Gamestop Reddit short squeeze

Cuchulainn2016 said:
Ok, well the IP owner allows it to happen all the time, when the item is a physical product. So, I can buy a game in dvd form in a physical shop, and I can trade that in later.
Physical shops don't have to buy the rights to the IP to sell the dvd.
The IP owners are also happy for it to happen digitally.
The problem is the vendors aren't set up to do it as they are still working on a digital devices model that is over a decade old.
In simple terms, it makes the digital marketplace functionally identical to how a physical marketplace operates, with the inherent benefits of that model and without the obvious overheads.
Click to expand...

We’re not talking about physical media we’re talking about digital media.

Why would the IP owners be happy to let it happen when it leads to less sales for them? If there are used copies of their games floating all over the digital marketplace it severely devalues their product. I understand what the concept is but they’re not going to allow GameStop to do this with their property. As I said it only works if GameStop buys exclusive rights to games which is not a feasible business model and creates a whole slew of other problems. None of this even broaches the other problem with the actual gaming platforms in that they have to allow this, they have to willingly allow a competitor to move in on their platform.

I think you need to re-evaluate it brother, it doesn’t make business sense. It’s an idea GameStop put out to make their supporters happy because with everything going on they had to say something and it took off because it’s exactly what the consumer would want, but it would never be allowed to actually happen.
 
FrancisK said:
We’re not talking about physical media we’re talking about digital media.

Why would the IP owners be happy to let it happen when it leads to less sales for them? If there are used copies of their games floating all over the digital marketplace it severely devalues their product. I understand what the concept is but they’re not going to allow GameStop to do this with their property. As I said it only works if GameStop buys exclusive rights to games which is not a feasible business model and creates a whole slew of other problems. None of this even broaches the other problem with the actual gaming platforms in that they have to allow this, they have to willingly allow a competitor to move in on their platform.

I think you need to re-evaluate it brother, it doesn’t make business sense. It’s an idea GameStop put out to make their supporters happy because with everything going on they had to say something and it took off because it’s exactly what the consumer would want, but it would never be allowed to actually happen.
Click to expand...
Ok, so first off it doesn't lead to reduced sales for the IP owners.
After a year or 2 you can pick up a game for 10% of what it cost when it is released.
The major revenue is in pre-ordered, and first week to monthly purchases. After that the game cost drops significantly. Also, remember that the IP owner doesn't get all, or nearly all, of the retail value of the game.
The other major revenue stream is in game purchases and microtransactions.
Retrade of games does not significantly reduce the IP owners revenue. However, if I buy a second hand copy of a game, then I can play it, and I may be likely to buy in game items to catch up with the other players.
Take GTA 5 for example. I can pick up a copy of it for 5-10 today. Rockstar get very little from my purchase, but I may decide to buy their Shark cards for in game money.
Now, piracy is an issue with the IP owners as it significantly reduces their income, and NFT/Blockchain may make a significant dent in that.

You keep saying that the IP owners won't allow it to happen, but you can't explain why they already do.

Even with digital media, it's not the IP owner that decides that the vendor is effectively renting out games, it is the vendor that does that. (It's a little more sophisticated and nuances than that, but you get the idea).

I buy a game on Steam, and steam revokes my ability to play it one day. Most people believe that I can't play that game anymore, but you actually can. Steam just provides a bespoke interface for all your games, with little extras like awards through the steam interface. I can just go into my hard drive and play the game by launching it from the .exe as I would have done a decade or two ago before Steam. It's a perception issue. It happened with the Kindle when Amazon released a copy of 1984 (ironically) then pulled it back off people's kindles without telling them.

You are confusing the IP owners with the vendors here.
 
When gme dropped to $210 just now I put in a few call options with my Roth IRA, I think it could bounce back up, of course it could just as easily drop another hundred points *shrug*

As an aside, steam (or gog) will never I mean never let people buy and sell used steam games after the product Id has been redeemed. That’s just crazy talk. I’m not sure what GameStop is up to, only time will tell


Cuchulainn2016 said:
Ok, so first off it doesn't lead to reduced sales for the IP owners.
After a year or 2 you can pick up a game for 10% of what it cost when it is released
Click to expand...
For pc games yes. For physical games for say first party Nintendo or Sony, no not so much, they keep the price high if it’s still selling, that goes for the physical copies and digital

edit, my other big question, how long will the gme saga continue with such a sky high price? My guess is years. It has achieved meme status similar to Tsla, there is no way tsla is worth 600/share according to any of its financials or anything close to that. It’s artificially high based off of Musks unrealistic promises that he has not delivered on and likely will never be able to deliver on. Yet it stays over 600/share (for now)

