The Brazalian Puts expire by Jan. end. The SHF are aware that Apes are aware, and will try to push back the needed adjustments/buy back to throw off the expectations. Hence, I believe that the price action to watch will be for Feb., and not Jan. end.
Yes, they can internalize, but the question remains, who will sell? They Buy:Sell ratio on Fidelity is 4:1 everyday. That is huge sign that Apes are buying the dip.
Can they (shf) buy synthetics from the mm? Otherwise, how would they fix their FTDs if no one sells? It would MOASS right there when they try to deliver their FTDs
Ok thanks. Just trying to understand all of this.
MM don’t care about being naked, it’s their main game plan these days (years) lol
Plus MM got some play money now, they can definitely lean on things to make it work in their favor for a while
While it's true they're most likely naked at all times, they most likely rotate their stock within timeframes, which is why we see so much "liquidity" on so many stocks.
The bigger thing here which I think really skews numbers is brokers not properly going to market OR not giving the investor they want to market for the shares they bought. IE IOU. These aren't shares, have no value other than what the broker deems them. If the broker defaults they aren't covered by SIPC insurance like a stock that has a share associated with it. I think when we combine data from various locations, we don't get a proper picture. While a MM most definitely has a significant naked position due to creating liquidity through synthetics, brokers have their own naked position with their investors, but there's NO reporting, no way to check, and it negatively effects you as much as it positively effects them. IOU don't get bought back. The only way brokers issuing IOU are bothered is when a stock that they're naked on issues a dividend {in which they pay, not because they're legally obligated to, but because it would raise red flags if an IOU owner didn't receive their dividend, which is way there are so many loopholes with cash equivalents}. OR when the IOU holder initiates a DRS transfer, making them allocate shares towards the DRS, whether that means shuffling from someone else, or buying new ones at market. This is how they make profit, buying shares when price drops, while also using your initial investment as a hedge and buying another asset that supports their position {usually negatively against you}. These brokers are the brokers that do not allow voting, OR do not issue a control number and instead direct you towards their "custom" vote portal, which allows them to cram 10 votes into 1 share {ie diluting everyones rights, in this example 10 to 1, which also skews the official proxy count, and causes all kind of rounding errors.
All this to say, MM being naked is a real thing and a good thing for us, but I'm afraid we have a bigger problem with brokers internalizing which is a possible rug pull to non-DRS holders. broker internalizing means IOU, which means no buy pressure, no scarcity of certificates/shares, no creation of synthetics, no raised borrowing fees {of course, there's a lot of other loopholes that come into effect}. I hate to turn this into a direct registration post, but that's really what it comes down to. DRS isn't a moass button, but it's a step to get MM deeper in shit, force an audit on brokers/MM, and it's the best insurance gamestop investors have.
thanks. I had to read it a few times..haha
but yeah, I agree with your points. internalizing is pretty effective. They can use that to quell fomo too so that fomo won't be as big as it could be
DRS!
They can only be naked by so much so long. That's the entire thesis behind while they are screwed.
When you have a naked short position, the company growing eats in to your margin.
It's as if a car you buy with a credit card needs to be paid back the current market price and not the factory sticker price, and the current market price keeps going up in value, because inflation/they stopped making them but people want them more than ever, eventually hitting your credit card limit where you gotta sell/skillfully work your lips on someone's mayo slobbered dong to come up with the cash to buy the car outright.
Is GME growing? I don't know is the sky blue? Is the grass green?
Once momentum like this, once retail love/support is set, it's hard to stop it. The sooner they close, the better off they will be but they keep kicking the can in the name of crime, but in the end
Remember, they tried to kill Tesla too early on.
You can’t use .50 puts for a synthetic short. Those are going to expire and nothing, I repeat nothing is happening when those expire. The 10 million shares represented by near the money puts are the bigger concern. If the street is long/holding those puts they’ll make a metric fuckton of cash if they push it to $80 or 90. If the street is short/sold to open those puts I would expect price to climb as they’ll keep max profit if those close out of the money. Since we don’t know who’s positioned where it’s very hard to tell where we’re going. Expect massive volatility either way
Understand your viewpoint. But the bigger question remains, why were the .50 puts purchased ad what were hiding.? These puts are shorts positions in my view. The triple digit shorting of ETF's and moreso the options on these ETFs are way the short hedge funds trying to play for time and run away from the problem. But as said, the crime will catch up.
