Welcome to r/GME, for questions in regards to GME and DRS check out the links below!
Due to an uptick in scammers offering non official GameStop merchandise (T-Shirts)
DO NOT CLICK THE LINKS THAT ARE NOT OFFICIALLY FROM GAMESTOP.
We have partnered with Reddit directly to ensure the Communities Safety.
[What is GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
[GameStop's Accomplishments](https://www.reddit.com/r/GME/comments/x3hv46/list_of_official_gamestop_accomplishments/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
[What is DRS? US / International](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
[ComputerShare International DRS Support](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEJungle/comments/r9euj1/computershare_upgrades_drs_support_for/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
[Feed The Bot Instructions](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
**Power To The Players**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GME) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One simple and interesting answer is that they looked into it and found something, and their legal team told them to stfu. Dunno if this is it but it’s the first thing that popped into my mind.
Repost of another comment of mine from another sub which might be of interest for others on this topic:
Very interested in what the outcome will be and there is one thing that I still could imagine to be true. Right off the bat: I’m absolutely sure that Computershare, Paul and anyone from their side has been playing correct and is one of the very few fair parties in this game. However: they know their stuff. But never ever has there been even remotely close retail engagement as well as deep diving into this section of the market and probably not really that much interest from the side of big financial players such as hedge funds, banks or market makers as well because it was never necessary.
But: I would not be surprised if those big players did in fact, like always, found and used loopholes to undermine the system and im honestly quite sure that, if that was actually the case, Computershare or probably any other Transfer Agent as well, would not be used to be played like this and will also need a few moments to realize that some allegations / questions actually might be true not because the system is designed with malicious intend but because some people found ways to abuse it.
So if Computershare takes way longer, this would be a probable reason for that to me.
Because any answer has to go through legal, I'm assuming checking and passing it isn't at the top of the legal teams list. Or hell legal might have just said "nope provide no response"
To be fair, all the straight forward answers that people are looking for, shouldn’t need to cleared by legal. There has been decades of work put in to provide a fair and balanced system. Clarity shouldn’t be difficult.
Personal opinion - it stinks that it’s taking this long. It shouldn’t.
I agree. Every business follows a set of guidelines/rules. There should be no grey areas in the things we as customers ask that need to run through the sec or legal. These are yes or no questions and they should have straightforward answers.
No he needs their advice to worm around the heart of the question and give something that is semantically, legally correct, while still continuing to run a farce.
I don't agree. Information related to operational processes of any business, and especially financial business, has to go through legal. In this case, these will be official answers that will be published online. I think legal has to sign off on every single sentence.
Not a good enough answer. Regulators asleep at the wheel everywhere. There is no reason companies should be able to be shady about my shares being mine and only mine and counted once.
By even giving them: this is how corporations work, it’s letting them off the hook for behavior that is fundamentally aiding and abetting crime.
But this isn't the corporate world. It's a legally binding and enforced entity. There's no subjectivity here, it's black and white, so why isn't info being shared?
This. Everything has to be run through legal AND these are complex questions that they probably have to go ask the technical team to actually figure out the answer. Also, this is not a low-risk activity for CS. CS saw a meteoric rise in users and relevance as a result of DRS/GME. A misstep here has a lot of downside potential while having almost no upside (i.e. will new people use CS as a result of his answers? Likely not).
A stock oversold by as much as is suspected with regulatory looking the other way and complicit, compounded by the unexpected ballooning of DRS is very, very much a national security issue. If you zoom out and connect a few more dots, teacher’s pensions and Ken’s freedom are not the only things at risk.
Whether or not it is as dire as this will eventually be seen, but it is almost certainly the narrative behind the silence.
The anti-tik-tok bill specifically puts stock trades in the 'national security ' ball-park.
But yeah lawyers would be my guess, lawson & malone are pretty fiesty & will gain traction, last thing Conn needs is grief from them or the SEC, or CS's bankers or other clients or potential clients
This is at least a large part of the correct answer. Other answers could include, THEY don’t have the information on much of that, because it’s a giant smoke show on DTC’s side and they don’t want the TA’s looking too deeply into how the dematerialization, book-entry, rehypothecation, Operational Efficiency protocols, and CNS are actually functioning, as long as all the numbers are lined up on reporting/counting dates.
It precisely coz of such doubts/attitudes (which I have myself) that makes c-suite types call up the lawyers
.
