Listen up you fucks, for most of you this is your first rodeo so let me tell you how this whole thing works. Some of you might remember me when I told you to hop on this tendie train at 9$ when MSFT deal happened, by my DD about why GameStop is worth 138$ or by my other posts I've made here for months. As you've noticed, I LOVE THE STOCK.
I've held through -90% at the lowest to +10,000% at the highest and I continue holding. I'm down $300k from the ATH at this point and I don't fucking care because this whole thing is far from being over.
Now get these points through your thick head:

• This is a fucking volatile stock.

This is how it goes: it shoots up, GME gang rejoices, a bunch of retards buys at the top. Then it crashes down for a while, 🌈🐻 keep blabbering about how the squeeze has squoze. Rinse and repeat. Every time it shoots up it does it more violently, the amplitude getting larger and larger. And every time it does there is a number of dickheads whining about not buying earlier:
"I wish I bought at $9..." - when it shot up to $13, and them came down
"I wish I bought at $11..." - when it shot up to $20, and them came down
"I wish I bought at $17..." - when it shot up to $70, and them came down
"I wish I bought at $40..." - when it shot up to $150, and them came down
"I wish I bought at $60..." - when it shot up to $450, and them came down
Being in GME gang was always about not caring about temporary swings, because in the end, the price always sets a new ATH
I've seen this shit happening so many times since October that I just sit there and smile while history repeats itself and my porfolio swings 5-6 digits.

• GME was never a squeeze play, despite what a lot of you retards think.

Read any DD more than a month old, the whole company is massively undervalued . Read about Ryan Cohen, a person who made a dog food company worth $45bn and who is a fucking shark, once he sets his mind to something he will never back down. Thanks to him we now have a star team assembled at GameStop formed of Matt Francis, CTO, former Engineering Leader at AWS; Kelli Durkin, Senior Vice President of Customer Care, former Chewy’s Vice President of Customer Service; Josh Krueger, Vice President of Fulfillment former senior fulfillment roles at Amazon, Walmart, and QVC (do I need to mention Reggie Fils-Aimé of a fucking Nintendo?). I am a firm believer that Cohen will manage to grow GameStop at the very least to the size of Chewy ($45bn market cap). Guess what GME has? $4bn. That's 12x bagger and I'm being very conservative here.
This is not about squeezing the hedge funds, this is about the company establishing it's true share price with wild swings along the way thanks to the 🌈🐻s. The true price for me is (conservatively) the size of Chewy, which translates to $650. I know I said $138 in my previous DD a few months ago, but it was before all the recent news of Ryan Cohen taking over with his star-team.
MOASS was a cherry on top (and still is on the table), not the main play
Also, GameStop had a $6bn in revenue in 2019, Tesla had $24bn. Think about it for a moment

• Short interest is still through fucking roof.

I know you're used to 100%+ SI and the new 41% number does not quite gets you off, but it's still fucking abysmal. VW, OSTK happened on less than 20%. Also keep in mind that this number is for 1/29, literally the top when a lot of shorts covered. It does not account for all the shorting that happened on the way down to $50 which I guaran-fucking-tee you was massive. Just wait and see the next report with increased SI, the shorts never learn.
TL;DR: GameStop is still undervalued. Conservative PT is $650, ambitious - $1200+ (assuming Ryan Cohen's success, which I don't doubt for a single moment). Short squeeze will last for a long time similar to $TSLA squeeze, with wild swings along the way - old shorts will cover, new ones will pile in because the bLoCkBuStEr narrative is still strong. This is still a risky gamble, no such thing as a sure bet, but the risk\reward is massively skewed to the upside
If you have short-dated calls you might be fucked, might be not. If you have shares or LEAPS, just get away from screens for a while if it's unbearable for you, but ultimately you'll be fucking loaded. This is one of those situations when in a year or two the price is $3000+ and you post your cost basis of $70 and all the paper-handed bitches in the comments scream "WOW HE FUCKING HELD GRATZ"
Positions: some Apr 40c, some Apr 200c and a shitload of Jan 2023 950c. Will dump the remaining cash into 2023 calls at open

Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor. This entire post represents my personal views and opinions, and should not be taken as financial advice (or advice of any kind whatsoever). I encourage you to do your own research, take anything I write with a grain of salt, and hold me accountable for any mistakes you may catch. Also, full disclosure, I hold a net long position in GME, but my cost basis is very low (average ~$67--I have to admit, the drop today was too tasty so my cost basis went up from yesterday)/share with my later buys averaged in), and I'm using money I can absolutely lose. My capital at risk and tolerance for risk generally is likely substantially different than yours. In this post I will go a little further and speculate more than I'd normally do in a post due to the questions I've been getting, so fair warning, some of it might be very wrong. I suspect we'll learn some of the truth years from now when some investigative journalist writes a book about it.
Thank you everyone for the comments and questions on the first and second post on this topic.
Today was a study in the power of fear, courage, and the levers you can pull when you wield billions of dollars...
Woops, excuse me. I'm sorry hedge fund guys... I meant trillions of dollars--I just briefly forget you control not just your own but a lot of other peoples' money too for a moment there.
Also, for people still trading this on market-based rationale (as I am), it was a good day to measure the conviction behind your thesis. I like to think I have conviction, but in case you are somehow not yet familiar with the legend of DFV, you need to see these posts (fair warning, nsfw, and some may be offended/triggered by the crude language). The last two posts might be impressive, but you should follow it in chronological order and pay attention to the evolution of sentiment in the comments to experience true enlightenment.
Anyway, I apologize, but this post will be very long--there's just a lot to unpack.

Pre-Market

Disclaimer: given yesterday's pre-market action I didn't even pay attention to the screen until near retail pre-market. I'm less confident in my ability to read what's going on in a historical chart vs the feel I get watching live, but I'll try.
Early in the pre-market it looks to me like some momentum traders are taking profit, discounting the probability that the short-side will give them a deep discount later, which you can reasonably assume given the strategy they ran yesterday. If they're right they can sell some small volume into the pre-market top, wait for the hedge funds try to run the price back down, and then lever up the gains even higher buying the dip. Buy-side here look to me like people FOMOing and YOLOing in at any price to grab their slice of gainz, or what looks to be market history in the making. No way are short-side hedge funds trying to cover anything at these prices.
Mark Cuban--well said! Free markets baby!
Mohamed El-Erian is money in the bank as always. "upgrade in quality" on the pandemic drop was the best, clearest actionable call while most were at peak panic, and boy did it print. Your identifying the bubble as the excessive short (vs blaming retail activity) is money yet again. Also, The PAIN TRADE (sorry, later interview segment I only have on DVR, couldn't find on youtube--maybe someone else can)!
The short attack starts, but I'm hoping no one was panicking this time--we've seen it before. Looks like the momentum guys are minting money buying the double dip into market open.
CNBC, please get a good market technician to explain the market action. Buy-side dominance, sell-side share availability evaporating into nothing (look at day-by-day volume last few days), this thing is now at runaway supercritical mass. There is no changing the trajectory unless you can change the very fabric of the market and the rules behind it (woops, I guess I should have knocked on wood there).
If you know the mechanics, what's happening in the market with GME is not mysterious AT ALL. I feel like you guys are trying to scare retail out early "for their own good" (with all sincerity, to your credit) rather than explain what's happening. Possibly you also fear that explaining it would equate to enabling/encouraging people to keep trying to do it inappropriately (possibly fair point, but at least come out and say that if that's the case). Outside the market, however...wow.

You Thought Yesterday Was Fear? THIS is Fear!

