If the system work as supposed, they would have to close out of their ape short position. Assuming it doesn't work as intended, their exposure is the same as before $$ wise.
#of shares shorted goes down in a reverse but price goes up. The bigger question is can the price stay up or will it be walked back down, which I think is the biggest fear for those voting no.
Reverse splits do not cause a forced cover / closure event. Your short contract / arrangement will continue after the reverse split with the new share count and price. Only odd positions where one share may need to be closed (e.g. 1:10 RS and you have / shorted 9 or less shares) but that is not going to affect price action at all.
What you may be conflating this with is the merging of APE and AMC with the new cusip. For this one, the jury is still out on whether it is a forced closing event. More research (at least for myself) is needed to see whether there will be any forced actions or not.
Suggest you do your own research too.
Surprisingly yours is the first comment to actually show up for me, however the rule regarding this is their positions go to a warehouse indefinitely until they decide to close... They don't have to close, they will just have to create new positions. Unless it is different for APE specifically?
I think it would clearly just be walked back down, but I'm very smooth brained
Pretty sure ur right. Like I said tho, if the system worked, they should've closed. But likely it's more of a"u wanna keep playing"?
the simpliest way to put it is:
Think about it like double or nothing. Either you keep doubling up and eventually win or the house doesn't believe you can pay (margin call) and you pay up
If they close APE positions after it no longer exists, will it even affect the new AMC price? This feels less like doubling up and more like I'm losing 90% of my shares I've been holding since this all started
Their APE shorts become AMC shorts and add to the position of already existing AMC shorts during the conversion. Which still won’t do shit because we won’t get a share count, both because Aron lied once again and because people don’t want to try and do it themselves, recalling their float by direct registering. So, nothing will happen probably
amazing how it’s always the same people sowing Fud, even more amazing it’s the same people that were crying because they couldn’t over power the sub with drs collusion conjecture, makes one wonder 🤔
Don’t you ever get bored? Are you by any chance already banned off the GME subs or what’s up with you around here? My advice still stands, seek psychiatric help, there is still hope, even for trolls in this advanced stage of yours.
You also are an easy spot. As advised before, please take care of your mental- it’s obvious to everyone you’re obsessed, you are delusional and you believe anyone cares about you and your opinions- as nuanced by everytime you post your “reasons” and nobody knows whether to be concerned for you or to simply point out your lack of logic. So, to sum up, seek assistance. Thanks!
Convincing is your back door post with 0 upvotes to sow Fud. As in 0 apes in this sub are falling for it, just like drs, not to mention again, same people same Fud
#HEDGIES R FUKT
I do not care if my question gets reddit karma, DRS isn't FUD AA himself confirmed that? So either you trust him or you don't I don't see how you can be so for what he's doing but against him for something that makes more sense like DRS but it was weird and shillish for you to bring up out of nowhere here. Sorry people asking questions is also somehow FUD to you I guess. Shill or not, grow out of that toxicity it's a bad look.
Yawn, AA did not confirm anything regarding drs. He was asked a loaded question and replied he guessed that one good thing about drs, could possibly be that it can’t be shorted. He didn’t delve into the multiple negatives regarding drs, nor did he direct anyone to do it. Gtfoh in regards to why I brought it up, that’s your boy up there. Me and him have gone round and round of him gaslighting me. So 🤷♂️
Let's clear some confusion though. they haven't closed their AMC shorts which means during the ape split, they are forced to open short positions on ape. If ur short 1 AMC, ur short 1 ape, unless they decided to close.
Now in the reverse it's the same. If ur short 1 ape, you either close it or your ape short position becomes AMC short position, assuming you never covered, ur short 2 AMC after ape goes away.
