nuckin_futz Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 18 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I wonder if Kimmel will buy a share, just to have access to all the company documentation. As a shareholder he'd be allowed to attend the (AGM) Annual General Meeting. Though if he is going to buy a share, I'd recommend he wait as he will be able to get it cheaper. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Bob Long Posted April 8 Popular Post Share Posted April 8 38 minutes ago, The Arrogant Worms said: Who would vote for this lunatic 'Soiled:' Trump suggests Biden relieved himself on Oval Office desk https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2667720954/ OK so now we know Trump did that too. 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the destroyer of worlds Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 At least Joe knows not to look at the sun without eye protection. Lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the destroyer of worlds Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 **** the old people is an interesting campaign strategy. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 40 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said: I don't like Graham, but at least he's a strong supporter of Ukraine instead of a traitor like Trump. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 2 minutes ago, King Heffy said: I don't like Graham, but at least he's a strong supporter of Ukraine instead of a traitor like Trump. Graham has never seen or thought of a war he didn't like. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 45 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said: Double post Edited April 9 by King Heffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 3 minutes ago, Gnarcore said: Graham has never seen or thought of a war he didn't like. I don't like the guy, but at least he served in the military. There's something seriously wrong in the US where in defending Lindsey Graham. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 I saw a headline today that said Devin Nunes is claiming Truth Social is "debt free" and has $200 million in cash. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/companies/trump-s-truth-social-ceo-claims-it-is-debt-free-and-has-200m-in-cash/ss-BB1lgWZg?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=eaf7ac23f1fe48cc900307d35db8f8a7&ei=28 It's a Daily Mail piece and I haven't been able to find anyone else reporting on it, so I don't know if the story is legit, or if other outlets just don't care....Still, it got me thinking....I've heard that claim before.... The other day, just after it was reported that the app lost $58 million, while only earning $4 million, Trump claimed that the app is on solid footing. He also provided what I think must be the source for Nunes' claim: Quote I THINK TRUTH IS AMAZING!” Trump wrote, echoing a statement earlier this week from Devin Nunes, CEO of the app’s parent company, Trump Media & Technology Group, that it has “no debt and over $200 million in the bank.” I have to admit that when I first saw this, I just looked at it as yet another case of Trump lying through his teeth. "Business as usual", as it were... But then I wondered....Is this legal? Are you allowed to publicly overvalue a stock for which you are the primary shareholder? I know very little about the markets, but I do recall hearing a phrase called "pump and dump", which I gathered at the time, would be something that the SEC would take a dim view of... Is this not exactly what Trump and Nunes are doing here? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1) He's nice to you Woody because you've got something he wants ($$$$) 2) When have the Jets last been relevant? Since around the Joe Namath days? Or around the time your buddy was getting his daddy to write him a doctor's note letting him evade the draft (like Freddy's dad evading the draft in Germany?)? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 36 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: I saw a headline today that said Devin Nunes is claiming Truth Social is "debt free" and has $200 million in cash. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/companies/trump-s-truth-social-ceo-claims-it-is-debt-free-and-has-200m-in-cash/ss-BB1lgWZg?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=eaf7ac23f1fe48cc900307d35db8f8a7&ei=28 It's a Daily Mail piece and I haven't been able to find anyone else reporting on it, so I don't know if the story is legit, or if other outlets just don't care....Still, it got me thinking....I've heard that claim before.... The other day, just after it was reported that the app lost $58 million, while only earning $4 million, Trump claimed that the app is on solid footing. He also provided what I think must be the source for Nunes' claim: I have to admit that when I first saw this, I just looked at it as yet another case of Trump lying through his teeth. "Business as usual", as it were... But then I wondered....Is this legal? Are you allowed to publicly overvalue a stock for which you are the primary shareholder? I know very little about the markets, but I do recall hearing a phrase called "pump and dump", which I gathered at the time, would be something that the SEC would take a dim view of... Is this not exactly what Trump and Nunes are doing here? I'm sure the US FTC is watching everything these asshats say about a public company. It's only a matter of time before the fraud charges. