/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>30287322
ooo

>>30129622

>>29947288
Hmm, if they are hiding the true Short % of float on the table, they might have used the true one in the "days to cover" calculation. not that crazy honestly, especially since they removed it.
I don't know it's possible for us to confirm the 19 days he says he saw, but it's unlikely it's a lie.
also, as much as HeyItsPixeL's prediction is flawed, they calculated the Short % of float
>Percentage of Shorts to the Float: 432.56%
which matches very well. maybe I'll look into his calculation to search for any flaws.

>>29727992
I don't remember, is this report cumulative, or was this all today?

>>29659221
This is what I've been waiting for
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>29602277
witnessed

>>29593713
I personally post her a lot

Just bought in, let the dump come I can take it

>>29161317
from five days ago
>See, because of the contract price structuring, it actually costs them MORE to knock the price down any lower. Allow me to explain:
>Lets look at both the Call and Put sides of the option chain... And for the nearest $10 swing in prices...
>There are 29,337 Put Options for $40-$50 strike.
>There are 2,459 Put Options for $51-$59 strike.
>There are 13,187 Call Options for $40-$50 strike.
>There are 3,066 Call Options for $51-$59 strike.
>Now, lemme explain why I believe this matters in predicting where the price is going to drift this week.
>If the price were to drop by $10, the net difference would be an ADDITIONAL 16,150 options that would be executed because of the contract price structuring. 10 Put Options would become in the money.
>Conversely, if the price went UP by $9, the net difference would be 507 extra contracts that would be able to be executed. Because of the price structuring, only two new Call Option strikes would be able to be executed between $55-$59.
>If we were to just look at the next five Put Option contracts below the current strike price, it equals up to 22,175. That means if the price were to DROP $5, they would need to find delivery for an EXTRA 2,217,500 shares.
>If the price were to go UP by $5, they would only need to find 85,600 extra shares to cover the extra contracts that would be ITM at $55.
>Let me say that again. If the price goes DOWN... It takes MORE shares off the market because of the Put Options going in dollar increments, while the Call Options go up in $5 increments.
>Based on the math, moving the price UP would save the shorts money by causing the lesser of two evils in extra deliveries.
>But one thing is for sure. They can't let the price tank any lower this upcoming week. It would trigger too many new deliveries.
>The best move to trigger the squeeze would be for us to ALLOW the price to drop to exactly $39.99 at close of next week... as odd as that seems

>>29047056
yeah it was in my quoted post, should have included it anyways

>>28514444
checked 4 quads

>>28097781
>>28097352
thank you bros, amazing stuff