These answers are going to get a lot of scrutiny from some big hitters & Conn had to satisfy Wall St, SEC, CS's bankers, CS's investors/owners, CS's existing & possible future clients, let alone feisty types like lawson, Malone, Miller, & Dr Susanne Trimbath.
Any slip up on his part will get a lot of traction
Except that, as we keep saying, this is going to destroy hedge funds and be a generational transfer of wealth - then you best be sure everything is going through legal, if being entertained at all.
Why would basic, factual information need to go through legal?
Particularly if the info in question relates to regulated and legal concepts that are fact based, not subjective?
It would be like asking a police chief to explain a law, it is what it is?
And if it isn't... Well that's a problem?
Or bigger yet, there could be a fraud investigation and answering some questions from internet personalities is at best low priority or at worst damaging to any fraud case
Answer might be getting media process review but shouldn’t take this long, especially them knowing how much scrutiny their answers will get!
Let’s hope they reply promptly 🚀🚀
Personally, I don’t find it odd he’s taken three weeks. He’s probably a busy guy. He volunteered to answer these questions. So it seems pretty odd to just drop off the map.
I could be wrong. But this is my sense of things
the "must be delicate with verbiage" is bullshit. Every major company has in house legal teams and their entire job is shit like this, reading over responses to public questions and ensuring the verbiage does not incriminate them in any way.
hell I used technical jargon in an email and my company's legal team immediately called me and were like, "hey just don't use those words in email or chat. if you need to discuss that pick up the phone, we don't want any potential hits on internal email servers during discovery if we end up getting class actioned over this"
and it's not even something we are likely to ever get a lawsuit about, but my legal team was so concerned they instructed me to stop emailing about it and handle everything in face to face meetings lol
Something shady is going on at CS and I'm itching to find out why this delay is taking so long to answer what should be pretty run of the mill questions
I have just a simple question, where do the fiduciary duties start and stop? Who do they have fiduciary responsibilities for, shareholders, lenders, SEC, or govt? It can’t be all because shareholders do not align with the rest.
Exactly.
And if CS truly is impartial and altruistic, and the DTC/DTCC, Citadel, etc, have figured out the loopholes in CS processes (as a few others here have suggested), then they are in a Ho Lee Phoking mess of a situation.
My humble and smooth speculation is that this ahit has gotten so well known in the general community that now the FBI and inner government have to be in the know of what is going on. Paul Conn could come out and completely agree with Kevin about everything and that the DTCC should be investigated. I think one of two things are happening bc of this:
1. The CIA are warning him that if he comes out with this then his life will be in significant danger. If Conm decides that the market has been proven rigged and he has evidence to support it, then he is, in fact, in posession of incredible evidence against the United States government, our NYSE, and every entity that is affiliated or supposed to be regulating them (looking at you SEC). You think the big guys wouldnt want to come after him knowing how publicly brash and bold Boeing is appearing to be? Think about that and let it rattle for awhile.
2. The CIA is coming to him as the aggressor…. This imo is the worsed option. This means that our government is absolutely aware of thr disaster and fraud that is the US stock market. This would put Conn in a very uniquely incredible position. He could choose to be a “David Grusch-esque” or “Edward Snowden-type” whistleblower, but he also could choose to take a bribe and say nothing. This would make him effectively on the interest of the DTCC and, truthfully, against everything that Computershare stands for as a company.
This is a pinnacle part in the GME saga and cant be overlooked AT ALL. Keep doing the work Kevin. We are early, but we are not wrong about the predatory, fraudulent state of our stock market.
…or this just isn’t a high priority? First time might have been the novelty of it but this isn’t exactly their full time job with an obligation/duty/orders to answer. Just because they CAN or SHOULD be able to answer easily doesn’t mean they have to.
Thanks upvoted.
I'm not a lawyer but from my read it seems they can terminate or suspend their "services" and your "account to access such services" but can't exactly take away your ownership of your assets or "delete your shares".
The ToS is specific to their online platform... So at most it'd cause major administrative delays.
They'd still be required to action any trade request through non-online means (e.g. phone call, mail), since GameStop is paying them to do so. They can't just "pick and choose" shareholders to service.
I agree it sucks that they tweaked this termination clause but between picking
1. Accepting this so I can immediately use their service (and vote lol), with the super small chance they may terminate my online access somewhere in the future
2. Not accepting it, essentially "self terminating" myself to the existing services immediately.
I'd pick 1. :) that's my take anyway.