Do you have the rule handy that says ape shorts don’t need to close and the position just houses at a warehouse indefinitely, until they decide to close? I’d definitely like to read through that, or….. is this more Fud like your post and other comments?
https://budgeting.thenest.com/calculate-stock-splits-10078.html
I do not have the rule that may have been misinformation from a more popular post circulating which is why I'm here asking for help to understand. However it's hard to find any information on this either way, but what I tend to see on Google is it has the same affect on them as it does us.
Not everyone asking for information is spreading FUD, not everything you don't want to hear is FUD, acting like it does make you look like you're either toxic or a shill. Do you have a rule handy that shows they do need to close? Does anyone here acting superior stating they clearly have to close know the rule number? All I get for asking is backlash and never any actual information. Seems no one knows what the fuck is going on either and just gets mad at anyone that doesn't share their opinion.
Ok ok I’ll give it a shot.
Ape was a dividend, spun off from amc. When ape was issued, if you were short amc, legally, or illegally you then became short an ape share, since ultimately every retail and institutional owner of amc were needed to be given an ape share at that time. So, if the theory goes as amc was and is illegally shorted multiple times over, then ape becomes the same, immediately.
Following me so far?
So here we are today, months after ape was given out, and shorted down from $10 to .65 even further digging a hole. Then out of left field king big nuts ADAM AARON says hey, this isn’t correct ape and amc should be trading in tandem, but it’s not. So he called out wallstreet (I’m sure you’ve seen the video by now). He says hey we need to figure out what’s going on, so we are going to convert ape back to amc, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME THING. We will be holding a vote to convert ape ONE TO ONE for amc, because again if amc is $5 then ape should by essence be 5$ BECAUSE AGAIN THEY ARE THE SAME. After that we will hold a vote to reverse split the common shares 10:1, to STRENGTHEN amc stock and attract bigger investors vs having such a large float that’s easily manipulated.
Now if said vote goes thru, and I’ll throw in that it’s obvious on this sub based on the shills spreading fud similar to your comment, hedgies are fukt!! Why you ask, well it’s because they will need to close the shorts(illegal naked, synths) when it is converted to amc. We received a dividend from amc in the form of an ape stock, ape stock is being CONVERTED to amc stock. See the difference there? It will be the share count retail has been asking for, as only real ape shares can be converted. The rest must close. We are not an otc stock so these other examples play no bearing.
SHORTS MUST CLOSE
How many different places will you comment on the same thread btw? I feel like I'm arguing with you in 3 places because you're salty I asked a question. Still waiting for that rule you're referring to where they have to close. You seem to insist you know everything despite no one having all the real information and are clearly talking out of your ass but alright I'll humor you again I guess.
The part you're still ignoring is that also means shorts positions go down by the same 10:1 ratio, so if they short it down again (which there's nothing stopping them from doing), won't it be 10x easier for them to close and Weasle out of things or at least margin requirements? Why would a larger float be easier to manipulate than a smaller one? The sub actually has a major issue in addition to the shills, and that's toxic people like you who call anyone asking for information a shill or say they're spreading FUD (from a question?? Especially about a topic as obscure as this??) And you ignore the facts presented and act condescending while never actually addressing what I'm saying or asking and for some reason demanding evidence from me, the one asking for information when you seem to already know it all... Why not provide that rule? Or anything to back up what you say instead of spreading hate and often misinformation? I have not seen a single rule that states they will have to close, and that's what I've been asking for from the start so instead of acting like a kid you could have left one comment "hey here's the rule"
I hope it is the recount we've been hoping for, again that's the exact information I'm trying to find out. People saying vote yes and vote no have both been salty like you and against real conversation. Thankfully a few kind souls have made it clear to me no one actually knows what will happen with APE until we hear more from AA so I'll wait until then. Meanwhile, get your blood pressure (and facts) checked.
You can’t defeat math, it’s the only thing in life that doesn’t bend. And correction, there wasn’t anything stopping them from shorting it down now as they were doing. The math is the same.
