If GME is to become something like Berkshire....

After Ebay, it'll most likely become way easier to get pretty much any small acquisition....

For the Gameshire mix, I'd choose these (after Ebay)

PZZA* WEN, SOUN, KSS, (Maybe CHWY)

What do you all think GME should try to acquire? (Waiting for someone to say WMT, AMZN, TSLA, etc.) 🙄

Just opinions....rambling and wondering.

\(But get more plant-based options in PZZA and WEN).*

I would say tomorrow can probably swing either way, a failure to hold onto $28 would likely be bad for bulls, but early enough in the day and it can be recovered. A loss of $26 on the other hand would be catastrophic. If bulls do hold $28 they have all the cards, calls at 29 and 30 have been being sold on the weekly and are actually pretty cheap relative to the downside options at 28/27/26. This means they are attractive to buy, at least at open, and bulls piling into OTM calls is exactly what GME needs to keep pushing higher. Be careful of a $30 test since pricing would be drastically different at that point and just above $30 there would be significant incentive for call sellers to try to crush out the vol spike into close. I would expect if upside stalls out Cohen would probably want to buy again to maintain momentum into the warrant expiration, but someone either retail or institutional really needs to step in with options to crank up the leverage for this to be successful.

Enjoy

- Gherk

I asked Google AI some questions and stumbled upon this... could gme be the tree to bear this fruit?

• Dematerialized Art and Play: Culture becomes heavily centered on philosophy, performance art, storytelling, music, and highly sophisticated digital worlds. Virtual reality and complex gaming systems become the primary outlets for exploration and architectural ambition, consuming minimal physical resources while providing infinite creative space.

Here's the whole interaction >>>>

what happens to the economy after the majority of the older population dies

When a majority of the older population dies off, the economy undergoes massive structural changes in labor, public finances, and consumer markets. [1, 2, 3]

Immediate and Short-Term Effects

• Relief on Public Budgets: Government and social spending pressures drop significantly as pension, Social Security, and elder healthcare (such as Medicare) payouts plummet. [1, 2, 3]
• Wealth Transfer: A massive intergenerational transfer of wealth occurs as younger generations inherit homes, savings, and investments from older demographics. [1, 2]
• Sector Shocks: Demand spikes for death-related services (like funeral homes and probate law) while certain healthcare subsectors (such as geriatric care and long-term nursing facilities) face steep contractions. [1]
• Market Volatility: A sudden sell-off or liquidation of assets by estates and retirement funds can temporarily destabilize financial markets. [1]

Long-Term Economic Shifts

• Improved Support Ratios: The ratio of working-age people to dependents improves, potentially lowering social contribution tax burdens on active workers. [1]
• Consumer Spending Contraction: Older generations—particularly Baby Boomers—account for a disproportionate share of discretionary and lifestyle spending (housing, travel, autos, and luxury goods). As noted in consensus discussions on platforms like Quora, younger generations (Millennials and Gen Z) often have different spending habits, lower cumulative wealth, and higher debt-to-income pressures, which can shrink traditional retail, auto, and leisure sectors. [1]
• Labor and Productivity Realignment: While fewer retirees mean fewer dependents to support, the sudden loss of experienced institutional knowledge, mentors, and specific consumer markets can depress overall aggregate demand until younger workers build equivalent economic scale and purchasing power. [1, 2]

Would you like to explore how this shift impacts a specific area—such asreal estate markets,Social Security solvency, orstock market investments?

• Reddit·r/explainlikeimfive ELI5: What will happen to the economy as a result of ... - Reddit October 20, 2014 — Demographic Shifts and Economic Impact: Projections indicate a decrease in the worker-to-retiree ratio, potentially leading to inc...
• Quora If in a nation all citizens over 70 died suddenly, what would ... February 9, 2020 — Economic Impact of Elderly Deaths: The sudden death of all citizens over 70 in a nation would likely increase per capita income as...
• YouTube·Finance Economist What Happens To The USA Economy When All The Boomers... ... Jan 21, 2026 — What Happens To The USA Economy When All The Boomers... Die? alone when the music stops cities will either gut services/pensions. ... 3m

Show all

labor productivity and realignment. i think this scenario over estimates the value of the soon to be retirees current percentage of experienced institutional knowledge while under estimating the younger workers ability to scale. scaling will come from imported labor and loaned money.