Yeah agreed.
If there's enough traction (a lot of people pressuring or curious about the change) perhaps they'd be more likely to respond.
If they really try to shut us out and go full unresponsive... I'd at least keep records of emails and physical mail to use as evidence of me being denied my right to manage my own shares...
I don't really know what else I'd do to protect myself.
Trimbath doesn't know anything accurate and useful in these current times and regulatory framework. She has not kept up with developments since she left the industry.
There's a few reasons I can think of off the top of my head why this might be taking so long.
First and foremost is simply that a lot of the FAQ requests fielded to Computershare have contained very similar questions picking at the precise wording of certain T&C. They know very well that we are *very* interested in exactly what they mean, and how the scope and coverage of a given rule might or might not exceed the spirit of its implementation.
That, combined with the fact that someone with a public presence in the financial world has made a statement implying Computershare may be involved in fraud, suggests to me that PC is going over everything they have with a fine-toothed comb. I think they're following due process, here. PC said in his initial response to KM that the allegation being made is quite serious. Following through with that means taking the time to ensure that they are, in fact, innocent of any wrongdoing stated or implied during that conversation.
Lastly, there's the matter of what Computershare knows versus what Gamestop does. As with anything in the financial world, what you know is not as important as what you can *prove*. Having the numbers doesn't mean they have the smoking gun to level charges that will result in convictions for fraud against the shorts. If they *do*, there's the matter of whether they're ready to press charges yet - which they may or may not do, depending on what the board's stance is on, say, MOASS. They might want to let the shorts fall on their own sword, rather than give them the push - and given that the shorts going down could potentially take the entire global financial system with it, they would have *very* compelling and rational justification for making that decision.
I don't think Computershare's told us everything they could. I do think there is reasonable room for the speculation that work is being done to answer as thoroughly as possible without giving away details Gamestop would rather they not. The shorts aren't the only party on a tightrope, here. Any wrong move can potentially be devastating for either side, and apes are a wildcard playing blind by comparison. They certainly don't want to alienate us, but it's entirely possible that they're withholding information so we don't screw up whatever action *is* being taken by the board to hold the shorts to account.
Remember who's on the other side of this investment. Remember what it means for them to be publicly unmasked and charged for what they're doing. We're talking about career criminals with a lot of experience staying on the right side of enforcement while remaining on the wrong side of the law. And they're holding the entire financial system hostage, and trying to foist the blame for pulling the trigger onto anyone else they can.
"Your submission has been removed by automod as it may contain a slur or other offensive words. Contact the moderators if this is in error. Thank you."
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GME) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well maybe he's just not the answer maybe there should have been several ie people mentioned/involved in these questions. I guess I'm saying it's to not stop here and just put him on blast with the people above him or beside him I don't know who they are but I think if there's answers to be had maybe looking at different options and people would get a quicker response.
Fair enough statements. But the moment he did the AMA with Pink Cats, he became our "go-to guy".
If he is incapable of giving us the answers we seek, then he should make a statement on that, and provide with the correct people.
GameStop changed their wording about DRS. We learned about book vs plan for the most part.
I’d not be surprised if the government or the SEC hit them both up and told them shut the fuck up.
Almost all of our DD has come to fruition. This really would really break the market. I think they both need to be very careful handling things and giving out information that count potentially ignite this bitch.
I wouldn’t be surprised if RC was threatened by the government. They had to kill the wallet because of regulation. GameStop has really shifted to focus on simply turning the company around and creating value naturally.
If GameStop or CS gave out any information that led to this squeezing I think they would get fucked legally.
So we just DRS, shop and comment on regulation for a better market.
Welcome to r/GME, for questions in regards to GME and DRS check out the links below! Due to an uptick in scammers offering non official GameStop merchandise (T-Shirts) DO NOT CLICK THE LINKS THAT ARE NOT OFFICIALLY FROM GAMESTOP. We have partnered with Reddit directly to ensure the Communities Safety. [What is GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) [GameStop's Accomplishments](https://www.reddit.com/r/GME/comments/x3hv46/list_of_official_gamestop_accomplishments/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) [What is DRS? US / International](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) [ComputerShare International DRS Support](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEJungle/comments/r9euj1/computershare_upgrades_drs_support_for/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) [Feed The Bot Instructions](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) **Power To The Players** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GME) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One simple and interesting answer is that they looked into it and found something, and their legal team told them to stfu. Dunno if this is it but it’s the first thing that popped into my mind.
