things You Can Legally Do When You Turn 18
Where can you gamble at 18 years old? - Answers
US Gambling Ages by State » Minimum Age to Visit Casinos
Is Legal Gambling Age 18 Or 21 In My State
18 Super Easy Ways to Make Money Under 18
List of California Casinos Allowing 18+ Year Olds - 18
where can u gamble at 18 years old
where can u gamble at 18 years old - win
GME Short Squeeze What Comes Next Part 3
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.
There seems to be a lot of interest in stocks from young investors. I imagine that many will make their way from WSB to this sub because WSB is a bunch of monkeys flinging poo. You may have lost some money and now you want to explore stocks from less of a Meme and emotional perspective. There is nothing wrong with Meme stocks. Meme stocks can be fun. I have had fun with it. I am also a 42-year-old man with rental properties, commercial properties, and a few small businesses. BB, NOK, AMC, and even GME are all fine. The DD is fine behind all of them. The issue is that if I lose $1,000 then I can write myself a check from one of my businesses for $10,000 to make myself feel better. That is not a brag...it is simply sharing that people come from different places in life. You are just starting off life and probably have far fewer resources and every dollar matters more. I challenge anyone to CMV but I am not a big proponent of stocks as a core investment strategy. Here are my reasons why.
Information has a time-decay of value. Meaning that information becomes less valuable over time. Data is what is mined to often produce new Information. You are at a disadvantage when it comes to both data and information. The information that you get on a retail level has already lost much of its value. This is where the saying "if you read it in the news you are already too late"
You have no power. You simply cannot compete with whales and whales don't become whales by letting people glean the crumbs that are leftover. They have the power to move markets, you don't.
You have no control over outcomes. You have no control over the success of a company. You have no control over other investors. You have no control over anything.
The odds on options are not that great. Even compared to blackjack our betting the outside of a roulette table they are just not that good.
Many people that are far more intelligent than you are, lose money at stock investing.
Your emotions and FOMO will be a hindrance and problematic.
Most stock investors are too young to understand the market cycles
I like stocks as a small part of an overall investment strategy for young people for the following reasons.
Time is valuable and you have the most time
Compound interest is the "force" behind all investing and compound interest compliments the stock market very well
Certain strategies can complement long-term wealth building
Building wealth through stocks is like trying to build a house one brick at a time...just you, and you are gathering the straw, digging the mud, and pressing each brick by hand. When it rains many of your bricks will wash away. If the sun shines for enough days then you will make good progress. The problem is that all markets cycle. The housing market cycles. Petroleum and natural gas cycles. The stock market cycles. I believe that a full market cycle is around 18 years with around 7-12 years in an up cycle and 6-11 in a down cycle. In the stock market, they call these bull and bear markets. We are currently in one of the longest bull markets on record due to interest rates and the feds printing money. No one has a crystal ball but sooner or later the market will peak. When this happens Boomers will be the first to pull money out and put it into bonds or CDs. Boomers are as big of a whale as retail can get. Anyone and I mean anyone could have made money in the current market. If ten years ago you had asked a five-year-old to pick five of their favorite things and invested in their choices you would have made money. That could be Barbies, YouTube, Pizza, Sprite, and their Dog. They would have made money on any stocks you picked around those five things. There will come a day sooner or later when Boomers and GenX will see trends in the market that they don't like. Boomers own multiple houses and are deep into retirement. GenX is a small but powerful generation that is now on the back Nine Holes of life. Gen X will largely inherit the wealth of the Boomers. There will come a shift towards mitigating losses and that shift is not far away. When they move their money from markets so goes the market. Is it fair to say that one of the longest bull cycles on record could transition to one of the longest bear cycles? Let's look at Millenials...a generation that is struggling to just buy a home. Boomers own a few. GenX may own a couple and Millenials that are now entering into their forties struggle with one. Millenials are a massively sized generation that I believe is now bigger than both GenX and Boomers combined because Boomers are dying at a rapid pace. Millenials are the generation that were adults starting life and careers in 2008 and full-blown families with Covid-19. Maybe one of the unluckiest generations. GenZ is this very talented and intelligent generation. Y'all are creating disruptions in culture, in politics, and in Wall Street. You are savvy and demanding. Giving billionaires the finger while pissing on the front door of their mansions. But you need to be careful. Stocks are not the key to your success. They are just a single tool in your toolbox. A better tool may be early homeownership or owning a small business. Life is about options...and I am not talking about the gambling options of Wall Street. I am talking about the options of having equity in a home to adapt to economic swings. I am, talking about the options of owning a small business where your day to day decisions make you smarter and more valuable. Where you own assets that make you money. Most importantly you have control over your own destiny. I am not telling you not to invest in stocks. I am just telling you that it should be a limited part of your overall strategy in life. Unless someone has been through two complete cycles of the stock markets then I would take their advice with a grain of salt. General advice:
Don't sell stocks that you have taken a loss on
Buy when everyone is selling and sell when everyone is buying
Invest in stocks with a strategy based on your knowledge and experience
Invest only what you can afford to lose
Stocks work best with time. Leave them alone
Be a value investor
Invest with a purpose
Number seven is important. For example, I like Robotics, AI, and Automation. I like these is two specific areas....transportation and mining. I operate in the Transportation industry. I know that very soon human drivers will be eliminated and self-driving trucks will take over. Trucks will be loaded, driven, and unloaded without a single human being doing any of that work. With that will come an entire supporting industry. Tow trucks will need to be automatically dispatched when trucks break down or in accidents. AI will need to be involved in decision making. I will see these changes before I am dead and I am 42. I like underwater mining. Our oceans are the next frontier and the next gold rush. We have areas of sea bottom that has very little life but is rich in gasses, minerals, and thermal energy. Automation, AI, and robotics will play a huge role in underwater mining. I will see this transition start in my lifetime and I am 42. Beyond that, once we have machines that are capable of underwater mining then we have the basics for machines that can mine inner-system planetary objects. From nearby asteroids to the moon, to thermal energy collection closer to the sun, to Mars and beyond. The wealthiest person in existence will be the person that is able to start the first off-planet mining operation. Where there is no EPA, no taxes on land, where we are not building sub-divisions next to mines. Where we don't have to worry about the ecosystem. Where gasses and pollutants are not pollutants because there is nothing of consequence to pollute. The largest land-owners in existence will be the owner of off-world mining operations. That may not happen in my lifetime...but it may in yours. I like investing in Meme stocks because they are fun. But I also invest in Robotics, AI, and automation with one-single question....is this company taking humanity one-step close to automated transportation or underwater mining? I invest with a purpose. Sure I will grab up some value stocks every now and then. People are going to be flying more than ever in a few years. People are going to be more social than ever in a few years. Shoot Condom manufacturers are a buy right now because people will be..........you get the idea. The whole reason that I wrote this excessively long post is to maybe get you into thinking about your strategy....what is it? And to caution you on being "all-in" on stocks. Stonks don't always go up.
For ALL THOSE WHO MISSED ON GME, LOST MONEY OR BAGHOLDING...THIS IS THE ENDGAME 🚀
ALL CREDIT GOES TO u/hooman_or_whatever 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.
Losing touch extended version - now with ideas for changes
Hello all Some days ago I made a post that got a bit of attention (scopely_you_are_losing_touch_with_your_playerbase). But my post did not focus enough on what can be done to help alleviate some of the problems we are seeing in the game right now. So therefor I will try to do a better job of that in this post. It’s not going to be perfect, probably not even close, but I really hope it can spark a discussion that Scopely, Cerebro in particular, can take some points from and try to make this game that we like so much, and make it that much better. Before we go into the nitty gritty, I would like to say thank you for all the positive feedback I got on the last post. I had feared that it there would be a lot people throwing mud at each other or starting to bash Scopely. But most of you kept it sober and constructive, so I hope we can keep that tone. With that said, this post can be a bit more dividing of the community, cause we all have one thing that we think is the most important thing to fix. And some of the solutions I am going to propose might not hit the spot for you or at all, but I hope it sparks a discussion. This is going to be a long post, and I know that it will not go down as well as the first one, for one it is simply too long, but also because it gets too focused on what changes I would like to see. Cause we can all agree on that we want changes, but when we then have to discuss what those changes are, then we get more divided. I really want to point out that I don't expect everybody to agree on what I have written. And also that my native language isn't English, but I hope that my points still gets across. But lets get into it...