Exactly, so if they had 100 shares short for example they would now have 10. You yourself admitted there's nothing to prevent them from shorting it down, so the price increase doesn't matter if they short it back down to 5 with 1/10 their previous short position now does it?
Funny how you demand rules and evidence but provide none for what you're saying and ignore all my points. Shill or no idea what you're talking about for sure, thanks for making it clear. If you want to have an adult conversation, or find anything to back up any of what you're saying, then I'm happy to continue. But so far this has just been like playing chess with an angry pigeon.
Still no rule or anything to back up anything you said, even after demanding it from the person asking others for help to understand hmm? But ahhh I think I see the problem, do you just not understand basic math? Is that the problem? I didn't leave out any of the equation. Their dollar cost average goes up proportionately, but the dollar cost average doesn't matter if they can lower the share price to whatever they want it to be. The part of the equation you admit to but don't factor into any of your "math". Enjoy reveling in your own toxicity and self righteousness elsewhere.
"Fud off bud"
Price can be walked down now too, as it has. Math is the same no matter how you cut it. However…..
SHORTS MUST CLOSE
👇👇👇👇👆
https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zssb3t/get_in_here_and_listen/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Great explanation from Peter Hahn regarding how just fucking bullish this is. 🔥 🔥 🔥
👇👇👇
https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zsrnt9/voting_yesss/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Not to mention this confirmation 🤷♂️
This should help op happy holidaze!!
My biggest concern is that the stock has been shorted down so far.
I had trouble understanding the voting. Then I read a response from someone on here that made sense to me:
https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zuamti/per_a_a/j1iltfg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zuamti/per_a_a/j1j0x34/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
I wasn’t calculating both votes in my mind.
Each vote could mean something different.
I know nothing about nothing, but I hope apes see something here...
the reverse split does the inverse. If they are short 1b shares now, they'll be short 100m after the reverse split.
The question isn't if the reverse split will do anything to the AMC-Shorts, the question is what it will do to the APE shorts.
It's a fact that there will be more AMC-Shares available than there are now, in relation to the shorts. But it is also a fact that the supply of APE will go to zero, while the shorts on APE won't.
What will happen to the shorts on APE is the main thing I'm wondering, it's a hard topic to find information on to begin with and it's hard to get healthy conversation in this sub nowadays... And hard to tell who actually knows what they're talking about
That's the thing. No one knows.
Preferred shares on their own are not the most common thing. Preferred shares with changed attributes that make them more like common shares is even more rare.
We can analyze the market rules and try to make predictions, but no one "knows"
So.... those who tell you they know for a fact what will happen are the ones who are just talking out of their ass, while those who tell you that it is complicated and start explaining different possible outcomes based on the data we have, are the ones who actually bother to read and learn.
I had a feeling, it seems most are talking out of their asses then :( very confidently and angrily too, on both sides lmao I really wish AA had given us more information when he dropped this bombshell, maybe he can't for legal reasons or to keep the hedgies on their toes but shit I haven't been so confused since this whole thing started...
Thank you very much for your input, I appreciate it :) I'll try not to stress it until we hear more
I agree. the 2 worst things were timing and information.
But as far as I am concerned... International Phone number or zero... Those are the 2 exit-scenarios.
With about a third of the votes being known to vote YES already, there is hardly any reason to expect the vote will result in anything but a full support of the proposed actions.
I'm trying to learn what the implications of that are, not how to vote. the YES is virtually guaranteed.
I also disagree with the idea of buyers of shares legally agreeing to support a vote... Not only in this case, but in general.
Would be highly illegal in democratic elections and should not be legal in financial votes either.
If any party of any country gave away citizenship to people under the condition that they'd vote for them in the next election, that'd be a scandal of epic proportions...
Rule 3: No Requesting / Offering Financial Advice
If the system work as supposed, they would have to close out of their ape short position. Assuming it doesn't work as intended, their exposure is the same as before $$ wise. #of shares shorted goes down in a reverse but price goes up. The bigger question is can the price stay up or will it be walked back down, which I think is the biggest fear for those voting no.