And as for why gme dipped today, GameStop sold 5 million of their own shares at market prices to generate revenue. (Note that it seems that they sold shares that they already owned rather than issue or create more shares and sell the way amc has been doing.

www.barrons.com

Why GameStop Stock Sank Despite Upbeat News

The videogame retailer disclosed plans to sell stock as it named a new CEO and CFO and reported better financial results than expected.
www.barrons.com www.barrons.com
 
Last edited:
eradicator said:
When gme dropped to $210 just now I put in a few call options with my Roth IRA, I think it could bounce back up, of course it could just as easily drop another hundred points *shrug*

As an aside, steam (or gog) will never I mean never let people buy and sell used steam games after the product Id has been redeemed. That’s just crazy talk. I’m not sure what GameStop is up to, only time will tell



For pc games yes. For physical games for say first party Nintendo or Sony, no not so much, they keep the price high if it’s still selling, that goes for the physical copies and digital

edit, my other big question, how long will the gme saga continue with such a sky high price? My guess is years. It has achieved meme status similar to Tsla, there is no way tsla is worth 600/share according to any of its financials or anything close to that. It’s artificially high based off of Musks unrealistic promises that he has not delivered on and likely will never be able to deliver on. Yet it stays over 600/share (for now)

And as for why gme dipped today, GameStop sold 5 million of their own shares at market prices to generate revenue. (Note that it seems that they sold shares that they already owned rather than issue or create more shares and sell the way amc has been doing.

www.barrons.com

Why GameStop Stock Sank Despite Upbeat News

The videogame retailer disclosed plans to sell stock as it named a new CEO and CFO and reported better financial results than expected.
www.barrons.com www.barrons.com
Click to expand...
Bought in at the dip too. First time I bought gamestop so you're not alone brother.
 
Cuchulainn2016 said:
Ok, so first off it doesn't lead to reduced sales for the IP owners.
After a year or 2 you can pick up a game for 10% of what it cost when it is released.
The major revenue is in pre-ordered, and first week to monthly purchases. After that the game cost drops significantly. Also, remember that the IP owner doesn't get all, or nearly all, of the retail value of the game.
The other major revenue stream is in game purchases and microtransactions.
Retrade of games does not significantly reduce the IP owners revenue. However, if I buy a second hand copy of a game, then I can play it, and I may be likely to buy in game items to catch up with the other players.
Take GTA 5 for example. I can pick up a copy of it for 5-10 today. Rockstar get very little from my purchase, but I may decide to buy their Shark cards for in game money.
Now, piracy is an issue with the IP owners as it significantly reduces their income, and NFT/Blockchain may make a significant dent in that.

You keep saying that the IP owners won't allow it to happen, but you can't explain why they already do.

Even with digital media, it's not the IP owner that decides that the vendor is effectively renting out games, it is the vendor that does that. (It's a little more sophisticated and nuances than that, but you get the idea).

I buy a game on Steam, and steam revokes my ability to play it one day. Most people believe that I can't play that game anymore, but you actually can. Steam just provides a bespoke interface for all your games, with little extras like awards through the steam interface. I can just go into my hard drive and play the game by launching it from the .exe as I would have done a decade or two ago before Steam. It's a perception issue. It happened with the Kindle when Amazon released a copy of 1984 (ironically) then pulled it back off people's kindles without telling them.

You are confusing the IP owners with the vendors here.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the discussion brother we’re going in circles at this point, but i do hear what you’re saying and understand the concept of it even if I disagree that it is viable. I’m always interested in learning business related things which may make me a better businessman so I appreciate it a lot that you didn’t just get upset that I was disagreeing with you which happens a lot on here.



Unrelated to that, I hope some of you went for my repeated pleading to take profit off the table for this past spike. It’s been a very profitable week so far for those who don’t see this as anything more than just a money making opportunity, which is exactly what it is and nothing more.
 
Last edited:
FrancisK said:
Thanks for the discussion brother we’re going in circles at this point, but i do hear what you’re saying and understand the concept of it even if I disagree that it is viable. I’m always interested in learning business related things which may make me a better businessman so I appreciate it a lot that you didn’t just get upset that I was disagreeing with you which happens a lot on here.



Unrelated to that, I hope some of you went for my repeated pleading to take profit off the table for this past spike. It’s been a very profitable week so far for those who don’t see this as anything more than just a money making opportunity, which is exactly what it is and nothing more.
Click to expand...
No problem, dont have to agree to be civil!
 