Red Stars
We are going to start out with what I personally find to be the biggest issue in the game right now. I know that RTA is a more hot topic right now, but I find red stars to be the biggest issue. Right now red stars are a double edged sword. Cause when you get the 5+ red drop on the new character you of course get happy. But with the droprates in mind, most of the time red stars leave you with a sour taste. Getting 3 red stars or lower on a new good character is so deflating that even id you got good pulls on your last 2 characters, that goodwill is out the window straight away. So what can we do to make red stars a bit better? I think the solution is in the silvegold promotion credits. If silver credits was added to red stars so that when you get a duplicate character, then you also get some promotion credits. Here is how one solution could be, the numbers might have to change a bit, but this is just the general idea. 1-2 star dupe: 1 silver promotion credit 3-4 star dupe: 2 silver promotion credit 5 star dupe: 3 silver promotion credit 6 star dupe: 1 gold promotion credit 7 star dupe: 2 gold promotion credit These are just numbers to showcase the idea. If we look at my pulls for Bishop then this is what it would have netted me (all my pulls where dupes apart from the 3 star Bishop): 20 1-2 star pulls = 20 silver credits 19 3-4 star pulls = 38 silver credits 6 5 star = 18 silver credits Total = 76 silver credits. Now that is not a lot, and I don’t think that would break the promotion system. But I do think that it would help with the bad feeling about red stars. With this system red star orbs are still the driving factor, and if you get lucky then you still get happy, but now when you get unlucky, then at least you progressed a bit still by having more promotions credit. I would also like to get rid of the promotion store. We have enough randomness in the game. If we could promote characters straight from the character screen, then the system would feel a lot better. I get that the store is probably there to make people burn some cores when they are chasing that on character they want to bring up. Also, let us update them way faster. Right now over a month passes on most new characters before they are even added to the store. I think the worries from Scopely is that we would start hoarding, and then only spend on the “best” new characters. But I really don’t see that as a problem in the long run. Cause with the added focus on wider rosters you will still have to bring up more characters instead of focusing on a few.
RTA and the Battlepass
So this is the hottest topic right now, at least with the people that I talk to. If we look to other games battlepasses are generally a positive thing, but in almost all of them they are also something that you can get done by playing the game as usual. I play PUBG and while the battlepass here is something that divides the community a bit, it is one that I like. Some days I just have to get some kills and I progress. Other days I have to get kills with a crossbow (I’m not good enough to get that done), but its all something I can do by playing the game as usual, I just have to pick up some other weapons than the “meta”. Battlepasses are created for two things: · Have people log in every day. But in MSF people already have to do that, so the battlepass doesn’t do anything at all for that. · Have people spend extra money, especially in FTP games. If spenders got the possibility to buy all the prizes we get from the battlepass for 20$ without having to grind it out, then I am 100% sure that way more people would buy it. But with the current way its tied to the RTA I actually think you are just losing money. The current form of battlepass that is implemented is really just an offer with extra steps. In MSF you have tied the battlepass to a single gamemode, and that takes all the possible fun out of that game mode. No people I have talked to likes RTA, not 1 person has something positive to say about it actually. But when you ask around, then a lot of people really started to like the balanced draft. So what can we do to make this a bit better? Solution 1: make us able to complete the objectives in other gamemodes. And if you really want us to grind the RTA also, then make it count double so that there is an incentive to play it if you want to get it over with as fast a possible. And that is where I think the biggest problem with RTA is right now. Its not fun, it is only a grind. The way I play it is to open RTA and press auto when I’m at work. I don’t even look at it, I just wait for the winneloser screen to pop up, and then go in and do it again. I get annoyed when people are slow, or if they don’t load in. As I see it there are 0 positive things about RTA right now. And the biggest problem I have is that no one I asked could actually find a way to make RTA fun with the current setup. Leagues and events could be a saving grace. But since we don’t even know what Scopley have in mind about these we can’t event try to make that better. I’m afraid that events is just like the battlepass, but I think that leagues could take RTA in the right direction. Cause if you make RTA about winning and trying your best, then its suddenly competitive instead of just a mindless grind. And I think it goes without saying, but I’m going to do it anyways, please revert the changes you made in 5.1 about quitters.
Doom raid
After my original post I was told that the Doom raid wouldn’t actually be for a limited time. And that changes my view a lot. Cause I do like that there are new and hard/almost impossible challenges. I was only worried if it was a limited that most people wouldn’t ever be able to get in there before it was taken down. But if its there to stay, then I don’t mind the current difficulty, even though I won’t step in there for at least another 6 months at best. But the point about the prizes still stand. They are simply not enough. Not even close actually. And right now only the top alliances are even able to get them, so you have created a “the rich getting richer” scenario, cause the prizes in there are what makes you able to compete in there.
Availability of new characters
I personally don’t mind the cadence of new releases of characters, new characters are what drives the game forward. But you have to make them available faster. The last couple of releases we have seen them added to orbs pretty fast (Longshot or Shatterstar was even added as their event was going on), and that is a small step in the right direction. But lets take a look at the most grievous current unfarmable character, Beast, he has been in the game for over 7 months (possible longer, I couldn’t find the exact date he was released.) without being farmable. That is simply not good enough. I know that he didn’t sell that well, and that Scopely has probably tried to wait with making him farmable to see if they could make more money of him, especially now that he actually seems to have a good place on the Axmen, I get it. I personally unlocked Beast at 3 stars, and I have not used him in anything than a throwaway blitz team. Is that fun? Is that something that makes me want to invest further into him? I think you know the answer. A possible solution to this problem is to add them to some of the stores faster. I understand why you are hesitant to add anything newish to the blitz, raid or arena store. Cause people now have so many credits stockpiled that any further income on them once they are added are out the window. But I think you can add them at a much higher price point in the stores. That does two things: You now give people something to use their credits on that they actually want, and at a higher price you are getting people to deplete their resources faster and taking both the blitz and arena store economy to a place where we once again have to make decisions on what to invest into. But at least you are giving us something to invest into. As of right now I have 150k blitz credits, so when you added Electro at 500, that wont even make a dent into that economy. But if you added new characters faster at a premium price, lets say 5-10,000 credits. Then you are giving us something to invest in, and you are bringing the economy to a better place. They of course shouldn’t stay at the premium price forever, at given intervals they should have their prices reduced until they hit the 500 credits that normal characters in the store has. I personally don’t mind that a few select characters are orbs only for a while. I get why they are that. But I also understand the frustration that a lot of players feel about orb only characters. I only mention this so that a discussion can spark from it. If we look at the prices on buying new characters I think we can all agree that they are too high. But I get why they are high and I don’t think that will change. I personally don’t find it to be that big of a problem, but I understand why a lot of people do. I also think the problem would be alleviated a bit, if we could start farming them in one way or the other sooner. Then players who really want the newest characters can pay and be ahead of the meta, and the people who can’t/won’t pay can still try to catch up without having to wait half a year, where the ones they can now farm are probably power crept anyway.