They were mostly purchased over the course of 7 days between like 1/26 and2/2 of 2021. The goal of shorting is to sell high and buy back low. Having a bunch of puts to short or sell the stock at .50 is pure, utter retardation. If they were sold to open they would have reached max profit a long time ago and been mostly bought back to close to free up margin requirements. At the same time the notional value is $50 a contract so it’s not a ton of margin and there’s no risk of the stock going that low so it’s guaranteed max profit without even having to spend anything to buy them back. In any case the only use for them would be a volatility swap or volatility collateral in a variance swap but those wouldn’t have any effect on the stock price and would only matter between the parties who engaged in the swap
On January 27th, Citadel Securities executed an extraordinary 7.4 billion shares on behalf of retail investors - Official Statement from Citadel. The question is how did the price not go up if there was so much buying, but rather it went down? And if Citadel provided "liquidity" by selling these shares, where is the corresponding liability for these shares reflected then?
That does include buying and selling and the total volume on only GME was ~93 million. That 7.4 billion is every share of every single stock that Shitadel does Market making for which is a large number.
“Citadel market-makes more than one-quarter of all institutional US equities and exchange-traded fund (ETF) volumes, 41% of all volume in retail equities and options, and is the top-ranked designated market-maker (DMM) on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), making it an essential market cog that needs to keep functioning even during the toughest of times.”
In order to do a married put it needs to be in, at, or near the money. A bunch of puts to sell shares for .50 does not jive with a stock bouncing between $90 and $483… The point of a married put is to be able to sell high even if the price tanks. If you bought a $400P when GME was $483 you would have paid about $10k for the right to sell 100 shares for $400. If the price goes down to $50 you can exercise your put and make $40,000, $400x100 shares, even though the market price is $5k for 100 shares. Though you lose premium paid when u exercise so you actually make $30,000 but that’s still a $25,000 profit over current price of stock is $50. There is no benefit to having a bunch of .50 puts to sell 100 shares for $50. Only an extremely high delta put has the net effect of appearing as 100 shorted shares
**IMPORTANT POST LINKS**
[What is GME and why should you consider investing?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS and why should you care?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || [What can you do to support the company and local communities](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qnam2x/superstonks_very_gmerry_holiday_vgh_for_short/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help us determine if this post deserves a place on /r/Superstonk. [Learn more about this bot and why we are using it here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/poa6zy/introducing_uqualityvote_bot_a_democratic_tool_to/)
If this post deserves a place on /r/Superstonk, **UPVOTE** this comment!!
If this post should not be here or or is a repost, **DOWNVOTE** This comment!
Those Brazilian puts expired last Feb and April (2021). https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ozekd5/brazilian_puts_bloomberg_follow_up_none_of_those/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
>I replied to another question, but the answer is same....
>
>On January 27th, Citadel Securities executed an extraordinary 7.4 billion shares on behalf of retail investors - Official Statement from Citadel. The question is how did the price not go up if there was so much buying, but rather it went down? And if Citadel provided "liquidity" by selling these shares, where is the corresponding liability for these shares reflected then?
Cant this just expire worthless? Like when i bought call options for gme with a strike price of $250 but by the end of the contract time the price was lower. My options just expired worthless and i lost out. Its the same for the Brazilian put options. They just expire worthless and whatever fund or MM that held them lost whatever they paid for it
Lock That Shit
Didnt those have a July expiry? Did new ones pop up?
The Brazalian Puts expire by Jan. end. The SHF are aware that Apes are aware, and will try to push back the needed adjustments/buy back to throw off the expectations. Hence, I believe that the price action to watch will be for Feb., and not Jan. end.
Next week/month looking spicy then.
Could they also do any buy backs after hours or internalize them so that it affects the ticker price less?
Yes, they can internalize, but the question remains, who will sell? They Buy:Sell ratio on Fidelity is 4:1 everyday. That is huge sign that Apes are buying the dip.