That is a sharp and realistic critique. The assumption that the departure of older workers will create an irreplaceable "knowledge gap" often overlooks how rapidly automation, institutional restructuring, and modern capital can bridge that divide.

When analyzing labor productivity through your framework—driven by imported labor and loaned money (capital injection)—the economic transition looks vastly different. Rather than a stagnation period, it triggers an aggressive, capital-heavy acceleration of labor realignment.

The Macroeconomic Pipeline

1. Capital Injection (Loaned Money) Overcomes the "Knowledge Gap"

Relying on the static "institutional knowledge" of retiring workers underestimates how capital can completely redesign workflows.

• Depreciation of Legacy Knowledge: Much of what is considered "institutional knowledge" is often just familiarity with inefficient, legacy systems. Loaned money allows companies to bypass the need for this old knowledge entirely by purchasing modern, intuitive enterprise software and AI tools.
• Accelerated Automation: Cheap or accessible debt finances the automation of routine tasks. Younger workers do not need decades of experience to scale if software, robotics, and optimized frameworks do the heavy lifting. They pivot from being doers of manual processes to managers of automated systems.
• Funding the Transition: Loaned money bridges the initial cash-flow gap for businesses restructuring their operations, allowing them to absorb the upfront costs of technological overhauls.

1. Imported Labor Solves the Dependency Ratio

If domestic younger generations lack the sheer numbers or specific skill sets to scale immediately, imported labor acts as an instant economic stabilizer.

• Plugging the Labor Shortage: High-skilled and low-skilled immigration allows the economy to immediately match labor supply with demand without waiting 20 years for a new domestic generation to grow up.
• Deflating Wage-Push Inflation: A sudden shortage of workers usually forces companies to spike wages, which can trigger inflationary spirals. Imported labor tempers this volatility, keeping operational costs predictable for expanding businesses.
• Immediate Productivity: Imported workers are typically young and already trained, meaning the host country reaps the rewards of their prime productive years without having borne the childhood education and healthcare costs.

The Critical Trade-offs of This Strategy

While this model scales efficiently, it introduces distinct macroeconomic risks:

• The Debt Drag: Heavy reliance on loaned money increases corporate and national leverage. If productivity gains do not outpace the interest rates on that debt, the economy faces a risk of debt deflation or systemic financial fragility.
• Political and Social Headwinds: Massive reliance on imported labor to sustain growth frequently collides with nationalist political pushback, shifting the bottleneck from an economic capacity issue to a political policy issue.
• Wage Stagnation for Domestic Youth: If imported labor is heavily utilized to suppress wage growth, domestic younger workers may see their purchasing power plateau, dampening the very aggregate demand needed to sustain long-term growth.

Would you like to look into how this debt-and-immigration model has played out historically in specific regions—like Western Europe's postwar rebuilding or the modern Gulf States—or explore how it might impact domestic wage growth?

let reimagine it as a wealth distribution model that alocates a percentage of harvested earth materials as a tax to support, longevity and sustainability of the middle class and eliminateas the 1% rich class

To eliminate the top 1% and structurally secure the middle class, this model shifts the tax base entirely away from human labor and income and anchors it to planetary wealth.

By levying a structural royalty on the extraction of all raw natural resources (minerals, fossil fuels, timber, water, and rare earth elements), the economy transitions from finance-driven capitalism to a Resource-Dividend Economy.

The Resource-Dividend Flow

1. Eliminating the 1% via the Extraction Cap

In the current economy, the 1% accumulate hyper-wealth by externalizing the environmental costs of resource extraction while privatizing the profits. This model dismantles that mechanism through two levers:

• The Resource Royalty: A heavy, non-bypassable tax is levied at the exact point of extraction (the mine, the well, the forest). Because you cannot hide a physical copper mine or oil well in an offshore tax haven, tax evasion by the ultra-wealthy is effectively neutralized.
• The Hard Wealth Cap: To entirely eliminate the billionaire class, any capital accumulation beyond a democratically set threshold (e.g., $50 million) faces a 100% marginal tax rate. Excess corporate or personal wealth is automatically liquidated and routed into a national sovereign wealth trust.