Ok short-side people, my hat is off to you. Just when I thought shouting fire in a locked theater was fear mongering poetry in motion, you went and took it to 11. What's even better? Yelling fire in a theater with only one exit. That way people can cause the financial equivalent of stampede casualties. Absolutely brilliant.
Robin Hood disables buying of GME, AMC, and a few of the other WSB favorites. Other brokerages do the same. Even for people on 0% margin. Man, and here I thought I had seen it all yesterday.
Side note: I will give a shout out to TD Ameritrade. You guys got erroneously lumped together with RH during an early CNBC segment, but you telegraphed the volatility risk management changes and gradually ramped up margin requirements over the past week. No one on your platform should have been surprised if they were paying attention. And you didn't stop anyone from trading their own money at any point in time. My account balance thanks you. I heard others may have had problems, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt given the DDOS attacks that were flyiing around
Robin Hood. Seriously WTF. I'm sure it was TOTALLY coincidence that your big announcements happen almost precisely when what has to be one of the best and most aggressive short ladder attacks of all time starts painting the tape, what looked like a DDOS attack on Reddit's CDN infrastructure (pretty certain it was the CDN because other stuff got taken out at the same time too), and a flood of bots hit social media (ok, short-side, this last one is getting old).
Taking out a large-scale cloud CDN is real big boy stuff though, so I wouldn't entirely rule out nation state type action--those guys are good at sniffing out opportunities to foment social unrest.
Anyway, at this point, as the market dives, I have to admit I was worried for a moment. Not that somehow the short-side would win (hah! the long-side whales in the pond know what's up), but that a lot of retail would get hurt in the action. That concern subsided quite a bit on the third halt on that slide. But first...
A side lesson on market orders
Someone printed bonus bank big time (and someone lost--I feel your pain, whoever you are).
During the face-ripping volatility my play money account briefly ascended to rarified heights of 7 figures. It took me a second to realize it, then another second to process it. Then, as soon as it clicked, that one, glorious moment in time was gone.
What happened?
During the insane chop of the short ladder attack, someone decided to sweep the 29 Jan 21 115 Call contracts, but they couldn't get a grip on the price, which was going coast to coast as IV blew up and the price was being slammed around. So whoever was trying to buy said "F it, MARKET ORDER" (i.e. buy up to $X,XXX,XXX worth of contracts at any price). This is referred to as a sweep if funded to buy all/most of the contracts on offer (HFT shops snipe every contract at each specific price with a shotgun of limit orders, which is far safer, but something only near-market compute resources can do really well). For retail, or old-tech pros, if you want all the contracts quickly, you drop a market order loaded with big bucks and see what you get... BUT, some clever shark had contracts available for the reasonable sum of... $4,400, or something around that. I was too stunned to grab a screencap. The buy market order swept the book clean and ran right into that glorious, nigh-obscene backstop limit. So someone got nearly $440,000 PER CONTRACT that was, at the time theoretically priced at around $15,000. $425,000 loss... PER CONTRACT. Maybe I'm not giving the buyer enough credit.. you can get sniped like that even if you try to do a safety check of the order book first, but, especially in low liquidity environments, if a HFT can peak into your order flow (or maybe just observes a high volume of sweeps occurring), they can end up front running your sweep, pick off the reasonable contracts, and slam a ridiculous limit sell order into place before your order makes it to the exchange. Either way, I hope that sweep wasn't loaded for bear into the millions. If so... OUCH. Someone got cleaned out.
So, the lesson here folks... in a super high volatility, low-liquidity market, a market order will just run up the ladder into the first sell order it can find, and some very brutal people will put limit sells like that out there just in case they hit the jackpot. And someone did. If you're on the winning side, great. It can basically bankrupt you if you're on the losing side. My recommendation: Just don't try it. I wouldn't be surprised if really shady shenanigans were involved in this, but no way to know (normally that's crazy-type talk, but after today....peeking at order flow and sniping sweeps is one of the fastest, most financially devastating ways to bleed big long-side players, just sayin').
edit *so while I was too busy trying not to spit out my coffee to grab a screenshot, piddlesthethug was faster on the draw and captured this: https://imgur.com/gallery/RI1WOuu
Ok, so I guess my in-the-moment mental math was off by about 10%. Man, that hurts just thinking about the guy who lost on that trade.*
Back to the market action..