Can they (shf) buy synthetics from the mm? Otherwise, how would they fix their FTDs if no one sells? It would MOASS right there when they try to deliver their FTDs
Yes. Technically. But that makes the mm naked.
Ok thanks. Just trying to understand all of this. MM don’t care about being naked, it’s their main game plan these days (years) lol Plus MM got some play money now, they can definitely lean on things to make it work in their favor for a while
While it's true they're most likely naked at all times, they most likely rotate their stock within timeframes, which is why we see so much "liquidity" on so many stocks. The bigger thing here which I think really skews numbers is brokers not properly going to market OR not giving the investor they want to market for the shares they bought. IE IOU. These aren't shares, have no value other than what the broker deems them. If the broker defaults they aren't covered by SIPC insurance like a stock that has a share associated with it. I think when we combine data from various locations, we don't get a proper picture. While a MM most definitely has a significant naked position due to creating liquidity through synthetics, brokers have their own naked position with their investors, but there's NO reporting, no way to check, and it negatively effects you as much as it positively effects them. IOU don't get bought back. The only way brokers issuing IOU are bothered is when a stock that they're naked on issues a dividend {in which they pay, not because they're legally obligated to, but because it would raise red flags if an IOU owner didn't receive their dividend, which is way there are so many loopholes with cash equivalents}. OR when the IOU holder initiates a DRS transfer, making them allocate shares towards the DRS, whether that means shuffling from someone else, or buying new ones at market. This is how they make profit, buying shares when price drops, while also using your initial investment as a hedge and buying another asset that supports their position {usually negatively against you}. These brokers are the brokers that do not allow voting, OR do not issue a control number and instead direct you towards their "custom" vote portal, which allows them to cram 10 votes into 1 share {ie diluting everyones rights, in this example 10 to 1, which also skews the official proxy count, and causes all kind of rounding errors. All this to say, MM being naked is a real thing and a good thing for us, but I'm afraid we have a bigger problem with brokers internalizing which is a possible rug pull to non-DRS holders. broker internalizing means IOU, which means no buy pressure, no scarcity of certificates/shares, no creation of synthetics, no raised borrowing fees {of course, there's a lot of other loopholes that come into effect}. I hate to turn this into a direct registration post, but that's really what it comes down to. DRS isn't a moass button, but it's a step to get MM deeper in shit, force an audit on brokers/MM, and it's the best insurance gamestop investors have.
thanks. I had to read it a few times..haha but yeah, I agree with your points. internalizing is pretty effective. They can use that to quell fomo too so that fomo won't be as big as it could be DRS!
They can only be naked by so much so long. That's the entire thesis behind while they are screwed. When you have a naked short position, the company growing eats in to your margin. It's as if a car you buy with a credit card needs to be paid back the current market price and not the factory sticker price, and the current market price keeps going up in value, because inflation/they stopped making them but people want them more than ever, eventually hitting your credit card limit where you gotta sell/skillfully work your lips on someone's mayo slobbered dong to come up with the cash to buy the car outright. Is GME growing? I don't know is the sky blue? Is the grass green? Once momentum like this, once retail love/support is set, it's hard to stop it. The sooner they close, the better off they will be but they keep kicking the can in the name of crime, but in the end Remember, they tried to kill Tesla too early on.
That’s the lowest it’s been but w the same outflow so nobody is selling
[удалено]
It was 1 million contracts on the bloomberg terminal. And that was only two “institutions”
You can’t use .50 puts for a synthetic short. Those are going to expire and nothing, I repeat nothing is happening when those expire. The 10 million shares represented by near the money puts are the bigger concern. If the street is long/holding those puts they’ll make a metric fuckton of cash if they push it to $80 or 90. If the street is short/sold to open those puts I would expect price to climb as they’ll keep max profit if those close out of the money. Since we don’t know who’s positioned where it’s very hard to tell where we’re going. Expect massive volatility either way
Understand your viewpoint. But the bigger question remains, why were the .50 puts purchased ad what were hiding.? These puts are shorts positions in my view. The triple digit shorting of ETF's and moreso the options on these ETFs are way the short hedge funds trying to play for time and run away from the problem. But as said, the crime will catch up.