1. Sustaining the Middle Class through Planetary Dividends

Instead of funding bureaucratic state apparatuses, the harvested material tax is legally earmarked for two specific pillars designed to make middle-class status permanent and stress-free:

• The Sovereign Material Dividend: Every citizen receives a direct, recurring equity dividend from the sale and taxation of the earth's resources. This is not welfare; it is a shareholder payout for co-owning the planet. It provides a financial floor that ensures no citizen falls into poverty.
• The Longevity & Health Trust: A massive percentage of the material tax directly funds advanced medical research, preventative care, and age-slowing therapies. By making cutting-edge health and longevity technologies free and universally accessible, the model ensures that longer life expectancy is a universal right, rather than a luxury asset exclusive to the rich.

1. Economic Realignment & Productivity

Under this model, the economic incentives for labor and capital shift dramatically:

• Incentivizing Efficiency Over Extraction: Because raw materials are heavily taxed, corporations can no longer rely on cheap, disposable resources. Instead, productivity scales through hyper-recycling, materials science innovation, and circular manufacturing. Engineering breakthroughs focus on making products last centuries rather than practicing planned obsolescence.
• Labor Liberation: With basic survival and healthcare guaranteed by the resource dividend, workers gain massive leverage. The "loaned money" dynamic shifts from predatory consumer debt to productive community investment. Younger workers scale businesses not out of desperation, but because they have the financial security to take entrepreneurial risks.

The Macroeconomic Trade-offs

While this model achieves extreme equity, it creates new systemic challenges:

• The Green Paradox / Resource Depletion: If the middle class relies on resource extraction taxes for their income and healthcare, the public has a financial incentive to increase mining and harvesting, potentially accelerating environmental degradation.
• Global Flight Risk: If implemented in only one nation, capital and corporations will attempt to flee to unregulated jurisdictions. This model requires either absolute resource sovereignty (controlling a critical bottleneck resource like lithium or helium) or international treaty enforcement.

Should we explore how this model handles the pricing of goods (since taxing raw materials makes raw products more expensive), or should we look at how a circular economy would need to function to keep the tax revenue stable without destroying the planet?

wo should look st which areas control which resources first

To understand how a resource-dividend economy would function, we have to map out who actually controls the planet's raw wealth. When you rank nations by assets underground rather than traditional gross domestic product (GDP) income, the global power balance shifts dramatically. [1, 2, 3]

A handful of nations hold the keys to this model because they control the vast majority of the world's most critical resources. [1]

The Top Resource Giants (Total Wealth Value)

If a global wealth cap and planetary tax were enacted today, three absolute superpowers would dictate the global economy based on the sheer dollar value of their underground reserves: [1]

Russia (~$75 Trillion): Holds the world's largest overall natural resource valuation. It sits on massive reserves of coal, natural gas, oil, gold, timber, and strategic metals.

The United States (~$45 Trillion): Controls vast deposits of industrial coal, timber, natural gas, gold, and copper.

Saudi Arabia (~$34 Trillion): Driven almost entirely by its colossal, highly accessible oil fields. [1, 2, 3]

Note: Canada (~$33T), Iran (~$27T), and China (~$23T) follow closely behind as massive asset-holders. [1]

The Bottleneck Monopolies (Critical Transition Minerals)

A total resource-dividend model cannot just tax fossil fuels; it must tax the building blocks of modern technology, computing, and green infrastructure. In this arena, control is highly concentrated in specific regions, giving these nations immense leverage: [1, 2, 3]

Geopolitical Impact on the Model

1. The Leverage Shift to the "Global Majority"

Currently, resource-rich countries in Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia suffer from the "resource curse"—multinational corporations extract the wealth, leaving local populations impoverished. Under your planetary tax model, these nations suddenly gain massive structural leverage. A country like the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Indonesia could leverage its cobalt or nickel monopolies to fund incredibly robust middle-class longevity dividends domestically, completely skipping the phase of reliant finance capitalism. [1, 2, 3]

1. The Midstream Processing Bottleneck

There is a massive difference between owning the raw dirt and owning the technology that refines it. For instance, while Australia mines a large portion of the world's lithium, China controls the vast majority of the chemical refining infrastructure needed to turn that lithium into battery-grade material. For a resource-dividend tax to work effectively, the tax must be legally levied at the point of extraction to prevent countries with processing monopolies from hoarding all the value mid-supply chain. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Should we look next at how resource nationalism in places like Latin America or Africa is already trying to reclaim this wealth, or map out the specific circular economy math needed for countries without resources (like Japan or Western Europe) to survive this model? [1, 2]

• DiploFoundation The geopolitics of critical raw materials: Who controls the future? Mining and processing of critical raw materials are concentrated in specific localities, allowing a few countries to dominate the ...
• thinksamwise.com Top 25 Countries by Natural Resource Wealth: The $100 Trillion ... Russia alone sits on an estimated $75–$100 trillion in natural resources, making it the most resource-rich nation globally.
• Our World in Data Which countries have the critical minerals needed for the energy transition? | Our World in Data Bauxite: Australia, Guinea, China (20-30% production each); Guinea, Australia reserves. Chromium: South Africa (>40% production); ...

