The price drop is because of market manipulation and the current price doesn’t represent fundamentals. We all know GME is worth more.
But the price has been gradually decreasing ever since the January 2021 sneeze and this thread over at SS suggests the line reaches 0 around 1/1/2024.
I don’t think it will actually hit 0 but I know I’m going to be buying more in November and December.
Point is don’t let this rattle you. I bought my first share at $448.30 so why wouldn’t I buy more at $1?
The finish line isn’t out of reach any more. We’re going to lock the float, and we’re going to do it fast. Buckle your seatbelts.
It’s been assailed.
You ignore the 1/3 DRS out of ignorance, which I will humor you by not including it here again, but - *once more8 - makes you look dishonest and uneducated when it comes to the larger context and associated dynamics. Having been in the markets for over two decades now, I can tell you that if only from a human psychological perspective, totally ignoring actual mathematics, a company that has such a high rate of stocks in individual owners’ names is valuable from a narrative and “fomo” aspect - on which much of the market works now, particularly in the age of the internet and ~light-speed communication.
Stop replying in three places and then getting mad when I address each post.
Stop ignoring when I say shit like “when I wrote what you’re quoting.”
Cult. Ignore math, embrace groupthink.
You’re describing an irrational bubble, driven by narrative. People buying in because people bought in. Line-go-up thinking. A craze, in other words.
‘Two decades in the market,’ and not only do you accuse me of being swayed by Wall Street propaganda, you’re in here pounding the table about the solid economic value of… a bunch of newbies playing follow-the-leader. You even end it with a description of fake-world economics, where ‘how markets work now’ is all image, all facade, with the actual production of goods and services distant and disconnected from whether anyone makes money.
You’re the one ignoring math when it comes to 1/3 of one company being DRSed. How that relates to market mechanics and associated buying/selling/trading - reducing supply - is important and valuable.
Geebus. You really are making a fool of yourself.
Supply does not matter if the stock keeps going down. Which it has.
The ship is sinking and you keep yelling that you’re holding on with both hands. That wasn’t why I asked what the fuck you’re doing, buddy. I want to know why you’re holding onto a sinking ship, at all. How hard you’re holding on doesn’t really matter to me. Saying so isn’t proof of brainwashing, sorry you didn’t say brainwashing, but you might say brainwashing, only you didn’t, you just meant I’m a sucker who bought everything hook line and sinker. Totally different! Meanwhile: still sinking.
The closest you’ve come to a sane answer is insisting Gamestop’s revenue is up. That’s great news! I will point out their stock keeps plummeting anyway. OP’s news is all about how it’s way down, and almost certainly headed lower. So I’m unsure how their revenue situation is going to do them much good, beyond finding an equilibrium and leveling off, at some point close to the mean.
Your suggestions for how they’ll ever grow in value seem to be (1) a vague “”“decentralized”“” digital ownership somethingorother, which I admit ignorance of but assert considerable doubt in, and (2) people buying in because people are buying in. Only one of these is even an argument and it’s an argument that sounds a lot like other tech-bro stuff that’s scam-adjacent, hideously mislabeled, and/or a complete flop.
Huh? Multiple stocks go through ups and downs due to a variety of reasons. Some of those reasons are criminality, some not. Sometimes it’s widespread “FUD.” Sometimes its exogenous events happening throughout the world. The list goes on.
Again…
That’s also not – again, again — including a first in all of market history where 1/3 of ONE company’s supply of shares are locked away, reducing supply, wherein “supply shock” comes into play, possibly.
Huh? Companies do increase in value the more people buy in. Anyway…
Yeah, that’d be both suggestions summarily mocked. Repeating it does not constitute a counterpoint. It is not new information. I didn’t miss it. I’m explicitly addressing it.
Ditto pounding the table about how tight you’re all holding on. More of you! Harder than ever before! A world record! Again again again: why. The ship is going down.
And with decades in the market - you think people buying a stock is what makes a stock worth buying. Okay. I think we’re done here. If you don’t even know what a craze is, to the point you’re promoting one in all but name, I’m not sure more words would help.
It’s on you if you don’t see value in those aspects of the business. Investing is, largely, subjective.
And again… you really do come across as idiotic with your future-telling and ignorance of the capital class’s ability to persuade people and hide associated, in this instance, market/capital criminality.
The “buying makes a company valuable” is merely one aspect of an investment. All “value” is subjective - and due to only others buying - in many respects. Dude.
Predictions are bad, says person predicting total reversal of visible trend.
Capitalism are bad, says veteran investor insisting all value is price.
There you are dishonestly putting words into my mouth. Again.
You and Fox News are really good at ignoring obvious facts and twisting reality.
The pattern with you is binary thinking and commenting, while also putting words into people’s mouths.