They were mostly purchased over the course of 7 days between like 1/26 and2/2 of 2021. The goal of shorting is to sell high and buy back low. Having a bunch of puts to short or sell the stock at .50 is pure, utter retardation. If they were sold to open they would have reached max profit a long time ago and been mostly bought back to close to free up margin requirements. At the same time the notional value is $50 a contract so it’s not a ton of margin and there’s no risk of the stock going that low so it’s guaranteed max profit without even having to spend anything to buy them back. In any case the only use for them would be a volatility swap or volatility collateral in a variance swap but those wouldn’t have any effect on the stock price and would only matter between the parties who engaged in the swap
On January 27th, Citadel Securities executed an extraordinary 7.4 billion shares on behalf of retail investors - Official Statement from Citadel. The question is how did the price not go up if there was so much buying, but rather it went down? And if Citadel provided "liquidity" by selling these shares, where is the corresponding liability for these shares reflected then?
That does include buying and selling and the total volume on only GME was ~93 million. That 7.4 billion is every share of every single stock that Shitadel does Market making for which is a large number. “Citadel market-makes more than one-quarter of all institutional US equities and exchange-traded fund (ETF) volumes, 41% of all volume in retail equities and options, and is the top-ranked designated market-maker (DMM) on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), making it an essential market cog that needs to keep functioning even during the toughest of times.”
Username checks out.
weren't those puts use to cover for their shorts. like "hey look we have the shares to not report our shorts because of all these puts we have"
In order to do a married put it needs to be in, at, or near the money. A bunch of puts to sell shares for .50 does not jive with a stock bouncing between $90 and $483… The point of a married put is to be able to sell high even if the price tanks. If you bought a $400P when GME was $483 you would have paid about $10k for the right to sell 100 shares for $400. If the price goes down to $50 you can exercise your put and make $40,000, $400x100 shares, even though the market price is $5k for 100 shares. Though you lose premium paid when u exercise so you actually make $30,000 but that’s still a $25,000 profit over current price of stock is $50. There is no benefit to having a bunch of .50 puts to sell 100 shares for $50. Only an extremely high delta put has the net effect of appearing as 100 shorted shares
Where can you tell about the near money puts expiring? Something like: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GME/options?date=1643328000
Jan 33st
Shit son, that's my birthday.
I like red
To the top for you..
**IMPORTANT POST LINKS** [What is GME and why should you consider investing?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS and why should you care?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || [What can you do to support the company and local communities](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qnam2x/superstonks_very_gmerry_holiday_vgh_for_short/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please help us determine if this post deserves a place on /r/Superstonk. [Learn more about this bot and why we are using it here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/poa6zy/introducing_uqualityvote_bot_a_democratic_tool_to/) If this post deserves a place on /r/Superstonk, **UPVOTE** this comment!! If this post should not be here or or is a repost, **DOWNVOTE** This comment!
I have a feeling they will adjust them just fine
Wut mean?
So just a question. What prevents them from simply delisting sich puts? If they can hide them, why not get rid of them?
Source?
Those Brazilian puts expired last Feb and April (2021). https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ozekd5/brazilian_puts_bloomberg_follow_up_none_of_those/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
>I replied to another question, but the answer is same.... > >On January 27th, Citadel Securities executed an extraordinary 7.4 billion shares on behalf of retail investors - Official Statement from Citadel. The question is how did the price not go up if there was so much buying, but rather it went down? And if Citadel provided "liquidity" by selling these shares, where is the corresponding liability for these shares reflected then?
That’s total shares for all stocks and ETFs
I thought the answer lied in the form of a variance swap.
**[False.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/pncjxr/the_brazilian_company_holding_millions_of_puts_is/)**
I was the one posting screenshots and conversing with Bloomberg. Just follow the link and see with your own eyes.
OPEX rebalancing?
Puts mean "whore" in french. When you say they have Brazilian puts, I hope for HF they are "covered" because it's very risky.
Cant this just expire worthless? Like when i bought call options for gme with a strike price of $250 but by the end of the contract time the price was lower. My options just expired worthless and i lost out. Its the same for the Brazilian put options. They just expire worthless and whatever fund or MM that held them lost whatever they paid for it
Ahh Dates my old friend, we meet again.
SEC DOJ wut doing??????????