A Ray of Light Through the Darkness

So I was worried watching the crazy downward movement for two different reasons.
On the one hand, I was worried the momentum pros would get the best discounts on the dip (I'll admit, I FOMO'd in too early, unnecessarily raising my cost basis).
On the other hand, I was worried for the retail people on Robin Hood who might be bailing out into incredibly steep losses because they had only two options: Watch the slide, or bail. All while dealing with what looked to me like a broad-based cloud CDN outage as they tried to get info from WSB HQ, and wondering if the insta-flood of bot messages were actually real people this time, and that everyone else was bailing on them to leave them holding the bag.
But I saw the retail flag flying high on the 3rd market halt (IIRC), and I knew most would be ok. What did I see, you ask? Why, the glorious $211.00 / $5,000 bid/ask spread. WSB Reddit is down? Those crazy mofos give you the finger right on the ticker tape. I've been asked many times in the last few hours about why I was so sure shorts weren't covering on the down move. THIS is how I knew. For sure. It's in the market data itself.
edit So, there's feedback in the comments that this is likely more of a technical glitch. Man, at least it was hilarious in the moment. But also now I know maybe not to trust price updates when the spread between orders being posted is so wide. Maybe a technical limitation of TOS
I'll admit, I tried to one-up those bros with a 4206.90 limit sell order, but it never made it through. I'm impressed that the HFT guys at the hedge fund must have realized really quickly what a morale booster that kind of thing would have been, and kept a lower backstop ask in place almost continuously from then on I'm sure others tried the same thing. Occasionally $1,000 and other high-dollar asks would peak through from time to time from then on, which told me the long-side HFTs were probably successfully sniping the backstops regularly.
So, translating for those of you who found that confusing. First, such a high ask is basically a FU to the short-side (who, as you remember, need to eventually buy shares to cover their short positions). More importantly, as an indicator of retail sentiment, it meant that NO ONE ELSE WAS TRYING TO SELL AT ANY PRICE LOWER THAN $5,000. Absolutely no one was bailing out.
I laughed for a minute, then started getting a little worried. Holy cow.. NO retail selling into the fear? How are they resisting that kind of price move??
The answer, as we all know now... they weren't afraid... they weren't even worried. They were F*CKING PISSED.
Meanwhile the momentum guys and long-side HFTs keep gobbling up the generously donated shares that the short-side are plowing into their ladder attack. Lots of HFT duels going on as long-side HFTs try to intercept shares meant to travel between short-side HFT accounts for their ladder. You can tell when you see prices like $227.0001 constantly flying across the tape. Retail can't even attempt to enter an order like that--those are for the big boys with privileged low-latency access.
The fact that you can even see that on the tape with human eyes is really bad for the short-side people.
Why, you ask? Because it means liquidity is drying up, and fast.

The Liquidity Tide is Flowing Out Quickly. Who's Naked (short)?

Market technicals time. I still wish this sub would allow pictures so I could throw up a chart, but I guess a table will do fine.
​

Date	Volume	Price at US Market Close
Friday, 1/22/21	197,157,196	$65.01
Monday, 1/25/21	177,874,00	$76.79
Tuesday, 1/26/21	178,587,974	$147.98
Wednesday, 1/27/21	93,396,666	$347.51
Thursday, 1/28/21	58,815,805	$193.60

What do I see? I see the shares available to trade dropping so fast that all the near-exchange compute power in the world won't let the short-side HFTs maintain order flow volume for their attacks. Many retail people asking me questions thought today was the heaviest trading. Nope--it was just the craziest.
What about the price dropping on Thursday? Is that a sign that the short-side pulled a miracle out and pushed price down against a parabolic move on even less volume than Wednesday? Is the long side running out of capital?
Nope. It means the short-side hedge funds are just about finished.
But wait, I thought the price needed to be higher for them to be taken out? How is it that price being lower is bad for them? Won't that allow them to cover at a lower price?
No, the volume is so low that they can't cover any meaningful fraction of their position without spiking the price parabolic almost instantly. Just not enough shares on offer at reasonable prices (especially when WSB keeps flashing you 6942.00s).
It's true, a higher price hurts, but the interest charge for one more day is just noise at this point. The only tick that will REALLY count is the last tick of trading on Friday.
In the meantime, the price drop (and watching the sparring in real time) tells me that the long-side whales and their HFT quants are so certain of the squeeze that they're no longer worried AT ALL about whether it will happen, and they aren't even worried at all about retail morale to help carry the water anymore.
Instead, they're now really, really worried about how CHEAPLY they can make it happen.
They are wondering if they can't edge out just a sliver more alpha out of what will already be a blow-out trade for the history books (probably). You see, to make it happen they just have to keep hoovering up shares. It doesn't matter what those shares cost. If you're certain that the squeeze is now locked in, why push the price up and pay more than you have to? Just keep pressing hard enough to force short-side to keep sending those tasty shares your way, but not so much you move the price. Short-side realizes this and doesn't try to drive price down too aggressively. They can't afford to let price run away, so they have to keep some pressure on at the lowest volume they can manage, but they don't want to push down too hard and give the long-side HFTs too deep of a discount and bleed their ammo out even faster. That dynamic keeps price within a narrow (for GME today, anyway) trading range for the rest of the day into the close.
Good plan guys, but those after market people are pushing the price up again. Damnit WSB bros and Euros, you're costing those poor long-side whales their extra 0.0000001% of alpha on this trade just so you can run up your green rockets... See, that's the kind of nonsense that just validates Lee Cooperman's concerns.
On a totally unrelated note, I have to say that I appreciate the shift in CNBC's reporting. Much more thoughtful and informed. Just please get a good market technician in there who will be willing to talk about what is going on under the hood if possible. A lot of people watching on the sidelines are far more terrified than they need to be because it all looks random to them. And they're worried that you guys look confused and worried--and if the experts on the news are worried....??!
You should be able to find one who has access to the really good data that we retailers can only guess at, who can explain it to us unwashed masses.