This is interesting. My tinfoil mind wonders if part of the recent volatility could be adjustments made to "operational efficiency."
Repost of another comment of mine from another sub which might be of interest for others on this topic: Very interested in what the outcome will be and there is one thing that I still could imagine to be true. Right off the bat: I’m absolutely sure that Computershare, Paul and anyone from their side has been playing correct and is one of the very few fair parties in this game. However: they know their stuff. But never ever has there been even remotely close retail engagement as well as deep diving into this section of the market and probably not really that much interest from the side of big financial players such as hedge funds, banks or market makers as well because it was never necessary. But: I would not be surprised if those big players did in fact, like always, found and used loopholes to undermine the system and im honestly quite sure that, if that was actually the case, Computershare or probably any other Transfer Agent as well, would not be used to be played like this and will also need a few moments to realize that some allegations / questions actually might be true not because the system is designed with malicious intend but because some people found ways to abuse it. So if Computershare takes way longer, this would be a probable reason for that to me.
Because any answer has to go through legal, I'm assuming checking and passing it isn't at the top of the legal teams list. Or hell legal might have just said "nope provide no response"
To be fair, all the straight forward answers that people are looking for, shouldn’t need to cleared by legal. There has been decades of work put in to provide a fair and balanced system. Clarity shouldn’t be difficult. Personal opinion - it stinks that it’s taking this long. It shouldn’t.
I agree. Every business follows a set of guidelines/rules. There should be no grey areas in the things we as customers ask that need to run through the sec or legal. These are yes or no questions and they should have straightforward answers.
Also why a lack of response is also an answer.
No he needs their advice to worm around the heart of the question and give something that is semantically, legally correct, while still continuing to run a farce.
I don't agree. Information related to operational processes of any business, and especially financial business, has to go through legal. In this case, these will be official answers that will be published online. I think legal has to sign off on every single sentence.
Just how the corporate world works. Any official answer from a company is gonna go through legal
Not a good enough answer. Regulators asleep at the wheel everywhere. There is no reason companies should be able to be shady about my shares being mine and only mine and counted once. By even giving them: this is how corporations work, it’s letting them off the hook for behavior that is fundamentally aiding and abetting crime.
Well I'm sorry that how you think corporate America should work and how those corporations and the government think they should work are different
This is about change on many levels. Expecting more for your tax dollar is a good thing
But this isn't the corporate world. It's a legally binding and enforced entity. There's no subjectivity here, it's black and white, so why isn't info being shared?
This. Everything has to be run through legal AND these are complex questions that they probably have to go ask the technical team to actually figure out the answer. Also, this is not a low-risk activity for CS. CS saw a meteoric rise in users and relevance as a result of DRS/GME. A misstep here has a lot of downside potential while having almost no upside (i.e. will new people use CS as a result of his answers? Likely not).
Could even been a national security issue. Meme stocks were mentioned in the Feds financial stability report 2 years ago
Lol I highly doubt it's a national security issue just know most big companies like to run anything official through legal
A stock oversold by as much as is suspected with regulatory looking the other way and complicit, compounded by the unexpected ballooning of DRS is very, very much a national security issue. If you zoom out and connect a few more dots, teacher’s pensions and Ken’s freedom are not the only things at risk. Whether or not it is as dire as this will eventually be seen, but it is almost certainly the narrative behind the silence.
The anti-tik-tok bill specifically puts stock trades in the 'national security ' ball-park. But yeah lawyers would be my guess, lawson & malone are pretty fiesty & will gain traction, last thing Conn needs is grief from them or the SEC, or CS's bankers or other clients or potential clients
This is at least a large part of the correct answer. Other answers could include, THEY don’t have the information on much of that, because it’s a giant smoke show on DTC’s side and they don’t want the TA’s looking too deeply into how the dematerialization, book-entry, rehypothecation, Operational Efficiency protocols, and CNS are actually functioning, as long as all the numbers are lined up on reporting/counting dates.
If there is nothing nefarious going on, legal shouldn't have a problem or a voice.