New player problems
This is only something that I have heard a bit about, and only mention it so that others can chime in. But right now there is a huge scarcity of blue ability mats. And there is no real good way of farming or even buying them. I think the problem stems from the powerlevel of characters, so now newer players don’t have to spend time on the lower raids that actually give these mats like we did when we started out. It doesn’t take a long time for a new player to be able to get into an alliance that does at least U6 or even U7, where these mats aren’t something they get. A simple solution that I could see working out is to simply remove green and blue ability mats from the game. I doubt that Scopley are making any money on these mats, and for people that have played a long time these mats are a non issue and never will be cause we have pretty much infinite of them. As I said, I don’t know too much about this problem as I only just heard about it on a stream not so long ago. But I wanted to add it to the list anyways. And there are probably more new player problems that I don’t even know of. So please add that to the discussion below, but also please try to be constructive about it, not just “We want more”.
Skillitary/new teams videos
We like that we can see new teams in action, but when you showcase them you have to be upfront about them. Skillitary has left a sour taste in the mouth of most people who bought into them. Yes, they can win against Marauders if brought up to the same level, but its still a gamble and more luckbased than playing with actual skill (on pun(isher) intended). But if you miss that first disrupt on Stryfe, then the whole team just crumbles. So if you showcase a new team as the new team to take out the “big bad”, then they have to at least be able to punch up a bit on them. I’m not saying that they should just win 100% of the time, but with Skillitary they even struggle on punch downs. If Shadowlands turn out to be as big of a letdown as Skillitary I think that will make you lose a lot of goodwill and at this point in the game, that will be very hard to gain back.
War
I am generally pretty fine with war and how it plays out. There are two pain points that keeps popping up tho. The most obvious one is the matchmaking sometimes makes you go up against unwinnable opponents. And that does make it feel very bad. But I also understand why you can’t always have it close to your own TCP. Cause who would the top alliances ever face if it was only trying to match on TCP? If it was changed to only factor in TCP, then we would suddenly have alliances in the top leagues, who where a 10th of the biggest alliances, but they would never have to face them because of the TCP difference. So the current matchmaking system is probably the lesser of the two evils. And yes, I know that it is very demoralizing to get 50m+ punch-ups week after week. But I think that stems from a problem that is unfixable, and that is the huge TCP difference between alliances. If we take a look at Legion_of_Cabal they currently have a combined TCP of 400 million. If we look at the 100th most powerful alliance they right now have a combined TCP of 251 million. That is such a huge difference that war matchmaking will just not ever be perfect. The second pain point of war is time spent. And in that also when you have to spend that time. Luckily my own alliance aren’t too focused on war, we are only G4. Most of the time we face alliances that wont clear us and we wont clear them. But higher up in the leagues, clearing as fast as possible is the only way to win. And that means getting on every time new energy is available, also if that means disrupting your sleep schedule to do that. I personally would never do that at where I am in life, but I understand why. I was fighting for world first in WoW back in the day, so I get why people do it. The problem is that they have to do it 3 times a week. Instead of just, in the case of WoW, when new content comes out. Its just not healthy. I don’t have any experience in high level war in MSF, so I hope that some of you that do can weigh in on this with ideas how to make it better.
Resource bottlenecks
This is a sore point for everybody in the game. I think we all understand why bottlenecks are a thing, and we all probably understand that it is also a necessary thing in a game to have something to grind for. But in the current state of the game, there are simply way too many bottlenecks. My proposed solution would be as follows: Get rid of green and blue ability mats. They serve no purpose anymore other than hindering new players from catching up. Then when the next level of ability levels are introduced, then you can add new currency for that and have us start out on the same level. Spenders will then be able to get a head start as always, and that is fine. Also take away the gold cost for leveling up abilities, or at least lower them. Get rid of training mats all together. Or change it so that they are the only currency needed to level up characters. It simply can’t be both gold and training mats unless they are giving them out a bit more freely. And I know it’s a balancing act, cause you don’t want people to have too many resources, and if we had infinite resources, that would also be bad for the game, as there is nothing fun in having everything given to you. If the above are implemented, then I don’t even think you have to make any changes to the gold we gain now. We of course don’t know how much money you make out of creating these scarcities, and I get it if the metrics show that you can’t just make them go away. But then at least acknowledge the problem that players are feeling about the bottlenecks. You don’t have to fix it in one big swoop. Gear is another bottleneck, but one that I personally find better balanced. Sure, right now getting G15 isn’t easy, but I also don’t think it should be easy. A change that I would love to see however is a better way to be able to focus on the gear that we need. Right now its all random, even the offers you made us are random. But again, I get if your metrics show something else and that you are doing this to make the most profit. But sometimes the most profit is not the way to go, if the cost is that you lose players by doing it.
Help us help you
In my first post I stayed away from mentioning bugs on purpose. Bugs will happen, and if you address them as fast as possible then that is probably ok. But you have a limitless amount of people who would gladly help you test upcoming patches for free. Right now you even have an envoy program that you clearly aren’t using to its full potential. Have them help you out with testing new features. Just look at ISO8, when you first announced it people where up in arms about it. But you decided to have the envoys weigh in, and it has been the best and most polished feature you have ever brought out.
Finishing remarks
Right now the game is in a rut, I don’t think that is up for discussion. It is natural for a 3 year old game, mobile at that, to lose players over time. But I still believe that you, Scopley, have the bones of a game that could live on for a long time. But you need to treat it a bit more as a game than as moneymaker. It can be both, and it can be successful at both. Make it fun again, that’s what games are about, entertainment. There has to be things that are hard or almost impossible to get, but it just can’t be every aspect of the game. You said you wanted to look at reducing the low quality screen time, and then added RTA. I hope you can see how that makes us have trust issues. I know this post isn’t perfect in any way, and I am very well aware that it might not change a thing. But I do hope that will, I really really do. If you made it all the way to the end, then thank you for reading it all, or at least skimming the points that you feel are the most important. And please, again, lets have a civil discussion about the issues we as players feel. And remember that even if we feel something is wrong, it might not actually be wrong for the game.