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Jon Stewart Mocks Fox News for Warning Migrants Could Sneak Across Border During the Eclipse https://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-mocks-fox-news-for-warning-migrants-could-sneak-across-border-during-the-eclipse/ Jon Stewart Mocks Fox News for Warning Migrants Could Sneak Across Border During the Eclipse The Daily Show host Jon Stewart ridiculed Fox News for warning that migrants could sneak across the southern border at a greater rate than usual during Monday’s four-minute solar eclipse. During his show on Monday evening, Stewart noted that “not everybody was happy about today’s celestial seasoning,” before playing a clip of America’s Newsroom co-host Bill Hemmer saying, “We are told that officials are bracing for higher traffic than usual, and that means a real opportunity for smugglers and cartels and migrants to come right in.” “Or they could just wait ’til night time,” reacted Stewart as the audience burst into laughter. “Four minutes?!” He added, “I gotta say though, is there nothing Fox can’t tie to immigration? ‘This here cicada infestation provides perfect cover for Venezuelans.'” Stewart also went on to mock Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) for claiming that the eclipse, along with Friday’s east coast earthquake, were “strong signs” from God “to tell us to repent. ””How do you know?” questioned Stewart. “How would you know that that is what God meant? Why would God be so obtuse? Why would he do that? Or she. Why would she? Or, how crazy would it be if God insisted on ‘they/them’? But honestly, is this shit really how God works? 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 16 hours ago, nuckin_futz said: As a shareholder he'd be allowed to attend the (AGM) Annual General Meeting. Though if he is going to buy a share, I'd recommend he wait as he will be able to get it cheaper. Trump owns 78.7 million shares or 57.3% of the company. If the share price stays above $17.50 until April 26 then he will receive an additional 36 million shares. So he will have a total of 114,700,000 shares, or 83.5% of the company. Other board members, founders and executives also own an additional 20 million shares. They are all subject to the 6 month lock off period. If this is all true then I can’t see how this stock is going to tank. The float will be too small. Also, you can’t short the stock. If the stock manages to stay above that $17.50 threshold then it probably will hang around that price until the election. If Trump loses the election then he will most likely bail from the stock and sell everything and the stock will get delisted. If he wins the election then all bets are off. Edited April 9 by Elias Pettersson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 Trump allies getting spooked that promoting RFK Jr. may blow up in their faces: report https://www.rawstory.com/rfk-jr-2667727495/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 25 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Trump owns 78.7 million shares or 57.3% of the company. If the share price stays above $17.50 until April 26 then he will receive an additional 36 million shares. So he will have a total of 114,700,000 shares, or 83.5% of the company. If this is true then I can’t see how this stock is going to tank. The float will be too small. Also, you can’t short the stock. If the stock manages to stay above that $17.50 threshold then it probably will hang around that price until the election. If Trump loses the election then he will most likely bail from the stock and sell everything and the stock will get delisted. If he wins the election then all bets are off. What makes you think you cannot short the stock? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 13 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: **** the old people is an interesting campaign strategy. I think he's confusing a nursing home with palliative care. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said: What makes you think you cannot short the stock? Someone tried to short it yesterday and couldn’t even buy $100 worth of stock. It’s too expensive to short. https://stocks.apple.com/A_V0H9cJMSluro6-GPdo-9w In order to short a stock, a trader must borrow shares elsewhere first. But that has been almost impossible with Trump Media because it’s been prohibitively expensive. As of last Thursday, Trump Media was easily the most expensive stock to borrow among those with more than $50 million of short interest, according to S3 Partners. Bob Sloan, managing partner at S3 Partners, told CNN that this distinction indicates speculative bearish investors see a “high probability” the stock will drop in the short term. “The rate to borrow is insane,” said Tuttle. “At one point, it was virtually impossible to make money shorting it because the stock could go to zero and the borrow rate would erode all of your gains, which is crazy.” Not only is the supply of shares to borrow very low, but the demand is high because some market veterans believe it is overvalued. “People really, really want to short it. That is driving up the borrowing rate exponentially, which then makes it very hard to