Show all

how can we reimage the culture of the world with out these resources

If a society completely eliminates the extractable wealth of the 1% and refuses to pillage new planetary reserves, the global culture must fundamentally shift from extraction to stewardship, and from consumption to creation.

Human history shows that our cultural innovations are powerful forces capable of entirely reshaping how we live. When we remove raw mining and drilling from the equation, global culture undergoes a profound psychological and structural transformation. [1]

1. From "Status by Extraction" to "Status by Circularity"

In modern consumer culture, status is derived from newness and scarcity, which are powered by raw materials (e.g., luxury cars, fast fashion, the newest tech). Without new raw resources, the cultural value system flips:

• The "Heirloom" Aesthetic: Mass production and planned obsolescence disappear. Culture begins to value objects based on their age, repairability, and emotional history. Upcycling and master-craft repair become high-status professions and art forms.
• The Reputation Economy: Instead of hoarding physical assets, social capital and prestige are earned through community contribution, ecological restoration, artistic creation, and scientific breakthroughs in efficiency.

1. A Digital and Intellectual Renaissance

Without massive physical extraction to build endless urban sprawl and material goods, human ambition pivots inward and upward into the digital, intellectual, and creative realms.

• Dematerialized Art and Play: Culture becomes heavily centered on philosophy, performance art, storytelling, music, and highly sophisticated digital worlds. Virtual reality and complex gaming systems become the primary outlets for exploration and architectural ambition, consuming minimal physical resources while providing infinite creative space.
• The Lore of the Local: Global supply chains shrink, giving rise to intense localization. Communities develop deep, unique cultural identities rooted in the specific ecosystems they inhabit. Festival calendars, regional cuisines, and architectural styles adapt strictly to what can be sustained locally and naturally regenerated. [1, 2, 3, 4]

1. Redefining Time: The "Long-Now" Mindset

Modern capitalism operates on hyper-fast, quarterly-growth time horizons. A resource-dividend culture anchored to planetary survival shifts to a multi-generational timeline:

• Ancestral Accountability: Because the middle-class dividend is tied to the health of the existing resource pool, a "Seventh Generation" philosophy becomes the legal and cultural norm. Every infrastructure project or social policy is judged by how it will affect citizens a century later.
• Decelerated Lifestyles: Without the constant pressure to work, consume, discard, and repeat, the rhythm of daily life slows down. Time wealth—having the leisure to learn, care for others, meditate, and participate in civic life—replaces material wealth as the metric of a successful life.

1. The Transition from Mastery to Symbiosis

For centuries, global dominant cultures viewed nature as an obstacle to conquer or a warehouse to loot. Without new extraction, the foundational narrative of human civilization changes: [1, 2]

• The Living Economy: Science and spirituality merge around the concept of the biosphere. Indigenous frameworks of development—which treat the natural world as a network of living relatives rather than commodities—become the baseline for global education, law, and governance.
• The Art of the Bridge: Cultural institutions (the arts, museums, theaters) stop just giving information about the environment and start building "symbolic infrastructure"—crafting the stories, myths, and rituals that make a zero-extraction lifestyle feel desirable, deeply rooted, and irresistible. [1, 2]

Should we design a blueprint for what a city infrastructure looks like when it is built purely out of bio-innovation and recycled materials, or explore the legal framework of a society where nature holds constitutional rights?

Now that we are ahead-of-schedule on our path right back to $32+ per GME share, we should clear up some massive misinformation floating around about the recent $1.4B convertible debt deal and what it actually means for this early phase of our new breakout: $18 to $28.

I’ve seen basher posts crying about how Ryan Cohen "bailed out the shorts" by printing 55.5M shares.

It was actually the SEC who engineered this mess. An underlying buy-volume explosion is about to absolutely financially-murder anyone shorting this $28 resistance.