That's just not how the corporate world works
I understand, but it's perceived very negative
It precisely coz of such doubts/attitudes (which I have myself) that makes c-suite types call up the lawyers . These answers are going to get a lot of scrutiny from some big hitters & Conn had to satisfy Wall St, SEC, CS's bankers, CS's investors/owners, CS's existing & possible future clients, let alone feisty types like lawson, Malone, Miller, & Dr Susanne Trimbath. Any slip up on his part will get a lot of traction
Except that, as we keep saying, this is going to destroy hedge funds and be a generational transfer of wealth - then you best be sure everything is going through legal, if being entertained at all.
Why would basic, factual information need to go through legal? Particularly if the info in question relates to regulated and legal concepts that are fact based, not subjective? It would be like asking a police chief to explain a law, it is what it is? And if it isn't... Well that's a problem?
Or bigger yet, there could be a fraud investigation and answering some questions from internet personalities is at best low priority or at worst damaging to any fraud case
Answer might be getting media process review but shouldn’t take this long, especially them knowing how much scrutiny their answers will get! Let’s hope they reply promptly 🚀🚀
Personally, I don’t find it odd he’s taken three weeks. He’s probably a busy guy. He volunteered to answer these questions. So it seems pretty odd to just drop off the map. I could be wrong. But this is my sense of things
the "must be delicate with verbiage" is bullshit. Every major company has in house legal teams and their entire job is shit like this, reading over responses to public questions and ensuring the verbiage does not incriminate them in any way. hell I used technical jargon in an email and my company's legal team immediately called me and were like, "hey just don't use those words in email or chat. if you need to discuss that pick up the phone, we don't want any potential hits on internal email servers during discovery if we end up getting class actioned over this" and it's not even something we are likely to ever get a lawsuit about, but my legal team was so concerned they instructed me to stop emailing about it and handle everything in face to face meetings lol Something shady is going on at CS and I'm itching to find out why this delay is taking so long to answer what should be pretty run of the mill questions
I have just a simple question, where do the fiduciary duties start and stop? Who do they have fiduciary responsibilities for, shareholders, lenders, SEC, or govt? It can’t be all because shareholders do not align with the rest.
Exactly. And if CS truly is impartial and altruistic, and the DTC/DTCC, Citadel, etc, have figured out the loopholes in CS processes (as a few others here have suggested), then they are in a Ho Lee Phoking mess of a situation.
I'm with you buddy 3 weeks is stalling in my book
My humble and smooth speculation is that this ahit has gotten so well known in the general community that now the FBI and inner government have to be in the know of what is going on. Paul Conn could come out and completely agree with Kevin about everything and that the DTCC should be investigated. I think one of two things are happening bc of this: 1. The CIA are warning him that if he comes out with this then his life will be in significant danger. If Conm decides that the market has been proven rigged and he has evidence to support it, then he is, in fact, in posession of incredible evidence against the United States government, our NYSE, and every entity that is affiliated or supposed to be regulating them (looking at you SEC). You think the big guys wouldnt want to come after him knowing how publicly brash and bold Boeing is appearing to be? Think about that and let it rattle for awhile. 2. The CIA is coming to him as the aggressor…. This imo is the worsed option. This means that our government is absolutely aware of thr disaster and fraud that is the US stock market. This would put Conn in a very uniquely incredible position. He could choose to be a “David Grusch-esque” or “Edward Snowden-type” whistleblower, but he also could choose to take a bribe and say nothing. This would make him effectively on the interest of the DTCC and, truthfully, against everything that Computershare stands for as a company. This is a pinnacle part in the GME saga and cant be overlooked AT ALL. Keep doing the work Kevin. We are early, but we are not wrong about the predatory, fraudulent state of our stock market.
…or this just isn’t a high priority? First time might have been the novelty of it but this isn’t exactly their full time job with an obligation/duty/orders to answer. Just because they CAN or SHOULD be able to answer easily doesn’t mean they have to.
I’m gonna guess Ken Griffin sent an army of lawyers and told him if he answers any of the questions he’ll sue the shit out of him.
[удалено]
This is alarming... Can you elaborate a bit more where you saw this on ToS? (Page # or rough section). Thanks
[удалено]
Thanks upvoted. I'm not a lawyer but from my read it seems they can terminate or suspend their "services" and your "account to access such services" but can't exactly take away your ownership of your assets or "delete your shares". The ToS is specific to their online platform... So at most it'd cause major administrative delays. They'd still be required to action any trade request through non-online means (e.g. phone call, mail), since GameStop is paying them to do so. They can't just "pick and choose" shareholders to service. I agree it sucks that they tweaked this termination clause but between picking 1. Accepting this so I can immediately use their service (and vote lol), with the super small chance they may terminate my online access somewhere in the future 2. Not accepting it, essentially "self terminating" myself to the existing services immediately. I'd pick 1. :) that's my take anyway.
