[HN Gopher] GameStop shares soar more than 100% amid executive s...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       GameStop shares soar more than 100% amid executive shuffle
        
       Author : koolba
       Score  : 73 points
       Date   : 2021-02-24 21:10 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.cnbc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.cnbc.com)
        
       | undefined1 wrote:
       | here we go again.
       | 
       | "Tomorrow we'll be doing an upgrade to our systems. Buying in
       | some stocks might be limited. Sorry for the inconvenience."
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/TradeRobinhood/status/136469009363465011...
       | 
       | edit: oops, that's a fake account! my bad.
        
         | xyst wrote:
         | all the homies hate robin hood
        
         | xahrepap wrote:
         | Looks like that's a troll account?
         | https://twitter.com/RobinhoodApp is the verified account...
        
         | shen wrote:
         | Fake account.
        
       | tyingq wrote:
       | Is there a consensus of who will be holding the bag when all of
       | this stops and it drops back down?
        
         | endisneigh wrote:
         | retail investors mainly - maybe likely some hedge funds on the
         | wrong side of this as well.
        
       | gvhst wrote:
       | Now the Reddit website is down. Is this related?
        
         | fleshdaddy wrote:
         | It must be. Wall Street bets grew to 8 million users after this
         | whole GameStop thing, up from 1 million. They all probably
         | hopped on to see what's going on. Plus reddit is down more than
         | any other website that popular that I know of.
        
         | Jugglerofworlds wrote:
         | Ironically old.reddit.com is working fine.
        
           | SilasX wrote:
           | Still waiting for one sense in which the redesign is better
           | for the user.
        
             | slig wrote:
             | Has there been any case where a redesign of an app or
             | website is actually better than the older version?
        
             | koolba wrote:
             | The new site is much better because it's so slow and user
             | hostile you stop browsing Reddit entirely.
        
           | imron wrote:
           | Not ironic. Old.Reddit has always been fine.
        
         | wongarsu wrote:
         | old.reddit.com works. Probably an influx people checking
         | /r/wallstreetbets. Reddit being overwhelmed for a couple
         | minutes seems like a daily occurance since forever, but wsb is
         | really pushing their capacity at times.
        
           | thinkingemote wrote:
           | > Probably an influx people checking /r/wallstreetbets.
           | 
           | There's only 300K people reading that subreddit at the
           | moment. During the peak earlier in the month it was over a
           | million. (edits, refreshed 4 mins later and it's just under
           | 500K).
           | 
           | Also, for the conspiracy fans, notice that the majority of
           | the rise (90 -> 199) has happened / is happening during post
           | market hours when normal users (retail) cant do anything.
           | 50->90 happened during normal trading hours.
        
           | ericbarrett wrote:
           | My guess is they have a "thundering herd" problem when a few
           | critical threads get lots of traffic, and any workaround is
           | still manual because it's delicate surgery. Pure speculation
           | however, I've no inside knowledge.
        
         | clarifier123 wrote:
         | That's unlikely, reddit is down all the time. They definitely
         | have the worst uptime of all the major websites.
        
         | anm89 wrote:
         | Woah, reddit, is indeed timing out for me as well.
        
         | cdiamand wrote:
         | I tried to determine this. And while I'm skeptical they brought
         | the site down, there WAS a large uptick in comments on
         | /r/wallstreetbets as the site went down. Still pulling in all
         | the data from right before it went down.
         | 
         | https://topstonks.com/blog/reddit-down
        
         | Jimmc414 wrote:
         | Yes.
         | 
         | https://t.me/wallstreetbets
        
           | Graffur wrote:
           | Is there a web version of telegram?
        
       | rjbwork wrote:
       | Imagine you got fired from your company and the news made it
       | double in value.
       | 
       | Poor guy.
        
         | castlecrasher2 wrote:
         | The news was known before the surge; I don't think they're
         | entirely related.
        
         | vardaro wrote:
         | He got something like a 30m severance. He'll live
        
           | cbozeman wrote:
           | This culture of rewarding failure really needs to end.
        
           | defen wrote:
           | 2.8 million. Still absurdly high for someone who did such a
           | terrible job:
           | https://twitter.com/DOMOCAPITAL/status/1364340405626671104
        
             | vardaro wrote:
             | Wow. I'm way off on my source. Thanks
        
           | gremlinsinc wrote:
           | I don't know.... Most people would blow through that in a
           | week, two at the most. /s
        
             | cvhashim wrote:
             | Lifestyle creep dontcha know
        
         | roland35 wrote:
         | If the company he gets hired at immediately loses half of its
         | value then I think we can say it was him for sure!
        
           | Judgmentality wrote:
           | You say this jokingly, but the last company he worked at lost
           | 90% of its value while he was there.
        