My blissful, hilarious and wacky financial journey…. I hope you all learn something THE FIRST 10 YEARS OF MY LIFE I learn how to sell, how to read and write. I play money a lot. And I enjoy it. Play selling and teaching too. Enjoyed them all. I lost my dad and I hate my mom. She did a lot of mean things to him based on her stories. I hate her for doing that to him. She is mean. I discover that writing can always help me. Like I have a best friend. I know there is God. I hate to be poor. I am so ashamed of it. I feel guilty asking for money for the things that I like. Mudra made me feel this way. Her message is we are poor. I cannot have money. Some were spoken. Some were not. I made kupit from mom's box of money. The excess from the kupit, I throw beneath the sleeping place. I do not like who I am. I formed a belief that I am not worthy, I am dirty. I know I am also kind and smart. THE NEXT 10 YEARS (11-20) I know what I want. A happy family, wealth, and being somebody. I want to measure up, to belong. I know I am not deserving of anyone. Nobody will love me. My male playmates did something they should not do that made me feel this way. I read a lot. I enjoy it. Magazines, stories. I want to help my mom and my sisters. I finished college. At 20, I had my first and last boyfriend. Got married. THE NEXT 10 YEARS (21-30) At 21, I gave birth to my first son, at 23 to my second child, a baby girl, at 25 to my 3rd child, a girl again, and at 28 to my 4th child, another girl. All through a C- Section. You can imagine how much it cost that the last girl had to be in a public hospital where you have to buy your things from gloves to anesthesia and everything. Libre nga lang dr at the hospital! At 22, live on our own, me the hubby and the first child. Plain housewife. At 24, the hubby lost the job with 2 kids around. Life happens. Prepare. Learn a lot from other people who had the same story. Started incurring debts. Move into parents with 3 kids, move out, and accumulated lots of debts, starting this and that (business). For those who lost a job. My first advice is to get one. If you do not have ipon do not loan to start a business. And even if you have ipon, do not gamble it on starting a business you hardly knew about. Learn first. Make money from your high paying skills. I read a lot. Enough to inspired me. We joined a community as couple. A big help in passing through the early test of married life. THE NEXT 10 YEARS (30-40) At 32, I gave birth to my youngest son. Last na to!!! I go back to my profession. Work in the hospital as a nurse for 3 years. Still accumulating debts. Change job from being a staff nurse, to becoming a clinical instructor. Teaching this time. A lot bigger salaries but still not enough to raise 5 kids, in elementary and hs and one in college. Renting home. Our 9th move in since the time we got married. I learn the value of giving tithes and had my income doubles and triples in the next few years. From 8,000 working as a staff nurse to 48,000 teachings on nursing students and hundreds of thousands to millions in the next years to come. AT 40 – TILL 49 I sell real estate. I leave work at school teaching nursing students. I bought my own home. I have a happy family. Sometimes not so happy. We bought a second-hand car. I started investing in stocks, equities, and real estate. I encouraged my OFW sister to learn about stock investing. She listens. She now has more than a million portfolio. Thanks God she did. She is now buying her fifth real estate, 3 in the Philippines, 2 in Italy. I am now starting to teach the younger one, an OFW also. A bit emotista than the other one. They were both married living abroad with their families. They both have a son. Also at 40, I earned my first millions but still creating a lot of debts. I can only pay a few I bought life insurance for one year and St. Peter then blows it all up. I was not able to continue paying the following years. I screwed up. I almost lost everything. The only one left was the house we currently live in. It is fully paid. I have very bad records on lending institutions, cooperatives, and the likes. My credit score is soooo bad. Here’s what I found out. I started debiting for the fear of not having enough. When I was able to work out on those fears there’s more. The guilt. I need to feel guilty making money. My lesson takes away- money will make more of what we keep inside. If you are afraid before the money, more money will make you more fearful. Work on the inside first. I hated my mom and repeated her cycle of debting. By the way, it took time before I realized this. She is more than 12 years gone now. Don’t get me wrong. I deal with my issues with her and I am eternally grateful for having her as my mom. Our strongest emotion moves us unknowingly. Both the pleasant and the unpleasant. I lost my eldest son (damn heartbreaking and financially draining. Memorial lots etc.. but the pain is the worst. Life happens again. Prepare. I don’t know-how. Read Tuesdays with Morrie. I’m glad I did before I lost my son. I published a book and started a blog. I sent to college 3 of my daughters. All working now. I sell all my stock investments to my eldest daughter. We started a business. 3 of my children are on their way to starting their financial journey. I am starting again, done with the inside. I have money now every month coming from the board and lodging fees I am charging with my three working girls. They are still living with us. I’m nauseous thinking about the roller coaster ride I went through on my finances. I hope you all learn. NOW AT 50? I COULD HAVE MADE A LOT OF WEALTH HAD I GOTTEN MY SHIT TOGETHER EARLIER IN LIFE. Back to real estate again, the love of my life. Got some very good deals. Done with emotional intelligence. Writing. An international publisher takes notice of my book. Doing some allotment for marketing expenses. Figuring out which life insurance to buy. The financial nightmare I’ve been through made most of my blood chemistry high. Those were some of the things I accumulated over the years of stress! Cholesterol, Increase BP, etc. So I have to buy my life insurance today in case I depart pre-maturely. I’ll have something to leave for my youngest who is still in Senior High today. Knock on woods. I'm drinking malunggay tea everyday and walking! I write my financial plan some 18 years ago, which I never follow. You can guess what I am doing now. More stories later. Most of you are very lucky. You are learning early. Good luck everyone. PS…...(a day after I made this post) I thank you all from the bottom of my heart. I never thought my financial story would create this kind of engagement from all of you, truly grateful. I promise to answer all your insightful questions in my upcoming post here. And for those who would like to read more of my stuff. just visit my blog. https://thehappyoikos.com/ You see your old dog here is a bit running out of time. I’m turning 50 remember? So I decided to only do the things that truly matter to me moment by moment, well don’t worry because that includes writing and making people happy. So you can expect to read a post that will answer your query. Thank you again, everyone!! Sending you all my love and hugs! Aui V.
Reposting because for whatever reason once this post started gaining traction in stocks it was removed. stocks reactivated the post, I posted this in several places please comment there as it has the most opinions to go around and I’m not jumping all over the place 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. 03/05 - 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 (Mid March-ish), 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.
EDIT: the post has been re-activated on stocks please comment there as it has the most traffic so I’m not jumping back and forth trying to respond. Appreciate everyone! 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. 02/15ish - 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." I am missing two pieces of information to answer this.
Does the 13 day countdown begin after T+2, or are those two days counted in the total number?
Are settlement days business days only?
Depending on the above information, starting at 01/29 we are looking at these possibilities:
If T+2 is not included and weekends are: 02/15
If T+2 is not included and its business days only: 02/19
If T+2 is included and weekends are: 02/13 (Saturday)
If T+2 is included and its business days: 02/17
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 Robinhood 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 (Mid March-ish), 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.
Discovering and embracing Satanism is an easier task for some than for others. I just wanted to share a little of my experience for anyone coming from a strict Christian upbringing or even a Christian cult. It's rare that someone is able to escape the clutches of a cult unscathed and then go on to thrive. It's not something that happens overnight and it can involve undoing a lot of ingrained beliefs, going through an identity crisis, losing family or friends, and changing your entire perception of yourself and life. Going through it, I wasn't sure I was going to ever get out. But now, I can really stand back and be amazed at how resilient we can be. In the 80s, my midwestern parents found themselves in a self-destructive lifestyle, and after attending a church-hosted and horrific dramatization of people being dragged off to hell, they turned to Christianity as the magic cure for their unhappiness in life. When I was born, they were still brand-new born-agains struggling with substance abuse and addiction, but they went all in. And I mean ALL in. They ghosted all their friends, cut ties with every member of my extended family, and made a new family of believers. We were Pentecostal - the 700 club-watching, faith-healing, tongues-speaking, Proctor and Gamble-boycotting variety. If you've ever seen Jesus Camp that was basically my life. I don't remember a lot from those early years, but I've heard stories and have seen family photos to know that I don't want to remember. As my sister and I got older, they attempted to shelter us from the horrors of the sin-ridden secular world. We were homeschooled with an all-Christian, church-approved curriculum taught by my mother (who had an 8th grade education) while my dad was at work. My textbooks contained and presented as fact the typical hoaxes and flawed analogies that form the basis for Christian science-denial, and I didn’t know any different. We lived in the Bible belt on a small farm, and everyone I knew was at least some form of Christian. There weren't enough non-believers to convert, so we spent most of our time trying to convert the Catholics and Baptists to "real" Christianity. My mom always said Pentecostals came first, Catholics and Baptists came along after and bastardized Christianity. Most of my "classes" were based in homemaking or farm work, and went along nicely with our weekly Wednesday night girl's program, The Missionettes. It was basically girl scouts but focused on Bible memorization and turning