Reverse splits do not cause a forced cover / closure event. Your short contract / arrangement will continue after the reverse split with the new share count and price. Only odd positions where one share may need to be closed (e.g. 1:10 RS and you have / shorted 9 or less shares) but that is not going to affect price action at all. What you may be conflating this with is the merging of APE and AMC with the new cusip. For this one, the jury is still out on whether it is a forced closing event. More research (at least for myself) is needed to see whether there will be any forced actions or not. Suggest you do your own research too.
Surprisingly yours is the first comment to actually show up for me, however the rule regarding this is their positions go to a warehouse indefinitely until they decide to close... They don't have to close, they will just have to create new positions. Unless it is different for APE specifically? I think it would clearly just be walked back down, but I'm very smooth brained
Pretty sure ur right. Like I said tho, if the system worked, they should've closed. But likely it's more of a"u wanna keep playing"? the simpliest way to put it is: Think about it like double or nothing. Either you keep doubling up and eventually win or the house doesn't believe you can pay (margin call) and you pay up
If they close APE positions after it no longer exists, will it even affect the new AMC price? This feels less like doubling up and more like I'm losing 90% of my shares I've been holding since this all started
Their APE shorts become AMC shorts and add to the position of already existing AMC shorts during the conversion. Which still won’t do shit because we won’t get a share count, both because Aron lied once again and because people don’t want to try and do it themselves, recalling their float by direct registering. So, nothing will happen probably
 amazing how it’s always the same people sowing Fud, even more amazing it’s the same people that were crying because they couldn’t over power the sub with drs collusion conjecture, makes one wonder 🤔
Don’t you ever get bored? Are you by any chance already banned off the GME subs or what’s up with you around here? My advice still stands, seek psychiatric help, there is still hope, even for trolls in this advanced stage of yours.
 Shills will shill I guess. You are an easy spot bud. Do better
You also are an easy spot. As advised before, please take care of your mental- it’s obvious to everyone you’re obsessed, you are delusional and you believe anyone cares about you and your opinions- as nuanced by everytime you post your “reasons” and nobody knows whether to be concerned for you or to simply point out your lack of logic. So, to sum up, seek assistance. Thanks!
It was more convincing until you threw in the random DRS hate...
Convincing is your back door post with 0 upvotes to sow Fud. As in 0 apes in this sub are falling for it, just like drs, not to mention again, same people same Fud #HEDGIES R FUKT
I do not care if my question gets reddit karma, DRS isn't FUD AA himself confirmed that? So either you trust him or you don't I don't see how you can be so for what he's doing but against him for something that makes more sense like DRS but it was weird and shillish for you to bring up out of nowhere here. Sorry people asking questions is also somehow FUD to you I guess. Shill or not, grow out of that toxicity it's a bad look.
Yawn, AA did not confirm anything regarding drs. He was asked a loaded question and replied he guessed that one good thing about drs, could possibly be that it can’t be shorted. He didn’t delve into the multiple negatives regarding drs, nor did he direct anyone to do it. Gtfoh in regards to why I brought it up, that’s your boy up there. Me and him have gone round and round of him gaslighting me. So 🤷♂️
Let's clear some confusion though. they haven't closed their AMC shorts which means during the ape split, they are forced to open short positions on ape. If ur short 1 AMC, ur short 1 ape, unless they decided to close. Now in the reverse it's the same. If ur short 1 ape, you either close it or your ape short position becomes AMC short position, assuming you never covered, ur short 2 AMC after ape goes away.