             | qaq wrote:
             | Is he on Citadel payroll ?
        
         | vmception wrote:
         | Imagine not having sold any of your 225,000 shares and the
         | stock price doubled the day after you got fired.
         | 
         | What a guy! Grifting along to another $20,000,000 with no
         | selling restrictions.
         | 
         | edit: and several million cash severence
        
       | thinkingemote wrote:
       | It went from 44 to 91 and then in post market from 91 to a peak
       | of 199 (currently at 150)
        
         | viklove wrote:
         | I had a limit sell order sitting at 210 from the insanity a few
         | weeks ago, honestly glad it didn't get hit. The amusement I'm
         | getting from having my stake is honestly worth what I paid by
         | itself.
        
       | secondcoming wrote:
       | I sold at $60. Go me.
        
         | redisman wrote:
         | What did you buy at? This is pure gambling so doesn't really
         | matter as long as you got something out
        
       | aye01 wrote:
       | this is straight bananas
        
       | uberdru wrote:
       | Reddit has zero impact on $GME volatility. If any of you were
       | around for the 2009 shenanigans, you'll understand.
        
         | kurikuri wrote:
         | What does 2009 have to do with GME?
        
         | A12-B wrote:
         | I'm sorry I wasn't around, could you please explain why?
        
           | vardaro wrote:
           | Pretty sure he's clarifying that retail flow has negligible
           | effects on the markets. Institutional money moves stocks,
           | retail investors are just along for the ride.
        
             | A12-B wrote:
             | Not that I don't believe that, but where's the proof?
        
               | witherk wrote:
               | I'm not sure where these guys are getting their numbers,
               | retail investors make up about 25% of the market. Not the
               | dominant force, but also not exactly negligible.
               | 
               | https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/retail-
               | inves...
        
       | nthitz wrote:
       | I don't quite understand, the announcement about the executive
       | was made on Tuesday, but this gain didn't happen until the final
       | hour or two of trading today.
        
         | WJW wrote:
         | It's probably a mistake to read much into these things when it
         | comes to Gamestop. It's not about the fundamentals, it's about
         | when /r/wallstreetbets notices and is collectively feeling up
         | for it.
        
           | fleshdaddy wrote:
           | I don't know it was definitely noticed when it happened and
           | honestly I have a hard time believing it could be more hyped
           | up than these last couple of days.
        
           | cat199 wrote:
           | wallstreetbets has been feeling up to it irrespective, and
           | the mgmt change was definitely noticed there way earlier than
           | near-close/after-hours, which is when the last ~$150 of the
           | current $180 ticker gained..
        
         | gct wrote:
         | You have to grok how financial reporting works. They said
         | _amid_ executive shuffle, not _because_.
        
         | hahahahe wrote:
         | Weekly option expiry. They waited until Thursday afternoon.
         | Plus Ryan Cohen's tweet.
        
           | travv0 wrote:
           | I got pretty excited when you made me think it was Thursday
           | afternoon.
        
       | hikerclimber wrote:
       | 50% of options trading is luck. robinhood is just to reduce risk.
        
       | yibg wrote:
       | AMC is started going up around the same time, although at a lower
       | magnitude.
        
       | iso1631 wrote:
       | I like the stock
        
         | burgerquizz wrote:
         | i'm not a cat
        
           | Judgmentality wrote:
           | When I was a young boy in Bulgaria
        
       | locusofself wrote:
       | I got pretty lucky with this stock. Bought at 144, sold at 470 in
       | the last rally. Bought back in at 45, sold at 69 today. Wish I
       | set my limit sell to much higher, I didn't know it was going to
       | rally so hard again.
        
         | xyst wrote:
         | paper handing at $69. should have gone with call options. more
         | potential for gainz
         | 
         | fyi 167 in the after hours
        
           | locusofself wrote:
           | totally. It was a limit sell from days ago, I was banking on
           | some volatility but didn't think it would necessarily soar
           | again.
        
           | vmception wrote:
           | the options are still too expensive. they are over half the
           | price of buying the shares and they've been up to 90% of the
           | share price.
           | 
           | I actually love how the option spread sellers havent said
           | anything and been flying under the radar but making the most
           | week after week
        
       | DevKoala wrote:
       | It doesn't seem like this is the correct reason. I feel the
       | recent short had more of an impact:
       | 
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/lrlmqx/14_m...
        
         | spelunker wrote:
         | Agreed. Lots of people will probably read "amid" == "because".
        
         | vmception wrote:
         | Okay that's beautiful
         | 
         | Everytime they pass through the gate, they agitate an ancient
         | populist fury
        
         | EpicEng wrote:
         | Yeah, definitely not because a CFO was ousted. Hit 200 AH and
         | volume is insane.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-24 23:01 UTC)