us into good Christian wives. We had badges like sewing, knitting, cooking, grooming, ettiquette, abstinence, and first aid. Of course we also had religious badges for communion, prayer, healing, fruits of the spirit, and the armor of god etc. A very well-rounded education. While my parents went to church and we put on the face like we were living the blessed life, things at home weren't great. The hardest thing growing up was hearing all the adults at church go on and on about how great my parents were and how lucky I was to have such good Christian parents. One day, I remember my dad pulling me aside to tell me there was something wrong with my mom, that I should never make her angry because he wouldn't be able to choose between us. When I was 5, my mom threw a pair of scissors at my dad. They got embedded in his leg and he had to go to the emergency room. When I was around 6, my mom began to threaten my dad in front of us, saying by the time he got home from work, we would be gone. That my sister and I needed to pick who we wanted to live with because by the end of the day, we needed to be packed and ready to leave. My mom was a big fan of belts and the wooden spoon, and she never spared the rod. I have had many objects broken on me. When she would make us bend over, I would try to look back and apologize, to ask what I had done wrong, or what i could do to fix it, but anything other than complete eyes-foward submission was viewed as rebellion and only added to the count. She told me once in a joking manner that when I was in trouble, all I would say was "I want to hold you" to try to get out of punishment. She laughed. When I was 7, my mom told us that Satan told her to kill us with a potato peeler, and that she was going to kill us, my dad, and then herself. But “luckily” god "saved" us! After that, I remember my sister and I used to hide in our closet and pray to god to turn us into farm animals. Horses, dogs, chickens, anything, so we could run away and be free. We didn't even want to be human anymore. By the time I was 12, suicidal ideation set in and never really let go. Satan didn't scare me anymore. My mom did. Hell was real and I was living in it. When I was 13, my mom found a pencil in a parking lot from a local high school and determined that it was a sign from god that we should be enrolled in public school. I was terrified. These people weren't anything like me, they were all lost sinners and it was my job to be the shining light in the midst of darkness, to teach them the way. However, it turned out, I was the one who did most of the learning. I was exposed to more math and science in high school than I had been in my entire life. I learned about other cultures and history. I actually made some friends and got to see how other people live for the first time in my life. Nothing, absolutely nothing, at that high school even touched the evil I experienced at home. There were days I didn’t want to go home. I never missed a day of school if I could help it. The things I had believed started to not make sense in my mind anymore. It took several years for me to put all the pieces together, but the final straw was actually reading the Bible entirely from cover to cover for the first time, rather than just the “reading plan” i was given. I learned when the gospels were actually written, who possibly wrote them and why. I started reading about as many different religions as I could and started realizing the similarties of them all. I had a good friend at the time who wasn't afraid to challenge every religious and political position I had, and realized that I didn't even know why I believed what I did, only that I was told to believe it and always had. I began to reexamine everything I believed, no matter how trivial or obvious. It became clear to me that more than anything, I just wanted more out of life than I was given. Originally, I wasn't going to go to college. We didn't have enough money, no one in my family had ever gone to college, and my parents had just assumed that I'd end up being a pastor's wife who played the piano for church services. But on the advice of an advisor, I applied to and auditioned for a music program, and I got in. I was finally getting out. But not before my mom could have the final word. When my parents found out I had been talking to a boy at school and that I liked him, she called me "the whore" for a month. One day, I had the flu and missed school for a few days. My boyfriend asked if he could bring over a can of soup and the homework I had missed. My parents agreed, and when he came in, he sat on the end of my bed (the door was wide open and I was under a ton of blankets) to ask how I was doing. My mom walked by and screeched at the top of her lungs that he needed to get the fuck out of my room and out of her house. That we weren't allowed to be in the same room without supervision. I had basically learned that sticking up for myself was useless, but I would stick up for him. He hadn't done anything wrong. I got out of bed and got up into her face and called her a psychotic bitch. She demanded that my dad throw me out. I looked at him and he looked at me and I will never forget what he said. "I told you not to make her angry because I can't choose between you. This is her house. You have to leave." So I left. I slept in my car that night and eventually stayed with my boyfriend's family until my aunt (who my parent's ghosted) heard what happened. She took me in for several months until I could make enough money working a few part-time jobs to afford a small apartment. I completely left the church after that. I did visit a few others and even worked as a choir director at a non-denomination church for a while as a side gig, but it just wasn't the same. The veil had been lifted. Out of the dozens of families who knew me, who watched me grow up and spent time with my family (some who even knew what was going on at home), none of them attempted to contact me. Out of all of my church friends, I am still in contact with only one, who left around the same time I did. When people say leaving a cult is like commiting social suicide, they aren't exaggerating. I was completely cut off. If you asked my parents today, they would tell you that around 18, I gave into doubt and fell from grace. That the friends I made outside of church brainwashed me. That going to college was the nail in the coffin of my salvation. They'd tell you that by the time I turned 18, I was lost. But I was never lost. Not really. They’d never tell you that I always got in trouble for constantly questioning things. When I was eight, I wrote on the back of an offering envelope “If god created us, who created god?” and left it on a church pew for one of the elders to find (and subsequently got a beating for it). They’d never tell you that at ten, I got into an argument with the children’s pastor for saying men were superior to women because they were created first. They’d never tell you that as a Missionette, I got caught skipping sewing class to crash the Royal Rangers’ (all boys group) flag football games and outdoor events. And they’d certainly never tell you that I was eventually replaced as the president of a bible study group at school for focusing on the less-read and more appalling stories in the Bible, telling people that the gospels weren’t actually written by eye-witnesses, and encouraging people to actually read and think for themselves. Discovering Satanism was actually one of the biggest steps in trauma recovery for me. To realize that all of my actions and behaviors were based in natural human needs and emotions that aren't at all sinful. That my learned helplessness was a direct result of my upbringing and I didn't need it anymore. That I had control of my life now. That I'm resilient and capable of going through a fire and coming out on the other end, and that I don't have to forgive anyone for anything. That the only person I can rely on is myself. Here I am on the other side of it all, through many twists and turns. I'm the first of my family to graduate high school, go to college, or go to graduate school. I'm now a professional scientist working on Alzheimer disease research and a keyboardist in a working band. I'm active in my community both in local politics and through volunteer work. Things are far from perfect. I still struggle with old emotions, behaviors and thought patterns. It’s taken many rituals and even daily effort sometimes, but I've achieved a level of happiness and fulfillment in life I never thought possible. —————— There is no heaven of glory bright, and no hell where sinners roast. Here and now is our day of torment! Here and now is our day of joy! Here and now is our opportunity! Choose ye this day, this hour, for no redeemer liveth! Say unto thine own heart, "I am my own redeemer." Stop the way of them that would persecute you. Let those who devise thine undoing be hurled back to confusion and infamy. Let them be as chaff before the cyclone and after they have fallen rejoice in thine own salvation. Then all thy bones shall say pridefully, "Who is like unto me? Have I not been too strong for mine adversaries? Have I not delivered MYSELF by mine own brain and body?" The Book of Satan - Anton Szandor LaVey
Who was a better defender Lebron James or Michael Jordan? A Defensive Comparison between the two.
Lebron James and Michael Jordan are the two greatest basketball players of all time in most people’s eyes. Instead of looking at their arguments for being the goat and comparing their legacies, I decided to compare their defense, something they both have been elite at. In order to compare the 2 defenders, I watched a lot of historic films, compiled evidence and created their defensive profiles, I focused on every aspect of defense, what they were good at it, bad at, how they helped their teams, their defensive prime and careers, etc. I don’t use any accolades or awards, this is mostly based on re-watching countless hours of games and looking at historic film and paying some attention to advanced stats to contextualize the information. I don’t pay as much attention to advanced stats as I recognize they’re not perfect, they do give a fair idea and help in providing substance. I watched regular season games to look at defensive fundamentals, tendencies, how frequently they make mistakes, what defensive skills they possess. And I used playoff games to track their one on one match ups when they guard stars like Kevin Durant, Magic Johnson, Tony Parker, Isiah Thomas, etc. I also paid attention to how many ‘good’ or ‘bad’ rotations they made, how much rim protection they offer, how many gambles, etc. So here are the two players:
Lebron James is a 6’9, 250lb freak of nature, who is considered one of the most athletic basketball players in the history of the game. He has a 7’0 ft wingspan and he has a hand-span of 9.25 inches which is actually below average for his height. Really quick, really agile for his height, physically dominant and insanely powerful. Lebron has a 44 inch vertical and he is quick off the floor. A perfect mix of speed and strength.
