Nice post It is good to see both sides but similar to the extreme APES who promote fantasies he is doing similar in the opposite direction. A couple things he said like
âOf course, the apes running after AMC wouldnât know much about âmarket capâ, theyâd only look at GME trading for $250 and think AMC at $76 still had a lot of upside.â
whilst many donât seem to know this and just follow the noise, lots do seem to know what they are talking about and certainly understand market cap so that is a very broad brush he painted APES with. It is also quite insulting to many APES and unfair and he should of said âsome apesâ or something.
But his comments on it being a pyramid are true and those denying that there will be losers are in denial
While with growth stocks thereâs usually a story which can keep them at high multiples for years, here there is nothing. Thereâs just a pure pyramid of buyers trying to take the stocks higher.
Everything he says is accurate about AMC as an investment in the traditional sense but I see it as a quick flip unlike other stocks which means different rules should be used.
All in all it is a very interesting article but as I always say the truth is in-between what either side say There will be winners, Iâm pure profit now, but there WILL be losers after the peak and no-one knows when that will be and who will miss it.
All I will say is that almost all of the extreme APE accounts will disappear after the event win or lose. It isnât too bad around this forum but looking on Yahoo etc it is pretty scary the blatant lies and fake accounts on both sides spreading lies.
Edit - Him saying " * The apes on AMC will get slaughtered." is again like I said extreme as some will but many APES have/will make a fortune in profit If only we could get sensible non-partisan articles
so many smug little digs in one article, I think he wants to be public enemy number 1. The bit about short % is interesting but I donât think every ape is arguing cinemas are due a revival, bit condescending.
Everything he says is accurate about AMC as an investment in the traditional sense but I see it as a quick flip unlike other stocks which means different rules should be used.
Everyone thinks theyâll be first out near the end of a bubble. Inexorably most people mistime the peak and most people lose money because once people start selling there can be no buyers at all, all the way to very low prices.
So intrinsic value is important as it sets a lower bound, and buying stocks like amc and gme really is very risky.
That is the worst example I could imagine to explain the potential price I have heard in a while That is like me saying Chelsea beat Man utd 2-0 and Utd beat Aresnal 4-0 who beat Spurs 3-0 so Chelsea should beat Spurs 9-0.
Just because the price went up 83% on 1.6% covered doesnât mean the same rate for each further % covered! People posting crap like that are dangerous to vulnerable/uneducated/new investors.
It is stupid stuff like this that gives so many in the Ape camp a bad name and makes people say they are stupid which isnât the case.
You are not investing if you put money into AMC, or at least not in the traditional sense. Much more akin to gambling - please, please donât kid yourself otherwise.
Meme stock gambling - The stock is in a fake position due to external matters pushing the price into insanely high levels with zero bearing on the actual business. No DD really knows what the prospects will be.
Meme stock not gambling - It is true all investments should be treated as a form of gambling as no-one knows what will happen in life/business.
I guess I could argue both sides but tend to think it is more about the âintentâ when said. Meme stocks are definitely more risky and I consider a gamble like I consider mining stocks a gamble.
I donât consider stocks like Tesco or Standard life a gamble as they are stable but in reality it is but a much smaller risk.
And referring to @Mike7 comment he did say âMuch MORE akin to gamblingâ which is fair as he didnât say it âwasâ but just that it was more akin which is a fair point
Agreed, I didnât say anything wasnât a gamble. I merely disliked the tone used and responded instead of flagging as inappropriate/unnecessary.
This is the same tone used against people calling for proxy voting, etc. I donât get it. 50% of your users now likely joined directly because of the AMC/GME uprising. It would have been in everyoneâs best interests to try to keep the customers FT now have pleased as opposed to the other more important things weâve been told need doing. When 50% of FT users leave for 212 or another that managed to sort Proxy or Broker Non Votes I suspect business priorities may change.
Yes, this rant again. This rant each time I see this snobby attitude go unchecked.
I literally said both views I am sure you donât need me to delve into the full reasoning. The point is it is kind of subjective and a fine line. What one person considers a gamble another calls investing.
Definitions
gambling - play games of chance for money; bet.
investing - put (money) into financial schemes, shares, property, or a commercial venture with the expectation of achieving a profit.
On this stock people are investing but on the affects of people who gambled, shorters, so it really is a mixture.
In the back of my mind, I always had this nagging feeling that the reddit crowd were being played by the professionals.
The figures being quoted as possible values by the reddit âexpertsâ have never made sense when comparing to the rest of the financial markets. Itâs the reason I got in, followed the hype, took my profit and will hold my now free shares for sh!ts and giggles.
I also have a beef with the âapeâ analogy. As mad collector of everything POTA, (thatâs Planet of the Apes to you), since the 1970âs. With a collection that includes books, comics, figures, games, lunchboxes, toys, posters etc, I feel my little corner of the collecting world has been tainted, besmirched even, by the theft of the franchise, via memes, by get rich quick snake oil salesmen and sheep who think by posting âHODLâ and âDDâ and âDiamond Handsâ means they will all be billionaires by Xmas.
Whilst the phrase âApes Together Strongâ does run through the latest POTA franchise, I keep coming back to the wise words of Maurice the Orangutan (who is the precursor to the founding god of the apes âThe Lawgiverâ in the original series) to Caesar.
It is good to see both sides but similar to the extreme APES who promote fantasies he is doing similar in the opposite direction. A couple things he said like
There will be winners, Iâm pure profit now, but there WILL be losers after the peak and no-one knows when that will be and who will miss it.
so many smug little digs in one article, I think he wants to be public enemy number 1. The bit about short % is interesting but I donât think every ape is arguing cinemas are due a revival, bit condescending.
That is like me saying Chelsea beat Man utd 2-0 and Utd beat Aresnal 4-0 who beat Spurs 3-0 so Chelsea should beat Spurs 9-0.