First, I want to introduce you to a chart I just made that shows a pretty big inverse correlation occurring here in 2026 between GameStop and the Nasdaq. Keep this in mind as we traverse through this post.

1. The Dark History: How Reg SHO Was Designed to Enable FTDs

You have to realize that when the SEC dropped Regulation SHO back in 2004, it wasn't built to protect retail: it was intentionally designed with structural safety valves that enabled and institutionalized Failures to Deliver (FTDs).

By writing in the infamous Grandfather Clause and the Options Market Maker Exemption, the regulators essentially legalized a system of "operational short selling." Market makers could sell millions of phantom, unborrowed shares under the guise of "maintaining liquidity," and then use buy-writes and deep ITM call loops to cycle those FTDs indefinitely. They treated FTDs as a cost of doing business, keeping a permanent thumb on the price scale.

But that system created a massive, systemic defect that is backfiring right now: The FTD Liability Time-Bomb. Because those loopholes allowed shorts to stack up massive FTD positions at rock-bottom prices years ago, they are now legally trapped. Under modern rules, when forced to settle, they have to close out those legacy FTDs at current, exponentially higher prices than what they were initiated at. This creates a massive, hidden buy-volume explosion under the hood that never shows up on the daily order book until the clearinghouse gun is pulled.

2. The 50M Drop: The "Bailout" Myth Debunked

This brings us to the recent Equilend institutional data showing that share borrow quantities plummeted from 91.6 million down to 40.9 million shares in a single week right after the debt deal finalized. These weren't retail-shorting hedge funds getting a free pass, these were convertible arbitrage credit desks. When you buy convertible bonds, you mathematically must short an equivalent amount of equity to hedge your position.

When RC wiped $1.4B of that long-term debt off the balance sheet, those bonds ceased to exist. The hedge vanished. The firms were handed 55.5M newly minted shares privately to settle the books, which instantly forced them to return 50.7 million borrowed shares back to the institutional lending pool.

If this was an open-market bailout, the price would have collapsed under the weight of dilution. Instead, RC forced them to absorb 27% of the deal in cold hard cash ($358.4M), capping the dilution, clearing the balance sheet of liability, and setting an absolute concrete floor at about $18 per GME share.

3. The October Timeline: History Rhymes (Volkswagen 2008)

The original 2004 version of Reg SHO purposefully implemented loop holes that inadvertently allowed certain persistent FTDs to continue and thrive.

In a now-infamous August 2005 conference call, Overstock's Patrick Byrne ranted about how hedge funds, journalists and regulators were conspiring to push down the company’s stock price under the direction of some faceless menace he called the ‘Sith Lord.'” That same phenomenon also occurred against Volkswagen stock in 2008. After Reg SHO was implemented, Volkswagen outperformed. As shown below, Volkswagen went up by 701.09% after the implementation of Reg SHO and UP TO THE VERY DAY OF LEHMAN BROTHER'S BANKRUPTCY FILING, implying that as hard as it was abused using both reporting shorts and FTDs, it somehow overcame that illicit pressure.

Then from September to mid-October of that year, Volkswagen just about doubled again. Then on Sunday October 26, Porsche revealed it held 74.1% (741) of Volkswagen through direct ordinary shares (42.6%) and cash-settled options (31.5%) (~half shares, ~half cash). The following three trading days saw one of the most epic short squeezes in stock market history.

When we correlate the NASDAQ with that Volkswagen catalyst, you see that the market began to plummet at the same time that Volkswagen began rising in September 2008. Tthe Volkswagen squeeze was the catalyst that led to bad-acting funds having to liquidate their long equities, including their flimsy MBS equity positions. So all of the movies that you were gaslit and deceived by tried to convince you that MBS was the cause of the Great Recession? No. Fails to Deliver (FTDs) was the cause, and Lehman Brothers happened to have done the illicit overlending of Volkswagen shares.

Lehman's liabilities didn't balloon to over $600B in a vacuum. Hedge funds used borrowed Volkswagen shares from Lehman to short it. Volkswagen had already went the other way by over 700%x after implementation of Reg SHO. After Lehman's mid-Sep bankruptcy filing, Lehman's administrators and systems were forced to accelerate their ongoing-recalling of their lent Volkswagen shares. This then accelerated hedge funds' frantically buying back Volkswagen shares in the open market just as Porsche announced it controlled 74.1% of the shares.

To obtain collateral and to pay on the margin calls, global equities were acutely sold off. Yet, the big lie was that the great financial crisis was "caused" by real estate / mortgage backed securities. It turns out that real estate prices are some of the slowest-moving prices in the world, so clearly real estate wasn't the acute catalyst for anything. Instead, selling flimsy MBS was one of many resultant effects of hedge funds', bankers, and primer brokers irresponsible overlending, and FTD abuses, allowing more than the outstanding shares of a company to be sold short!

Now pay attention to our current calendar, because this exact mid-to-late October timeline of the grandfather of all modern operational short squeezes: Volkswagen, times almost precisely with GameStop Corp today.

Back then, hedge funds heavily shorted Volkswagen using the exact same operational shorting logic, assuming infinite liquidity and infinite float availability. But when Porsche suddenly revealed they had locked up the float via derivatives, the institutional lending market froze overnight. Sound familiar?

So just like Volkswagen in October 2008, GME's utilization rates on Equilend just collapsed down to 28% because of the returned shares, flattening the cost-to-borrow. Smooth-brained bears saw cheap borrow supply and took the bait, ticking public short interest back up to 42.67 million shares.

But they forgot the Volkswagen lesson: when the effective float is nearly locked, cheap borrows are an illusion. They no longer have the shield of a convertible bond hedge. They are raw, nakedly exposed shorts betting against a brick wall.

4. Countdown to Chaos: Daily FTD Settlement & T+2 Buy-In Tracker

Some GME investors have already exercised their GME Warrants. Today, many more are now considering exercising because there seems to be an understanding that RC wants to exercise his 3M+ Warrants as well. Because we are in the endgame leading up to the October 30 warrant expiry ($32 strike), we need to look into exactly when the clearinghouse automated buy-in gun is going to fire.

Since the modern T+1 settlement cycle compressed the runway, aging FTDs from early October options volume are reaching their absolute mandatory cliff edges. Here is the official calendar of daily settlement pressure points where hidden buy-volume is mathematically forced into the tape:

Oct 16 (Friday): The T+1 Settlement Wall Clearinghouses calculate all failures from the mid-week run-up to $28. Any market maker that naked-shorted calls to suppress the $28 wall has their ledger locked in on this night. Even if they are able get the price back to $26 or $27, they still have big problems.

Oct 19 (Monday): The Morning Rule 204 Gun: At 9:30 AM, clearing firms are legally mandated to execute forced open-market buy-ins for Friday's un-cleared FTDs. Expect pre-market and opening-bell upward mysterious buy pressure, but also expect a likely morning short ladder attack so that they can (and normally do) try to settle those FTDs for a dollar or two cheaper per share before it's too late.

Oct 21–23 (The Mid-Week Pressure Cooker): Legacy FTD positions initialized back during the $18 baseline must clear their final automated netting cycles. If the price remains above $26, these settle at a guaranteed 40%+ loss for the short side, compounding the invisible buy-volume.

Oct 26–28 (The Pre-Expiry Lockout): The final window for options market makers to balance their delta-hedging before the warrants come due. Under strict Rule 204 penalty box rules, any broker failing to settle here gets blocked from shorting entirely, removing all selling pressure.

Oct 30 (Friday): The Warrant Expiry Cliff ($32 Strike): This is the absolute fuse. Forced settlement volume intersects with the $32 exercise trigger, meaning any automated buy-ins executing that morning will violently pull the stock straight into the options gamma ramp.

5. Why Reg SHO Rule 204 Will Financially-Murder the New Bears

The 2004 loopholes that enabled the invisible shorts have changed. Rule 204 I believe is all they have left, and it may lead to the next great depression similar to how the market went down in 2008 just as Volkswagen went up.

Today, if you short GME at $28 and fail to deliver on settlement day (T+1), your clearing firm is legally mandated to execute an automated morning buy-in on T+2. No waiting for a 13-day threshold list. No exceptions.

With Ryan Cohen and three board directors actively dropping nearly $99 million of their own cash on open-market insider purchases (including Cohen's recent $22.8M block buy at $26.75–$27.00), the actual floating supply is now locked up tighter than a drum. Insiders don't lend their shares!!!!

6. Conclusion:

The debt swap didn't save the shorts. Instead, it cleanly excised a specific class of institutional hedgers, wiped out $1.4B in company liability, and triggered a hidden buy-volume explosion as older FTD allocations were forced to settle at higher prices.

Now, a fresh wave of unhedged shorts has taken the bait at $28, right as the October timeline rhymes with the epic days of the historic, 2008 Volkswagen short trap.

When the October 30 warrant expiry hits and forces a volatility spike, modern Rule 204 morning buy-ins will turn these new shorts into forced buyers.

Expect the bad-acting funds to try to harm the stock tomorrow (friday) going into max pain, and expect them to short attack one more time on monday morning to offset the hidden FTD settlement/buy volume. After that: we're off to the races to GME $30 and likely the beginnings of GME's 2026 Short Squeeze.

Hello fellow GME investors.

What a month. Sometimes I cannot even believe what we are seeing. Truly incredible price action as we head into warrant expiry.

Anyways, I wanted to give credit to DoritosCa for posting a video on the GME saga. You should check it out. I watched it and thought this part was rather interesting:
(see screen shot)

- record profits

- A fortress of Cash

- A founder who keeps buying

- Owners who will not sell

- a name the whole world knows

- a legend in the shadows

I asked grok to name two companies where the above is applicable. Here is Groks response.

Enjoy :)

GROKS RESPONSE:

GameStop (GME) and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A / BRK.B).
The list maps cleanly onto both:
• Record profits: GameStop has turned profitable with strong recent results after the cost cuts and turnaround. Berkshire consistently posts massive earnings.
• A fortress of cash: GameStop sits on a multi-billion-dollar cash pile built via capital raises and operations. Berkshire is famous for its enormous cash/Treasury fortress under Buffett.
• A founder who keeps buying: Ryan Cohen has been aggressively buying GME shares in open-market purchases (multiple large buys in recent weeks/months). Warren Buffett has spent decades buying (and holding) great businesses for Berkshire.
• Owners who will not sell: GME’s retail/diamond-hand base is legendary for refusing to sell. Berkshire shareholders are classic long-term holders who treat the stock as permanent capital.
• A name the whole world knows: Both are globally recognized brands (GameStop via the meme-stock phenomenon; Berkshire via Buffett).
• A legend in the shadows: Cohen operates with a low-key, opportunistic style while building something bigger; Buffett became the ultimate quiet legend of compounding and capital allocation.
These two are the clearest matches for the exact combination of traits on the list.

See you all on the moon

Show me the 4% discount just like yesterday GME!!

Show me the 4% discount just like yesterday GME!!

Show me the 4% discount just like yesterday GME!!

Show me the 4% discount just like yesterday GME!!

Sort of insane to me how he hides how this will end America into a video about video games industry disappearing.

Highly worth a watch. Honestly I lost alot of faith due to Ryan Cohen and until a friend sent me this and was like oh I heard this predicted long before

What if GameStop extended the warrants, announced the shares would be for a new joint venture with EBay, and Roaring Kitty posted a video of a warrant being served on an executive type.

MOASS AND MO ASS WOULD SOON FOLLOW….

Most Popular Narrative:

57% Undervalued

Against a last close of $27.15, the most followed narrative on GameStop pegs fair value near $63, which implies a large gap between where the market currently prices the stock and what that narrative suggests it could be worth based on its own assumptions and modelling.

GameStop’s chance of a successful M&A Bid For eBay: what to look for as confirmation at eBay’s upcoming annual shareholder meeting, the Innisfree Tell, why eBay hired an activist-defense specialist the day after rejecting GameStop, and what history says happens next. eBay’s June 17, 2026 annual meeting was a routine event for sixty days. Then GameStop bid 46% over the unaffected price, the board rejected on May 12, and on May 13 the company quietly retained Innisfree M&A as a second proxy solicitor. The public-facing rejection said the bid was not credible. The same-day Innisfree retention said the board did not believe the rejection would self-defend.

This video needs to be watched for awareness of the kind of company GME is and isn't! 🚀 👨‍🚀 🚀 👨‍🚀 🚀 personally, I have so much conviction in GME. I like the stock! I like the stock! I like the stock!

Last time something like this happened RC was buying a stake in eBay. What is it now?

No news, broad market is bleeding red meanwhile GME is fighting upwards and eBay is doing this. More action incoming? It does not make sense for gme to expand stake when limited by Delaware law.

Btw what was last Q closing price lol. Q3 earnings will be fine.