Defensive Profile
Coming into the league as an 18 year old, Lebron was this super athletic raw player who needed time to develop into something positive on the defensive end. From 2003/04 to 2007/08 he was a slightly above average defender who had a lot of highlight plays but a lot of breakdowns too. His first major leap to being an elite defender was in 2008/09, after 5 years in the league, Lebron had become an excellent defender. Starting things off with his man defense, Lebron for the most part of his career was a really good one on one defender, often guarding the best guard or wing on the opposing team. His athleticism and combination of lateral quickness and strength help him keep offensive players in front of him. He is really good at limiting drives to the basket and making the offensive players take tougher jump shots, something he wants them to do. Early on in his career he didn’t have the best footwork, this affected his ability to defend in space and often led to easy baskets. Over the years his footwork improved significantly and he became a better individual defender. Lebron guards Durant, uses his body to stop the drive, good use of hands to make KD lose the ball and contests well for an airball Lebron guards Joe Johnson 1v1. Does a great job of keeping him in front uses his size to make it a difficult shot and then blocks the shot. It’s really hard to beat a prime Lebron off the dribble, his 6’9 frame and explosiveness makes it difficult for anyone going against him. Lebron was one of the better man to man defenders in his prime, however he wasn’t at an all time level. Lebron did get beat a few times too often for me to call him an all time one on one defender. Elite ball handlers and quick guys would blow past him once in a while. For the most part he shifted his feet well, but he did have errors on a more consistent basis than Michael Jordan for example. He got beat off the dribble a fair few times by elite ball handlers, a touch bit slower at sticking with them. He’s got good footwork, not great. He shifts his feet well but it’s not an uncommon thing to see Lebron get off the dribble at times. Here Paul George beats him off the dribble. Another element of Lebron’s defense is his recoveries, if he gets beaten he often tries to erase shots from the back. “Blocked by James” haunts a lot of players and fans. His speed, leaping ability and IQ make it easy for him to run back and contest or block shots from the ball handler. Lebron’s post defense is also great. He has the strength to bang down low, can contain players in the mid post and force and contest mid range shots. Lebron uses his strength effectively to cut out Zion in the post Lebron is guarding Kevin Durant here. First he fronts the post, great ball denial. Then he uses his strength to keep KD in that spot, doesn't bite on the pump fake, contests the shot well to force a miss. When guarding bigger players like centers or power forwards, he usually fronts the post and is great at ball denial. He usually tries to swipe down at the ball when in the post. He isn’t able to defend deep post positioned players though, once he gives up deeper post position it’s hard for him to alter the shot, often leading to an easy shot at the basket. Lebron wasn’t great at navigating screens for the first half of his career, just a tendency where he had trouble moving his body around and over screens effectively. Later in his career he improved a lot and is good at staying with his man when other players are involved. Lebron’s man defense is great, but not all time. What puts his defense at an all time level is his off ball and team defense. Lebron in his defensive prime was a master at reading and breaking up plays, making rotations. He is super active on the court, when locked in (something I’m going to touch on later) his ability to understand other team’s offenses and make sharp rotations, move around the court, offer rim protection and perimeter defense is super valuable. This is a good example of his rotations. He helps off of his defense when the pass is made and AD rolls to the basket. Provides great rim protection is forces a miss from an all time finisher Lebron helps off the point guard when Dwight gets the ball, he makes a great play by blocking the shot right at the rim Lebron comes in from the weakside to deny Dwight Howard. Lebron’s off ball and team defense is easily his best defensive attribute and that’s where a large amount of his defensive impact comes from. Often Lebron played the free safety role, helping off of his matchup to slide over to the roll man, or protect the rim or attempt a steal in the passing lane. This iconic play is a great example of Lebron's ability. His rotation is on time and he offers great rim resistance here. He made these type of plays often in his prime Lebron is extremely active on the defensive end, switching through multiple positions, rotating over to stop the rim roller, closing out shooters all on the same play. His playmaking and vision help him in reading plays, often anticipating which pass is going to be made ahead of time. He is amazing at knowing the ball handlers passes making rotations ahead of time often breaking up plays. Rotating over to players, helping and getting blocks from the weak side, disrupting passing lanes, Lebron is great at all of these components. He’s at the right place at the right time and adds a lot of value to his team’s defense. The Miami Heat had a hard hedging defensive scheme due to Lebron’s ability to play the free safety role. Helping when the roller got the ball on a pick and roll, coming over to stop a driver, closing out a shooter on the opposite side of the court, Peak defensive Lebron did it all. Lebron reads the ball handlers pass way ahead of time and gets the steal. Fantastic anticipation, his all time vision helps him here His vision here too helps him a lot. Sees the pass ahead of time and makes a fantastic read. Lebron's lightning quick reaction and anticipation Lebron is one of the very best in NBA history at playing off ball defense, he has value as a rim protector too. In Miami he played closer to the basket at the power forward position a fair bit, his ability to influence shots at the basket was really helpful in the “small ball” lineups they played. Another big reason for Lebron being an all time defender is his versatility. Lebron can guard 1-4. I wouldn’t say it’s fair to say that he can guard 1-5, but he can sure switch 1-5. You’d often see him be comfortable at handling all positions. Lebron has been consistently guarding point guards through power forwards in his career and when he switches on centers, it’s not a mismatch most of the time. Mostly in the playoffs, having Lebron during 2009-13 meant you can have him guard the best opposing perimeter threat. He’s spent time on nearly every player, he guarded Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili and Kawhi Leonard in the 2013 finals. He’s spent time on Derrick Rose and David West while being the primary defender on Kevin Durant. In a nutshell, Lebron in his prime can guard points, shooting guards, small forwards very comfortably. Against average power forwards he does a great job relative to other players. He can contain non scoring centers, against better bigs he may make it harder for them to score. Saying he would completely stop them is a stretch though. I absolutely don’t mind Lebron guarding 1-5 for stretches, but guarding them throughout the game (1s and 5s) is something I’m not too comfortable with. Here he is switched onto Jokic and uses his strength well. He contests into a miss and secures the rebound. This versatility allowed the heat to deploy several schemes and make use of them effectively. Lebron is one of the few players in history to effectively be able to switch through all positions. He does struggle at times against dominant post scorers, at times the physicality is overwhelming even for him. In his prime he did a really good job vs most shifty guards, often staying with them and sliding his feet well. Guarding wings was no problem for him either. Lebron’s weakside shot blocking ability also helps in him playing different off ball roles. He has value as a rim protector, often helping alter shots at the basket. He’s great at reading passing lanes, posting healthy steal and deflection numbers. His length and ability to read plays make him effective when stealing passes. Lebron Steal Rate Percentile Lebron doesn’t make a lot of errors in off ball situations, though he has some minor flaws. Lebron’s closeouts at times are sloppy, not the best footwork and getting beat by subtle fakes a fair few times. He misses out on a few rotations which are extremely close to the basket, being marginally late or not realizing he could make the play. Lebron’s transition defense has been up and down throughout his career. In his prime it was really good, he was a great transition defender. In the later end of his career, the effort reduced and his ability to track back and impact plays wasn't as common. Lebron’s speed and size make him a really effective transition defender, closing out, swatting shots or even simply slowing down attacks. Lebron is an elite rebounder for his position and was great at not fouling. Another important element of Lebron’s defense is his really high defensive IQ. Lebron is a walking scouting report, with so much attention to detail and time spent studying the sport he basically knows players, their tendencies, their shooting splits on different areas of the court. The guy is simply a genius. Super high IQ defender who knows when to help off of his man, knows which shooters aren’t good ball handlers; makes them uncomfortable, etc. Heck he knows every play of other teams too, the guy is a walking playbook too. His IQ on that side of the court is so helpful, knowing where to be, when to be, what play is being run, how to play a man, this guy is prepared for basically everything.
