A full year later, we have "yet" to break 76M again.
In this post here https://lemmy.whynotdrs.org/post/381421, we discussed how the numbers are likely much higher than are currently reported. This heavily implicates Cede/DTCC because every quarter requires fraudulent reporting (well played SEC).
But how much higher? We've been at 75M for exactly 4 quarters now. Estimates at the previous pace would have us over 130M shares DRSd at this point.
This would mean there are very few shares actually left out there. Roughly only 26M left to DRS before they truly start to panic from the math-breaking number. The DTCC definitely fucked up by thinking we couldn't buy the entire thing lol.
They warned you there would be FUD, this is it. Keep DRSing and eventually ComputerShare will stop selling to us like they said they would if there are no locates ;).
With that in mind, also don't forget the $149T bullet swap that hits instantly on December 15th. Since they opened that particular short, the stock has seen a 390% increase along with a 430% rise in interest rates, do think they roll that shit over ;)?
I will leave with the same question: Why do you think Gamestop changed the wording from 03/22/2023 onward?
In no way do I believe DRS numbers have stagnated for this long. There are either concerted efforts being made to hide the truth via legal jargon, or im a monkeys uncle
Something I've not seen anyone discuss... perhaps because it's a very unpleasant thought.
What if the flood of purple circle posts on reddit are fake? If a majority are posted by bad actors, then SHF pull shares they DRS'd, wouldn't that leave the numbers static?
I'm trying to think of a less tinfoil answer and I can't. Something doesn't add up, big time.
There was some hypothesizing a while back (on SS and before Lemmy) that the initial drop or flatlining of the DRS trendline was due to hedgies having initially DRSed and then un-DRSed them, but I don't recall if that was ever generally agreed. This was about the time that the Heat Lamp Theory was introduced which seems to have more supporting evidence at this point.