Ok. Before the FUD gets out of hand.
It was my fault for not directly asking if the short position in GameStop must be covered.
His answer was in response to the HISTORY of shorts not having to cover. This only happens when short sellers are able to drive the target company into the ground. I believe his full answer addressed this fact. This was MY fault for misguiding the question.
Obviously, he talked for a very long time about the number of phantom shares that are circulating within the market. He also stated that GameStop is a prime example of this.
Phantom shares resulted from hyper-shorting with the intent of driving GameStop into the ground. When retail investors refused to sell through the onslaught of market manipulation, it reversed the game in our favor.
There is a very high chance, as he stated, that the shareholder vote will reflect the presence of continuous short selling (naked & otherwise) because the problem is SO LARGE that even the "back-office" guys can't sort it out.
He also explained that the SEC has been turning a blind eye to these situations because they are RARELY over 100%. If we are correct, it will be much harder for them to sweep this under the rug. Finally, his outlook on the SEC's current leadership, especially Gary Gensler, is positive.
The perfect storm has arrived, so please don't let a misguided question spoil the confirmation bias in that AMA!!
This site only for you and only just for fun. For you, who love fun and laughter.
About site content
Site content is 18+. Site content is not unique and is a compilation of information from different resources. There is no moderation when adding content.
The creator of the site, neither as e wants to hurt the feelings of believers, sexual minorities and other groups of users. If all the same you felt hurt, I'm sorry.