Defensive Career
Lebron dPIPM Lebron rDRTG Lebron James has had an eventful defensive career. During 2003-07 he wasn’t a super impactful nor great defender. Around 2008 is where he started making greater strides and 2009 is the first season where his defensive potential was realized. His on ball defense was never great pre 2009 and off ball he wasn’t super aware. During 2009 he improved in all aspects. This was around his peak athleticism too. He became more versatile, a much better on ball defender and most importantly a smarter defender. After he went to Miami, he became an ever better defender. At this stage of his life he was at his athletic peak, added more weight to his frame and as explosive as ever. His crazy athleticism along with super high IQ made him one of the best defenders in the league. He was super versatile and constantly engaged. Around 2014 is the time his effort dropped a bit. He was still a great defender, his consistency was slightly lower. When he went back to Cleavland, his athleticism had declined a touch bit. Mainly his on ball defense took a slight hit due to slower feet and his off ball defense took a slight hit due to slower reactions. In 2017 he probably reached the defensive low in his career after the first major improvement in 2009. His effort greatly reduced and his foot speed was slower. His athleticism had faded a bit too. 2017-19, Lebron wasn’t a good defender by his standards. All aspects of his defensive game took a hit to some extent. A lot of this was mainly due to him “coasting” on defense or lack of effort. He got beat more often off the dribble, he wasn’t making rotations as frequently and proficiently, he struggled with shifty guards and players in general. In 2020, he is back to being a great defender. He is very clearly not in his defensive prime but added effort along with unparalleled iq makes him a really valuable defender. To sum his defensive career up, I think 2009-13 was his defensive prime, this is the time he was one of the greatest and most impactful wing defenders of all time. Before that period, his fundamentals, IQ and actual ability wasn’t that high and after that period his effort and athleticism had decreased. More often than not, Lebron’s defense in the postseason becomes better than his defense in the regular season, showing he clearly saves himself for when it matters most.
Michael Jordan was a 6’6, 195-215lb freak of nature. Just like Lebron he is considered one of the most athletic players ever too. MJ has a 6’11 wingspan and a ridiculous 9.75 hand length, crazy for a 6’6 player. He also has a 11.5 handspan, again ridiculous. One of the quickest reaction times and agility in nba history, Michael was really fast both in short and long distance runs. He has a crazy 48 inch vertical, one of the best ever.
Defensive Profile
Michael Jordan was a super energetic high risk high reward defender for the most part. One of the most athletic players of all time, he had all the tools to be an elite defender. In his younger days, he wasn’t the smartest or most polished defender, he was still a positive on that end though. As the years went on he developed into being an elite defender with his athleticism, reactions, energy and technical ability. He made the leap from being an ok defender to good one around 1987 and became elite in 88. In his prime, one of the best components of his defense was his man to man defense and ability to guard skilled ball handlers. His speed, reaction time and footwork made him a really effective defender when guarding isolation possessions. Often guarding the best perimeter player on the opposing team for the first half of his career, Michael had the ability to contain players, stay in front of his man and be a superb point of attack defender. He put his 6’6 frame to the max using every bit of his athleticism to stop penetrators, he was so quick when moving, always keeping offensive players in front of him. On the ball, he had great fundamentals; moved in his stance really well, had great footwork and his massive hands helped in navigating players. The combination of fundamentals and supreme athleticism made Jordan really difficult to beat off the dribble. He was one of the best ever at guarding players one on one. Michael’s error rate on one on one defensive sequences was lower than Lebron, he got blown by less and got beat less. Younger Michael did have problems with this element, often getting beat at a higher rate. Before his 88 season this was a problem. During 1988 and onwards his ability to slow done drives was amazing, often locking up players. He was so quick to spots and he used his chest to cut out a lot of drives. Anticipating where his man would go and reacting before the move was even made. 1988-1993 he often took on the best guard, great at containing them and forcing higher turnovers and lower shooting percentages. His hands were really active, one of the biggest hands in NBA history. He troubled ball handlers constantly by getting under them, great stance and using his hands to disrupt their dribble. This generated a lot of steals with him often swiping at the ball. He was so effective at this, completely shutting down players at times, getting the ball in his hands like they were gloves and killing their momentum. He was also great at contesting shots with his massive wingspan and reaction time. His ability to remove players from games was valuable, especially in the playoffs. Jordan’s post defense wasn’t great for the most part. 1984-90 Jordan weighed around 195-200 pounds, he wasn’t the strongest. He struggled at times with good post players and would often try and snipe the post, a risky strategy which didn’t always pay off. Gradually as he got stronger he also got smarter, not taking as many risks and using his body more effectively. Overall Jordan’s post defense was good and didn’t hurt his team that much. MJ sniping the post and getting the steal. Something he did fairly often In the second half of his career, he added more strength and lost some speed, he became smarter, less risk taking defender and used his strength really effectively. During the second three-peat he was slower than before and his defensive errors on ball increased, he got blown by more. Although he didn’t bleed that much value, still a great defender Moving onto his off ball defense, Michael Jordan is one of the greatest in passing lanes, his anticipation, hands and aggressive style means he has few of the greatest steal numbers of all time. A master at creating havoc in the passing lanes, he is 3rd all time in total steals, 18th in steal percentage and 4th in steals per game. His aggression in passing lanes was great, although again a high risk high reward strategy. He had one of the best reaction time in NBA history, lightning quick reflexes and extreme speed made him great in rotations. Good subtle double by MJ and his active hands lead to the steal. Great at getting steals from the passing lanes. Michael tracks the shooter well and gets the steal. He was phenomenal at denying passes, denying and stealing a post entry, not allowing post entries when guarding the ball handler, fighting over cross screens and stealing passes, Jordan had a lot of value on creating turnovers. With all these positives comes the negative, Michael was a big gambler (on the court obviously), he went for steals a touch bit too often. At times his mistakes led to easy baskets, although his error rate wasn’t that high. As he matured as a player, he took less risks, went for less steals and played a more conservative (a good thing) style of defense. Michael attempts the steal but fails. This leads to open dunk. His high risk high reward playstyle would lead to these types of breakdowns at times. He was a really good team defender too, making accurate reads and timely rotations at a high rate. Michael consistently helped off of his man to provide help defense, his quickness and activity rate made him a really good help defender. He was a great weakside shot blocker, he was really good at helping from the weak side in general often leading to steals or blocks. Michael rotates over from the weakside to swat the shot His reads were accurate, although he was a little too aggressive at times, this high risk high reward strategy led to over helping at times. An evident tendency of Jordan was his super aggressive style of defense for the first 9 years of his career. Another minor flaw was he didn’t offer a lot of resistance at the basket when rotating over. Despite having a crazy vertical leap, MJ’s rim protection wasn’t super valuable, he did make the right rotations but his contests weren’t necessarily shot altering. Younger Jordan didn’t have the mass to offer good protection, older Jordan didn’t have the vertical. He wasn’t the strongest and rim rollers could easily finish over him. He shys away from contact at the rim and wasn’t reliable in these situations. Here his overhelping leads to the open shot. Relatively early into his career and in the second three-peat, the number of good rotations he made were lesser than his prime. It was clear when he was taking the gas off and conserving his energy. Around 87-92, Michael’s activity rate was phenomenally high, both on the ball and off the ball. Michael’s off ball activity allowed Chicago to have one of the most aggressive perimeter defenses in NBA history. Since the bulls didn’t have great rim protection, they built their scheme around Michael, Scottie and a suffocating perimeter defense. Due to their point of attack defense, aggressive helping and stealing passing lanes, the bulls had a defensive dynasty for almost a decade. Jordan helps off his man and gets the steal. Great timing and help defense Michael was also a versatile defender who could guard point guards, shooting guards and small forwards. His ability to guard and switch 1-3 to near perfection was really valuable to his overall impact. Throughout his career he’s guarded these positions and he’s done it really well, he’s quick enough for points and big enough for small forwards. There’s not much of a sample size where he can guard power forwards or centers. Basically you would not trust him to switch onto PFs or centers without it being a mismatch. He’s not big enough to alter their shots or make it tougher for them. He never really needed to guard 4s and 5s but switching on bigger players wasn’t ideal. He’s mostly spent time on guards although he is able to guard SFs with no problem. In his career he matched up with elite offensive players in Magic Johnson, Clyde Drexler, Reggie Miller, Isiah Thomas and more. This meant the bulls could almost take a player out of the game at times, Michael’s defense was so pest like he troubled ball handlers like no other. Michel’s steal and block numbers for a guard are insane. There's only been 13 players in NBA history to have 150+ steals and a 100+ blocks in a single season. Only 2 are guards. There's only been 4 total seasons with 200+ steals and 100+ blocks, Michael did it twice. The red points are the 86-87 and 87-88 Jordan seasons. Talking about a trend in all of his defensive skills, his high risk high reward playstyle. Michael’s defensive IQ wasn’t amazing a lot of times, especially when talking about unforced errors. He didn’t make that many one on one errors, missed rotations due to his inability; it was rather due to going for steals or being a little too aggressive. This isn’t to say he wasn’t a smart defender, it’s just about losing some value due to avoidable errors. His transition defense was a bit streaky, he wasn’t super aware early on and later on his effort was reduced. In his prime he was a really effective transition defender, slowing down fastbreaks, switching onto whoever he wanted to. He was also an elite rebounder for guards. His foul rate was fairly high for his position throughout his career.