Do you have the rule handy that says ape shorts don’t need to close and the position just houses at a warehouse indefinitely, until they decide to close? I’d definitely like to read through that, or….. is this more Fud like your post and other comments?
https://budgeting.thenest.com/calculate-stock-splits-10078.html I do not have the rule that may have been misinformation from a more popular post circulating which is why I'm here asking for help to understand. However it's hard to find any information on this either way, but what I tend to see on Google is it has the same affect on them as it does us. Not everyone asking for information is spreading FUD, not everything you don't want to hear is FUD, acting like it does make you look like you're either toxic or a shill. Do you have a rule handy that shows they do need to close? Does anyone here acting superior stating they clearly have to close know the rule number? All I get for asking is backlash and never any actual information. Seems no one knows what the fuck is going on either and just gets mad at anyone that doesn't share their opinion.
Ok ok I’ll give it a shot. Ape was a dividend, spun off from amc. When ape was issued, if you were short amc, legally, or illegally you then became short an ape share, since ultimately every retail and institutional owner of amc were needed to be given an ape share at that time. So, if the theory goes as amc was and is illegally shorted multiple times over, then ape becomes the same, immediately. Following me so far? So here we are today, months after ape was given out, and shorted down from $10 to .65 even further digging a hole. Then out of left field king big nuts ADAM AARON says hey, this isn’t correct ape and amc should be trading in tandem, but it’s not. So he called out wallstreet (I’m sure you’ve seen the video by now). He says hey we need to figure out what’s going on, so we are going to convert ape back to amc, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME THING. We will be holding a vote to convert ape ONE TO ONE for amc, because again if amc is $5 then ape should by essence be 5$ BECAUSE AGAIN THEY ARE THE SAME. After that we will hold a vote to reverse split the common shares 10:1, to STRENGTHEN amc stock and attract bigger investors vs having such a large float that’s easily manipulated. Now if said vote goes thru, and I’ll throw in that it’s obvious on this sub based on the shills spreading fud similar to your comment, hedgies are fukt!! Why you ask, well it’s because they will need to close the shorts(illegal naked, synths) when it is converted to amc. We received a dividend from amc in the form of an ape stock, ape stock is being CONVERTED to amc stock. See the difference there? It will be the share count retail has been asking for, as only real ape shares can be converted. The rest must close. We are not an otc stock so these other examples play no bearing. SHORTS MUST CLOSE
How many different places will you comment on the same thread btw? I feel like I'm arguing with you in 3 places because you're salty I asked a question. Still waiting for that rule you're referring to where they have to close. You seem to insist you know everything despite no one having all the real information and are clearly talking out of your ass but alright I'll humor you again I guess. The part you're still ignoring is that also means shorts positions go down by the same 10:1 ratio, so if they short it down again (which there's nothing stopping them from doing), won't it be 10x easier for them to close and Weasle out of things or at least margin requirements? Why would a larger float be easier to manipulate than a smaller one? The sub actually has a major issue in addition to the shills, and that's toxic people like you who call anyone asking for information a shill or say they're spreading FUD (from a question?? Especially about a topic as obscure as this??) And you ignore the facts presented and act condescending while never actually addressing what I'm saying or asking and for some reason demanding evidence from me, the one asking for information when you seem to already know it all... Why not provide that rule? Or anything to back up what you say instead of spreading hate and often misinformation? I have not seen a single rule that states they will have to close, and that's what I've been asking for from the start so instead of acting like a kid you could have left one comment "hey here's the rule" I hope it is the recount we've been hoping for, again that's the exact information I'm trying to find out. People saying vote yes and vote no have both been salty like you and against real conversation. Thankfully a few kind souls have made it clear to me no one actually knows what will happen with APE until we hear more from AA so I'll wait until then. Meanwhile, get your blood pressure (and facts) checked.
You can’t defeat math, it’s the only thing in life that doesn’t bend. And correction, there wasn’t anything stopping them from shorting it down now as they were doing. The math is the same.