C-Note said:
The media is reporting that this London-based hedge fund is shutting down because of the Gamestonk, but the company itself is not affirming that. The interesting thing in the press coverage is that the media is not using it as an opportunity to attack WSB or retail investors. I don't know why.

Click to expand...

Most likely because they know nobody is going to shed a tear for a hedge fund over a bunch of common idiots. They tried that when all this first started with the billionaire jews crying on air and trying to call it anti semitic, nobody went for it.
 
FrancisK said:
Most likely because they know nobody is going to shed a tear for a hedge fund over a bunch of common idiots. They tried that when all this first started with the billionaire jews crying on air and trying to call it anti semitic, nobody went for it.
Click to expand...
Well, the media was sympathetic to the "Occupy Wall Street" protests ten years ago, which was a leftist movement against Wall Street elites and capitalism. I guess those protestors also could have been accused of being anti-Semitic, but the accusation was not made or even hinted at.

The media follows the talking points that the globalists give them. For whatever reason, "they" have decided that this isn't a battle they want to fight. I previously predicted that the Biden administration was going to intervene in the meme-stock movement before the end of the year. If they don't, then that seems to reinforce that the globalists don't want to get involved in it, at least at this time.
 
C-Note said:
Well, the media was sympathetic to the "Occupy Wall Street" protests ten years ago, which was a leftist movement against Wall Street elites and capitalism. I guess those protestors also could have been accused of being anti-Semitic, but the accusation was not made or even hinted at.

The media follows the talking points that the globalists give them. For whatever reason, "they" have decided that this isn't a battle they want to fight. I previously predicted that the Biden administration was going to intervene in the meme-stock movement before the end of the year. If they don't, then that seems to reinforce that the globalists don't want to get involved in it, at least at this time.
Click to expand...

Yea it’s not a good look for them to turn against a bunch of broke kids to favor billionaires, even they can’t brainwash people into going for that one…
 
Kinda feeling like a jackass holding on to these AMC shares, not doing any flipping or selling but I do believe it's ready to run. Anyone else holding AMC?
 
FrancisK said:
Kinda feeling like a jackass holding on to these AMC shares, not doing any flipping or selling but I do believe it's ready to run. Anyone else holding AMC?
Click to expand...
Getting ready to sell all. Looks like they pinned it under 60. Been trading sideways more or less for a whole month.
 
GodfatherPartTwo said:
Getting ready to sell all. Looks like they pinned it under 60. Been trading sideways more or less for a whole month.
Click to expand...

Don’t blame you one bit, you made your money then get out. For me I’ve taken a lot of profit and flipped it multiple times so I’m willing to keep the risk for the upside. I’m encouraged that the price has stabilized so it could still pop the way GME did or at the worst the descent down will be very gradual so I can pull out without taking a big hit, it was green today.
 
FrancisK said:
Kinda feeling like a jackass holding on to these AMC shares, not doing any flipping or selling but I do believe it's ready to run. Anyone else holding AMC?
Click to expand...
I bought a minimal amount around $15. I am Diamond Hands, baby! lol The amount I spent is insignificant and it is more a chance for me to (in some small way) get a shot in at the wannabe masters-of-the-universe.
 
Caractacus Potts said:
I bought a minimal amount around $15. I am Diamond Hands, baby! lol The amount I spent is insignificant and it is more a chance for me to (in some small way) get a shot in at the wannabe masters-of-the-universe.
Click to expand...

Just make sure you get your money brother, dont miss out for some idealistic garbage from a bunch of kids who are doing it to live their lives playing video games and smoking seed. As much as I hate the jew billionaires those losers are not far behind them…
 
Is there a way to tell how much of AMC stock is still shorted? It could be that the hedge funds are holding off completing their short trades as long as possible in a desperate attempt to reduce their losses. However, if most of the shorts are now gone, it doesn't seem to me that there's anything to prop AMC's price above $10-15 once the current heavy, daily churn on it starts to calm down.
 
Unfortunately, this article is behind a paywall that I don't have access to, but from what I understand, RobinHood was just ordered by FINRA to pay $29k to a retail investor who was harmed when the app froze trading in GME, AMC, etc a year ago in an effort to protect the hedge funds.

www.marketwatch.com

A 27-year-old truck driver just became Robinhood's first big headache of 2022

Finra has ordered the zero-commission app Robinhood to pay Jose Batista almost $30K and found the company liable for his investment losses when it restricted...
www.marketwatch.com www.marketwatch.com

If you or anyone you know was damaged by those RobinHood shenanigans, please ask them to file their own claim through FINRA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top