Defensive Career
Michael Jordan dPIPM Michael Jordan rDRTG With all the tools to be a really good defender, Michael entered the league as a raw defender. He was a positive around 84-86 but not a good defender. Around 87, before his dpoy campaign he improved a lot in all departments of defense. Became smarter, increased effort, much better concentration, footwork and movement had improved. His defensive prime and where he truly realized was 1988-92, at this point of time he’d solidified himself as one of the best defensive guards in the league, in fact defenders in general. Michael was one of the best defenders ever for this prime, an all time one on one defender and an elite team defender. He was still making his risky plays but he was smarter. He was about 205lb during this stretch, phenomenal athleticism and on a defensive juggernaut. In 93 his defense had dipped a bit, slightly reduced effort and a bit of a dip in athleticism. He made less good rotations, his man defense was still great and he was still as versatile. After he came back from retirement, he had lost more athleticism, was slower footed and less active in passing lanes. In 95-96 and 96-97 he became one of the best guard defenders in the league again. He was much smarter and had developed a great defensive IQ by this time. His rotation activity wasn’t as frequent but it was more controlled and really valuable. In 98 he wasn't the same athletic freak he once was, he wasn’t guarding quicker guards as frequently as it wasn’t the best matchup. He was much slower relative to young Jordan, but during 96-98 he was even stronger than before. His post defense improved and he was great at using his chest to stop players. He was still a good defender but clearly not the same. In his wizards days, Jordan was a negative defender, obviously at the age of 38 and 39 it’s hard to be a good one. Overall he had a great dominant defensive career, with him reaching his apex around 88-92. He was an all league level defender throughout 87-97 (missing 2 years:-94&95) and he was consistently a positive on that end up till his Washington days. He became a smarter defender in the second half of his career and he was way more athletic in the first half. Consistently being an all time man defender and great team defender, Michael also had a really high motor. Just like Lebron his defense in the postseason became even better.
Final Comparison
So after watching the film, looking at the data available, putting their defense into context, who do I think was the better or more impactful defender? The best way to put this is I think Lebron James had the better defensive prime (08-13) and Michael Jordan had the better defensive career. I think Lebron’s prime defense is more impactful and adds more value to his team compared to Michael’s. That added off ball defense and versatility gives him a slight edge over Jordan. Michael Jordan has the better defensive career, he was as valuable to more valuable for a longer period of time. I have 08-13 Lebron beating 88-92 Michael by a hair, his combination of team and isolation defense along with amazing versatility added a lot of value to his team. Both are all time defenders, especially in their primes. Jordan’s defensive consistency stayed up till later in his career, Lebron declined earlier. Both these greats turn it up in the playoffs, predictably their defense gets better when the stakes are higher. Both of the players were a part of great league defenses and clearly had an all time impact.
US States That Allow 18 Year Olds To Gamble Legally At Brick And Mortar Land Casinos. There are currently twelve states that have established 18+ over as their legal minimum gambling age for state-regulated casino gaming. Those states include: Washington; Rhode Island; Puerto Rico; Oregon; Oklahoma; Montana; Minnesota; Michigan; Idaho; Georgia; Florida; California Yes, there are casinos in which you can legally gamble at 18. It depends on the individual state laws. Almost all state controlled casinos require you to be 21 years old, Native American casinos... Today there are 22 states where 18-year olds can legally gamble and 35 which only allow 21+. However, it can also vary depending on the casinos themselves as Native American casinos enjoy a special... The legal gambling age is 18-years-old on all land under California jurisdiction. Because Indian casinos technically operate on reservation land, they aren’t beholden to California legislation. They can set their own legal gambling age to some extent (with some government oversight). Gambling in Las Vegas is subject to a strict minimum age requirement of 21 years old; nowhere in the city is an 18 year old permitted to gamble. In fact, casino staff will typically prevent anyone under the age of 21 from standing or sitting down within their gaming areas. In some cases, nobody under the age of 18 is even allowed to pass through the casino doors. i have read on many websites and heard from a few people there are places 18 year olds can gamble and me and a few frineds are trying to go to a casino for a vacation but i cannot find a place that will aloow me to gamble at the age of 18 does anyone know of any p[laces in or near the U.S. where its legal to gamble at 18 Some states allow 18 year olds to gamble. Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington and Wyoming all have gambling ages of 18. Every other state in the Union has fixed their gambling age at 21, and you cannot get around this in any way. With the passage of this bill, here are just a few of the things that American 18-year-olds will be legally allowed to do before they are allowed to buy products with nicotine: 1. Buy shotguns and You probably knew that your kids can vote at 18 but there are quite a few of these came as a surprise to us. So yes, while some things change when your child turns 18 one thing doesn’t change and probably never will; whether your kids are 18 or 80, they are still your babies. They may drive you insane but you wouldn’t have it any other way. To all the “kids” who are turning 18 this You can join LifePoints as soon as you turn 16 years old. LifePoints helps companies use your opinions to develop and improve products and services. It’s free to become a LifePoints member, and you’ll earn points for each survey you complete. You can use your points to get PayPal cash or other rewards such as retail gift cards.
American vlogs 7 year old Mahiro is well on her way to being a karate master. As you can tell from this Kankudai demonstration, this girl has skills! Original Link: https:/... if you are under 18, please have an adult present before making any purchases" Gambling ist erst ab 18 Jahren erlaubt. Gambling dient hauptsächlich zur Unterhaltung, Gewinn wird man meistens ... A new PIF (almost a PIF) by Veikkaus, the Finnish state-owned gambling monopoly. Veikkaus donate most of their profits to charity, for example, to victims of abuse. Not bad, is it? If you're a ... The Kardashian kids have expressed their worries for Kris Jenner when the 60-year-old announced she was dating 35-year-old Corey Gamble and after OK! revealed that he’s a paid staffer, a new ... Christian, Hip Hop, Gospel, Rock, Rap, Inspiration Are we supposed to pick up the phone and then do it?' Hilarious footage shows two teenagers completely baffled by a rotary telephone when given four minutes ...