short,” said Tuttle, who tried and failed to short even just $100 of stock from his Charles Schwab account on Monday and was unable to due to insufficient shares available. This dynamic makes it easier for investors to place bullish bets, sending Trump Media shares surging. “At some point, retail guys are going to pump this. We could be sitting here tomorrow and it could be trading at $70,” Tuttle said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 8 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Someone tried to short it yesterday and couldn’t even buy $100 worth of stock. It’s too expensive to short. https://stocks.apple.com/A_V0H9cJMSluro6-GPdo-9w In order to short a stock, a trader must borrow shares elsewhere first. But that has been almost impossible with Trump Media because it’s been prohibitively expensive. As of last Thursday, Trump Media was easily the most expensive stock to borrow among those with more than $50 million of short interest, according to S3 Partners. Bob Sloan, managing partner at S3 Partners, told CNN that this distinction indicates speculative bearish investors see a “high probability” the stock will drop in the short term. “The rate to borrow is insane,” said Tuttle. “At one point, it was virtually impossible to make money shorting it because the stock could go to zero and the borrow rate would erode all of your gains, which is crazy.” Not only is the supply of shares to borrow very low, but the demand is high because some market veterans believe it is overvalued. “People really, really want to short it. That is driving up the borrowing rate exponentially, which then makes it very hard to short,” said Tuttle, who tried and failed to short even just $100 of stock from his Charles Schwab account on Monday and was unable to due to insufficient shares available. This dynamic makes it easier for investors to place bullish bets, sending Trump Media shares surging. “At some point, retail guys are going to pump this. We could be sitting here tomorrow and it could be trading at $70,” Tuttle said. I'm always tempted (note, I said tempted not actually willing to do it heh) to go 'contrarian' when so many want to go 'one way'. But this stock's price isn't based on really any "fundamentals". Probably have a better bet just going 'pass' or 'don't pass' on the craps table at the Riverrock Casino. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 4 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: Someone tried to short it yesterday and couldn’t even buy $100 worth of stock. It’s too expensive to short. https://stocks.apple.com/A_V0H9cJMSluro6-GPdo-9w In order to short a stock, a trader must borrow shares elsewhere first. But that has been almost impossible with Trump Media because it’s been prohibitively expensive. As of last Thursday, Trump Media was easily the most expensive stock to borrow among those with more than $50 million of short interest, according to S3 Partners. Bob Sloan, managing partner at S3 Partners, told CNN that this distinction indicates speculative bearish investors see a “high probability” the stock will drop in the short term. “The rate to borrow is insane,” said Tuttle. “At one point, it was virtually impossible to make money shorting it because the stock could go to zero and the borrow rate would erode all of your gains, which is crazy.” Not only is the supply of shares to borrow very low, but the demand is high because some market veterans believe it is overvalued. “People really, really want to short it. That is driving up the borrowing rate exponentially, which then makes it very hard to short,” said Tuttle, who tried and failed to short even just $100 of stock from his Charles Schwab account on Monday and was unable to due to insufficient shares available. This dynamic makes it easier for investors to place bullish bets, sending Trump Media shares surging. “At some point, retail guys are going to pump this. We could be sitting here tomorrow and it could be trading at $70,” Tuttle said. The someone you're referring to tried to short it through a Charles Schwab account. It's no surprise it's HTB (hard to borrow) at Schwab. As it would be at almost any retail brokerage. No one who is serious about short selling would use a retail brokerage. You need to be with a specialized broker which has a locate service Like CenterPoint Securities. A locate fee is never prohibitive when the stock in question is swing +10%/day. The people in your article are talking about a long term borrow to remain short for months or a year+. These can occasionally exceed 100%. Obviously there's no point in remaining short for a year when the borrow fee exceeds 100%. Shorting is rarely a long term game. It's done for short term gain on a time frame of days to a few weeks, if not hourly ). If people want to short it and don't mind coughing up a bit of premium they can use the options market. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 12 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: I'm always tempted (note, I said tempted not actually willing to do it heh) to go 'contrarian' when so many want to go 'one way'. But this stock's price isn't based on really any "fundamentals". Probably have a better bet just going 'pass' or 'don't pass' on the craps table at the Riverrock Casino. At some point it's going to squeeze. That's just the nature of markets. They don't move in one direction for long. It actually looks ripe for a squeeze right now. As I type this it's trading at $37.15. I could see it touching $50 again relatively soon. It could also get pummelled again. The best move would be to avoid it all together or wait for it to squeeze then short it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 4 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said: The someone you're referring to tried to short it through a Charles Schwab account. It's no surprise it's HTB (hard to borrow) at Schwab. As it would be at almost any retail brokerage. No one who is serious about short selling would use a retail brokerage. You need to be with a specialized broker which has a locate service Like CenterPoint Securities. A locate fee is never prohibitive when the stock in question is swing +10%/day. The people in your article are talking about a long term borrow to remain short for months or a year+. These can occasionally exceed 100%. Obviously there's no point in remaining short for a year when the borrow fee exceeds 100%. Shorting is rarely a long term game. It's done for short term gain on a time frame of days to a few weeks, if not hourly ). If people want to short it and don't mind coughing up a bit of premium they can use the options market. Makes sense. As of April 26 though Trump and all of his cronies will own almost 97% of the company with a 6 month lock up period. So, the float will be minimal. Even if you wanted to short it I can't see how you would be able to purchase enough of the stock to make a difference in the price... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 28 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: I'm always tempted (note, I said tempted not actually willing to do it heh) to go 'contrarian' when so many want to go 'one way'. But this stock's price isn't based on really any "fundamentals". Probably have a better bet just going 'pass' or 'don't pass' on the craps table at the Riverrock Casino. There are alot of Trump supporters holding the bag at $70. They won't be selling anytime soon. With Trump about to acquire an additional 36 million shares, I can see this stock going back up to $70 at some point in the short term as the float is going to be tiny. But personally I wouldn't touch it now. If it holds above $17.50 on April 26 then I might take a flyer though. At that point with such a small float it could easily jump to $40-50 in a day or two... Edited April 9 by Elias Pettersson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) Down another 8% so far today. It's going to fail like most things Trump touches. I read an article today that Trump might have broken the law with a pump a pump and dump and committed securities fraud. Trump supporters are so dumb. The company will never make money. Edited April 9 by The Arrogant Worms 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 2 hours ago, RupertKBD said: I saw a headline today that said Devin Nunes is claiming Truth Social is "debt free" and has $200 million in cash. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/companies/trump-s-truth-social-ceo-claims-it-is-debt-free-and-has-200m-in-cash/ss-BB1lgWZg?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=eaf7ac23f1fe48cc900307d35db8f8a7&ei=28 It's a Daily Mail piece and I haven't been able to find anyone else reporting on it, so I don't know if the story is legit, or if other outlets just don't care....Still, it got me thinking....I've heard that claim before.... The other day, just after it was reported that the app lost $58 million, while only earning $4 million, Trump claimed that the app is on solid footing. He also provided what I think must be the source for Nunes' claim: I have to admit that when I first saw this, I just looked at it as yet another case of Trump lying through his teeth. "Business as usual", as it were... But then I wondered....Is this legal? Are you allowed to publicly overvalue a stock for which you are the primary shareholder? I know very little about the markets, but I do recall hearing a phrase called "pump and dump", which I gathered at the time, would be something that the SEC would take a dim view of... Is this not exactly what Trump and Nunes are doing here? Hyping your own stock is frowned upon but necessarily illegal. Trump and Nunes' shares are restricted so they can pump but cannot dump. There aren't really any rules regarding the practice of "jaw boning" or talking a stock up. Analysts do it all the time issuing BS upgrades etc. If you actually pump a stock then dump that is illegal so long as your intent was to dupe people. Hard to prove unless you're dealing with idiots. There was a gang of nitwits with a huge Twitter following doing this 3 years ago. Some of you may remember a Twitter account "Zack Morris". He and his crew were doing just that. Loading up then issuing recommendations while all the lemmings piled in they were dumping on them. They made millions until they got caught. They were a little too brash posting pictures with cars and houses etc and even taunting the SEC by posting "SEC deez nutz". One of their crew could see it coming and took screen shots of them bragging about ripping people off. "Zack" is looking at at least 20 years in government housing. Edited April 9 by nuckin_futz 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.