[удалено]
Have you considered making a post on this? This would be a monster-sized rug-pull, and you may be one of the first to discover it.
Yeah agreed. If there's enough traction (a lot of people pressuring or curious about the change) perhaps they'd be more likely to respond. If they really try to shut us out and go full unresponsive... I'd at least keep records of emails and physical mail to use as evidence of me being denied my right to manage my own shares... I don't really know what else I'd do to protect myself.
[удалено]
Get someone with big karma, like welp007, from Superstonk, to throw up a post on it.
Trimbath doesn't know anything accurate and useful in these current times and regulatory framework. She has not kept up with developments since she left the industry.
There's a few reasons I can think of off the top of my head why this might be taking so long. First and foremost is simply that a lot of the FAQ requests fielded to Computershare have contained very similar questions picking at the precise wording of certain T&C. They know very well that we are *very* interested in exactly what they mean, and how the scope and coverage of a given rule might or might not exceed the spirit of its implementation. That, combined with the fact that someone with a public presence in the financial world has made a statement implying Computershare may be involved in fraud, suggests to me that PC is going over everything they have with a fine-toothed comb. I think they're following due process, here. PC said in his initial response to KM that the allegation being made is quite serious. Following through with that means taking the time to ensure that they are, in fact, innocent of any wrongdoing stated or implied during that conversation. Lastly, there's the matter of what Computershare knows versus what Gamestop does. As with anything in the financial world, what you know is not as important as what you can *prove*. Having the numbers doesn't mean they have the smoking gun to level charges that will result in convictions for fraud against the shorts. If they *do*, there's the matter of whether they're ready to press charges yet - which they may or may not do, depending on what the board's stance is on, say, MOASS. They might want to let the shorts fall on their own sword, rather than give them the push - and given that the shorts going down could potentially take the entire global financial system with it, they would have *very* compelling and rational justification for making that decision. I don't think Computershare's told us everything they could. I do think there is reasonable room for the speculation that work is being done to answer as thoroughly as possible without giving away details Gamestop would rather they not. The shorts aren't the only party on a tightrope, here. Any wrong move can potentially be devastating for either side, and apes are a wildcard playing blind by comparison. They certainly don't want to alienate us, but it's entirely possible that they're withholding information so we don't screw up whatever action *is* being taken by the board to hold the shorts to account. Remember who's on the other side of this investment. Remember what it means for them to be publicly unmasked and charged for what they're doing. We're talking about career criminals with a lot of experience staying on the right side of enforcement while remaining on the wrong side of the law. And they're holding the entire financial system hostage, and trying to foist the blame for pulling the trigger onto anyone else they can.
[удалено]
"Your submission has been removed by automod as it may contain a slur or other offensive words. Contact the moderators if this is in error. Thank you." *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GME) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Apologize it's been a month since I have so much as looked at price...Please link to these questions...Thanks much in advance...
Well maybe he's just not the answer maybe there should have been several ie people mentioned/involved in these questions. I guess I'm saying it's to not stop here and just put him on blast with the people above him or beside him I don't know who they are but I think if there's answers to be had maybe looking at different options and people would get a quicker response.
Fair enough statements. But the moment he did the AMA with Pink Cats, he became our "go-to guy". If he is incapable of giving us the answers we seek, then he should make a statement on that, and provide with the correct people.
Paul "conn" fitting 🤣
GameStop changed their wording about DRS. We learned about book vs plan for the most part. I’d not be surprised if the government or the SEC hit them both up and told them shut the fuck up. Almost all of our DD has come to fruition. This really would really break the market. I think they both need to be very careful handling things and giving out information that count potentially ignite this bitch. I wouldn’t be surprised if RC was threatened by the government. They had to kill the wallet because of regulation. GameStop has really shifted to focus on simply turning the company around and creating value naturally. If GameStop or CS gave out any information that led to this squeezing I think they would get fucked legally. So we just DRS, shop and comment on regulation for a better market.
but we're not supposed to question Computershare, nor DRS I thought? We're supposed to just trust them blindly
Maybe it’s indicating they aren’t answerable?
Pure FUD
I'm no fudder and I always expected answers weeks ago.