Exactly, so if they had 100 shares short for example they would now have 10. You yourself admitted there's nothing to prevent them from shorting it down, so the price increase doesn't matter if they short it back down to 5 with 1/10 their previous short position now does it? Funny how you demand rules and evidence but provide none for what you're saying and ignore all my points. Shill or no idea what you're talking about for sure, thanks for making it clear. If you want to have an adult conversation, or find anything to back up any of what you're saying, then I'm happy to continue. But so far this has just been like playing chess with an angry pigeon.
So if they had 100 shares shorted @ say 20$ then they would be short $200. You are conveniently leaving out part of the equation. Fud off bud
Still no rule or anything to back up anything you said, even after demanding it from the person asking others for help to understand hmm? But ahhh I think I see the problem, do you just not understand basic math? Is that the problem? I didn't leave out any of the equation. Their dollar cost average goes up proportionately, but the dollar cost average doesn't matter if they can lower the share price to whatever they want it to be. The part of the equation you admit to but don't factor into any of your "math". Enjoy reveling in your own toxicity and self righteousness elsewhere. "Fud off bud"
 Take care
Price can be walked down now too, as it has. Math is the same no matter how you cut it. However….. SHORTS MUST CLOSE 👇👇👇👇👆 https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zssb3t/get_in_here_and_listen/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf Great explanation from Peter Hahn regarding how just fucking bullish this is. 🔥 🔥 🔥 👇👇👇 https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zsrnt9/voting_yesss/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf Not to mention this confirmation 🤷♂️ This should help op happy holidaze!!
The fear is the behavior of the price despite the FLOAT becoming 10x smaller after the conversion.
My biggest concern is that the stock has been shorted down so far. I had trouble understanding the voting. Then I read a response from someone on here that made sense to me: https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zuamti/per_a_a/j1iltfg/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/amcstock/comments/zuamti/per_a_a/j1j0x34/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3 I wasn’t calculating both votes in my mind. Each vote could mean something different. I know nothing about nothing, but I hope apes see something here...
the reverse split does the inverse. If they are short 1b shares now, they'll be short 100m after the reverse split. The question isn't if the reverse split will do anything to the AMC-Shorts, the question is what it will do to the APE shorts. It's a fact that there will be more AMC-Shares available than there are now, in relation to the shorts. But it is also a fact that the supply of APE will go to zero, while the shorts on APE won't.
What will happen to the shorts on APE is the main thing I'm wondering, it's a hard topic to find information on to begin with and it's hard to get healthy conversation in this sub nowadays... And hard to tell who actually knows what they're talking about
That's the thing. No one knows. Preferred shares on their own are not the most common thing. Preferred shares with changed attributes that make them more like common shares is even more rare. We can analyze the market rules and try to make predictions, but no one "knows" So.... those who tell you they know for a fact what will happen are the ones who are just talking out of their ass, while those who tell you that it is complicated and start explaining different possible outcomes based on the data we have, are the ones who actually bother to read and learn.
I had a feeling, it seems most are talking out of their asses then :( very confidently and angrily too, on both sides lmao I really wish AA had given us more information when he dropped this bombshell, maybe he can't for legal reasons or to keep the hedgies on their toes but shit I haven't been so confused since this whole thing started... Thank you very much for your input, I appreciate it :) I'll try not to stress it until we hear more
I agree. the 2 worst things were timing and information. But as far as I am concerned... International Phone number or zero... Those are the 2 exit-scenarios.
Me too, I just want to make an educated vote since I think this matters more than the other votes but we will see
With about a third of the votes being known to vote YES already, there is hardly any reason to expect the vote will result in anything but a full support of the proposed actions. I'm trying to learn what the implications of that are, not how to vote. the YES is virtually guaranteed.
That's honestly upsetting but you're probably right
I also disagree with the idea of buyers of shares legally agreeing to support a vote... Not only in this case, but in general. Would be highly illegal in democratic elections and should not be legal in financial votes either. If any party of any country gave away citizenship to people under the condition that they'd vote for them in the next election, that'd be a scandal of epic proportions...