43
Now that some believe me, What if a publicized DRS count of >76M actually breaks the math? What if ALL of the "Cede" quarters are actually hiding a massive increase in DRS? (lemmy.whynotdrs.org)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/drs_your_gme@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A full year later, we have "yet" to break 76M again.

In this post here https://lemmy.whynotdrs.org/post/381421, we discussed how the numbers are likely much higher than are currently reported. This heavily implicates Cede/DTCC because every quarter requires fraudulent reporting (well played SEC).

But how much higher? We've been at 75M for exactly 4 quarters now. Estimates at the previous pace would have us over 130M shares DRSd at this point.

This would mean there are very few shares actually left out there. Roughly only 26M left to DRS before they truly start to panic from the math-breaking number. The DTCC definitely fucked up by thinking we couldn't buy the entire thing lol.

They warned you there would be FUD, this is it. Keep DRSing and eventually ComputerShare will stop selling to us like they said they would if there are no locates ;).

With that in mind, also don't forget the $149T bullet swap that hits instantly on December 15th. Since they opened that particular short, the stock has seen a 390% increase along with a 430% rise in interest rates, do think they roll that shit over ;)?

I will leave with the same question: Why do you think Gamestop changed the wording from 03/22/2023 onward?

all 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 27 points 2 years ago (12 children)

In no way do I believe DRS numbers have stagnated for this long. There are either concerted efforts being made to hide the truth via legal jargon, or im a monkeys uncle

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago

    Which is insanely bullish. If no numbers are posted, I will continue w/ the pace I have charted in the previous post. There is no reason for the DRS-rate to not have increased during this price fall. But I will keep the slope the same for my estimates going forward. As bearish as possible.

    Over 129M DRS'd, and the DTCC is still tryna fuck around like nobody will notice our ceiling is exactly at 1x the float piror to the 1/4 split.

    Me: "Oh, we can't DRS more than 76M? That kinda looks like you took all of the shares during the split and shorted w/ them instead."

    DTCC: "Uhhh, no, you actually all just stopped at the exact same time (76M DRSd), duh. Oh and you stopped 1 year ago. The posts you've seen since then are actually all fake. Also Citadel is definitely not short on GME, don't even look into it."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Something I've not seen anyone discuss... perhaps because it's a very unpleasant thought.

    What if the flood of purple circle posts on reddit are fake? If a majority are posted by bad actors, then SHF pull shares they DRS'd, wouldn't that leave the numbers static?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Possible, but not probable imo

    GME fervor doesnt suddenly die at 76m shares

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    There was a time I would read the post history of everyone I saw posting a purple circle. Did it for a month and couldn't see anything felt was dodgy, but that was a while ago...

    What checks does drsbot make to verify submissions? I deleted my account a while back as felt I was addicted to reddit. When I made a new one I couldn't post on superstonk due to my acc being under a year old. I messaged the mods at 6 months to request approval and was reinstated early. So it's not exactly Fort Knox over there!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I'm trying to think of a less tinfoil answer and I can't. Something doesn't add up, big time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    There was some hypothesizing a while back (on SS and before Lemmy) that the initial drop or flatlining of the DRS trendline was due to hedgies having initially DRSed and then un-DRSed them, but I don't recall if that was ever generally agreed. This was about the time that the Heat Lamp Theory was introduced which seems to have more supporting evidence at this point.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Could be. Every day it seems more clear that most of what we are publicly provided or witness online and in media has been fabricated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    I just viewed some profiles, some I can't view without logging in due to being 18+. Most were 2 years, couple were 7+ years old.

    Kinda meaningless though as I can go buy an aged account for nefarious use right now if I wanted.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I haven't been back there since the exodus; has there been a continuous flood of purple circles there while the DRS numbers themselves are stable?

    If so, is there an Occam's Razor explanation that is simpler than crime?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Wouldn't a close look at the ledger solve the question ?

    I would totally do it myself if I was living on the same side of the Atlantic as Grapevine, Texas, but it is not the case.

    Is someone volunteer to die for the cause (again) and go check the ledger manually ?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    To my understanding, the ledger doesn't reveal DTC tuckery. In the ledger you will find a one-liner to the effect that DTC has the rest of the shares.

    To prove their fuckery we would need to see the DTC ledger, but it’s a private corporation above the law 🤮

    Lucky for us, we can lock the float and they can’t stop us 💎💪

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    But looking at the ledger you would be able to tally everyone else.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Oh I understand now what you mean 💎✌️

    Ya I guess if we could monitor it then we could detect which entries are going down just enough to keep the total where it is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Let's say you have two accounts at ComputerShare with DRSed GME stock. One of the accounts is in pure Book form while the other is mostly Book but also has a few in Plan. If you had the opportunity to see your entry in the ledger, then you could confirm whether or not the ledger showed you as having exactly 1000, 500, or something in between. Anything less than 1000 would support the Heat Lamp Theory.

    Another thing worth doing is just summing all the non-DTC/Cede entries in the ledger to the extent possible in the time allowed, to confirm that they add up to whatever the DRS total is for that day. I would expect that would only be possible if the ledger does not list all of the shares in Plan accounts under their respective household investor names.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 10 points 2 years ago

    What a sham market we have.

    Potempkin market.

    You know what, I amend that. It's a sham world. When are we collectively going to band together and pull back the curtain on The Great and Powerful Oz?

    Hopefully soon. Glad to be standing shoulder to shoulder with you all here pushing for that reveal. 👊

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •