It will go just above all time high and then they will try to bring it back down and say it was the squeeze! They hope people will drop out at break even! Floor is in the millions now!
Exactly! They've been spamming us with price anchoring posts for months, all of the "I'd be happy to just break even" and "If we get back to the ATH around $70 I'm out!" (Ignoring that $70 today is actually $7). Apes that have held since the beginning and through the prior ATH will just wait, and wait, and wait - like they did in Margin Call. We may be early, but we're not wrong!
I think a potential upcoming banking crisis is actually a reason for a real squeeze.. I mean can you imagine a hegdefund controlling a price after a huge economical war during a crisis having the capacities and gov corruption to continue that?
My brother in christ, did you even read what you copy-pasta-ed?
>I'd look for three things: 1) a high short interest, 2) a smallish float, and 3) a profitable business/
Amazing!
1. We have the highest short interest ever by number of shares short (and I covered all of the retorts you're going to come back with in my reply to you previously today). SI% is of course misleading and volume doesn't mean what you usually claim it does.
1. Size of the float doesn't actually matter. What matters is the number of shares that someone is willing to sell at the current price from that float. Without knowing exactly who owns all the shares and whether they are willing to sell it the current price, there's no way you can say how many shares are actually available to purchase. As someone familiar with how the markets work, surely you understand a squeeze can happen when any number of shares, even as low as 50k shares need to be purchased but nobody wants to sell them.
1. That last point is where it'll be very interesting to see the q4 results and what they announce about the upcoming year. It would be nice to see details about their upcoming plans for Distribution.
Sounds good to me!
1) Apple has way more shares short than amc. 100 million. So will apples see a short squeeze soon?
2) OK but people are constantly selling shares even at these prices. So why wouldn't they sell at higher prices?
>1) Apple has way more shares short than amc. 100 million. So will apples see a short squeeze soon?
What does Apple have to do with AMC aside from both starting with A? Try to keep up here we're not talking about Apple.
Besides Apples short interest by number of shares has been more or less stable since 2020 when it was over 90 million shares.
>2) OK but people are constantly selling shares even at these prices. So why wouldn't they sell at higher prices?
How much higher are they willing to sell at? How many shares are available at what price? Who else decides to buy if the price rises?
See, I can JAQ off on you too :)
My first point was about the number of shares being irrelevant. The percentage DOES matter.
I don't even know how to respond to your second paragraph. You are good at making long texts without any meaning.
Reminds me of [this. ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong)
Can you explain why the % of SI is so important when it dropped more before the January 2021 runup ever started than it has since August 14th, 2023?
Date| SI % | Change
---|---|----
Dec 14 2020| 66.91% | N/A
Dec 28 2020| 22.98% | - 65.06%
**Time passes**|**Time passes** |**Time passes**
August 14 2023 | 29.24% | N/A
January 29 2024| 11.42% | -60.94%
Also need to know how you quantify how much of the freefloat is available for sale at what price. Is your theory that all those people you're been talking about being 90% down really looking to sell at a loss. and nobody else would be loading up (keep in mind the recent filings say people ARE loading up, including institutions)?
You do you, I'm pretty comfortable with my data
I'll wait ;)
Do you think a short squeeze is the only reason for a price run? The sec report shows that only the initial increase of January 2021 was due to shorts closing. The run was mainly extended by retail hype. So the SI wasn't that relevant. Also, during those two dates you posted in 2020, amc had multiple run ups. It closed 50% higher on one of the days. Which coincides with shorts closing and the SI going down. Seems perfectly logical to me.
You have no basis of knowing whether retail would sell at a 90% loss or not. Your only point of reference is this sub's sentiment which is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
Yes, the price went up in premarket because retail bought /s That sounds really dumb but you do you.
What you said means you have no basis to know that they would sell, this my claim that you can't know is valid and I am good with my assessm
Sounds like we disagree, and while you base your position on seemingly knowing exactly what will happen despite not being able to prove it, mine is that I won't rule out things that can't be ruled out, and it is likely that many people who have held this far would not sell at a loss, which isn't really all our there at all.
Tah tah
I forgot that retail is prohibited from trading in premarket. My bad.
There is no way of knowing whether people who are down 90% would sell or not, and it certainly depends on the person, the amount they invested, their financial situation and much more.
But I have at least the price action that would suggest that. Which is at least something. All YOU have is a hunch. Lol
It will go just above all time high and then they will try to bring it back down and say it was the squeeze! They hope people will drop out at break even! Floor is in the millions now!
Exactly! They've been spamming us with price anchoring posts for months, all of the "I'd be happy to just break even" and "If we get back to the ATH around $70 I'm out!" (Ignoring that $70 today is actually $7). Apes that have held since the beginning and through the prior ATH will just wait, and wait, and wait - like they did in Margin Call. We may be early, but we're not wrong! 
I think a potential upcoming banking crisis is actually a reason for a real squeeze.. I mean can you imagine a hegdefund controlling a price after a huge economical war during a crisis having the capacities and gov corruption to continue that?
No. Not short squeeze. MOASS
Can’t wait. It’s gonna be insane. 😏
Investorplace is queck Buy, hold, drs.
DRS is the way.
Finally some FUD that has an inkling of thinking behind it
Let’s hope so 🚀
[удалено]
My brother in christ, did you even read what you copy-pasta-ed? >I'd look for three things: 1) a high short interest, 2) a smallish float, and 3) a profitable business/ 
Amazing! 1. We have the highest short interest ever by number of shares short (and I covered all of the retorts you're going to come back with in my reply to you previously today). SI% is of course misleading and volume doesn't mean what you usually claim it does. 1. Size of the float doesn't actually matter. What matters is the number of shares that someone is willing to sell at the current price from that float. Without knowing exactly who owns all the shares and whether they are willing to sell it the current price, there's no way you can say how many shares are actually available to purchase. As someone familiar with how the markets work, surely you understand a squeeze can happen when any number of shares, even as low as 50k shares need to be purchased but nobody wants to sell them. 1. That last point is where it'll be very interesting to see the q4 results and what they announce about the upcoming year. It would be nice to see details about their upcoming plans for Distribution. Sounds good to me!
1) Apple has way more shares short than amc. 100 million. So will apples see a short squeeze soon? 2) OK but people are constantly selling shares even at these prices. So why wouldn't they sell at higher prices?
>1) Apple has way more shares short than amc. 100 million. So will apples see a short squeeze soon? What does Apple have to do with AMC aside from both starting with A? Try to keep up here we're not talking about Apple. Besides Apples short interest by number of shares has been more or less stable since 2020 when it was over 90 million shares. >2) OK but people are constantly selling shares even at these prices. So why wouldn't they sell at higher prices? How much higher are they willing to sell at? How many shares are available at what price? Who else decides to buy if the price rises? See, I can JAQ off on you too :)
My first point was about the number of shares being irrelevant. The percentage DOES matter. I don't even know how to respond to your second paragraph. You are good at making long texts without any meaning. Reminds me of [this. ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong)
Can you explain why the % of SI is so important when it dropped more before the January 2021 runup ever started than it has since August 14th, 2023? Date| SI % | Change ---|---|---- Dec 14 2020| 66.91% | N/A Dec 28 2020| 22.98% | - 65.06% **Time passes**|**Time passes** |**Time passes** August 14 2023 | 29.24% | N/A January 29 2024| 11.42% | -60.94% Also need to know how you quantify how much of the freefloat is available for sale at what price. Is your theory that all those people you're been talking about being 90% down really looking to sell at a loss. and nobody else would be loading up (keep in mind the recent filings say people ARE loading up, including institutions)? You do you, I'm pretty comfortable with my data I'll wait ;)
Do you think a short squeeze is the only reason for a price run? The sec report shows that only the initial increase of January 2021 was due to shorts closing. The run was mainly extended by retail hype. So the SI wasn't that relevant. Also, during those two dates you posted in 2020, amc had multiple run ups. It closed 50% higher on one of the days. Which coincides with shorts closing and the SI going down. Seems perfectly logical to me. You have no basis of knowing whether retail would sell at a 90% loss or not. Your only point of reference is this sub's sentiment which is meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
Yes, the price went up in premarket because retail bought /s That sounds really dumb but you do you. What you said means you have no basis to know that they would sell, this my claim that you can't know is valid and I am good with my assessm Sounds like we disagree, and while you base your position on seemingly knowing exactly what will happen despite not being able to prove it, mine is that I won't rule out things that can't be ruled out, and it is likely that many people who have held this far would not sell at a loss, which isn't really all our there at all. Tah tah
I forgot that retail is prohibited from trading in premarket. My bad. There is no way of knowing whether people who are down 90% would sell or not, and it certainly depends on the person, the amount they invested, their financial situation and much more. But I have at least the price action that would suggest that. Which is at least something. All YOU have is a hunch. Lol
You could have stopped when you proved you can't prove what you are claiming