Ok, So.. Questions

There is no market justification for this. How can you tell me is this fundamentally sound and not just straight throwing money away irresponsibly?? (side note: not that that should matter--if you want to throw your money away why shouldn't you be allowed to?)
We're not trading in your securities pricing model. This isn't irrational just because your model says long and short positions are the same thing. The model is not a real market. There is asymmetrical counterparty risk here given the shorts are on the hook for all the money they have, and possibly all the money their brokers have, and possibly anyone with exposure to the broker too! You may want people to trade by the rules you want them to follow. But the rest of us trade in the real market as it is actually implemented. Remember? That's what you tell the retailers who take their accounts to zero. Remember what you told the KBIO short-squeezed people? They had fair warning that short positions carry infinite risk, including more than your initial investment. You guys know this. It's literally part of your job to know this.
But-but-the systemic risk!! This is Madness!
...Madness?
THIS. IS. THE MARKET!!! *Retail kicks the short-side hedge funds down an infinity loss black hole\*.
Ok, seriously though, that is actually a fundamentally sound, and properly profit-driven answer at least as justifiable as the hedge funds' justification for going >100% of float short. If they can be allowed to gamble INFINITE LOSSES because they expect to make profit on the possibility the company goes bankrupt, can't others do the inverse on the possibility the company I don't know.. doesn't go bankrupt and gets a better strategy from the team that created what is now a $43bn market cap company (CHWY) that does exactly some of the things GME needs to do (digital revenue growth) maybe? I mean, I first bought in on that fundamental value thesis in the 30s and then upped my cost basis given the asymmetry of risk in the technical analysis as an obvious no-brainer momentum trade. The squeeze is just, as WSB people might say, tendies raining down from on high as an added bonus.
I get that you disagree on the fundamental viability of GME. Great. Isn't that what makes a market?
Regarding the consequences of a squeeze, in practice my expectation was maybe at worst some kind of ex-market settlement after liquidation of the funds with exposure to keep things nice and orderly for the rest of the market. I mean, they handled the VW thing somehow right? I see now that I just underestimated elite hedge fund managers though--those guys are so hardcore (I'll explain why I think so a bit lower down).
If hedge fund people are so hardcore, how did the retail long side ever have a chance of winning this squeeze trade they're talking about?
Because it's an asymmetrical battle once you have short interest cornered. And the risk is also crazily asymmetrical in favor of the long side if short interest is what it is in GME. In fact, the hedge funds essentially cornered themselves without anyone even doing anything. They just dug themselves right in there. Kind of impressive really, in a weird way.
What does the short side need to cover? They need the price to be low, and they need to buy shares.
How does price move lower? You have to push share volume such that supply overwhelms demand and price therefore goes down (man, I knew econ 101 would come in handy someday).
But wait... if you have to sell shares to push the price down.. won't you just undo all your work when you have to buy it back to actually cover?
The trick is you have to push price down so hard, so fast, so unpredictably, that you SCARE OTHER PEOPLE into selling their shares too, because they're scared of taking losses. Their sales help push the price down for free! and then you scoop them up at discount price! Also, there are ways to make people scared other than price movement and fear of losses, when you get right down to it. So, you know, you just need to get really, really, really good at making people scared. Remember to add a line item to your budget to make sure you can really do it right.
On the other hand..
What does the long side need to do? They need to own as much of the shares as they can get their hands on. And then they need to hold on to them. They can't be weak hands either. They need to be hands that will hold even under the most intense heat of battle, and the immense pressure of mind-numbing fear... they need to be as if they were made of... diamond... (oh wow, maybe those WSB people kind of have a point here).
Why does this matter? Because at some point the sell side will eventually run out of shares to borrow. They simply won't be there, because they'll be safely tucked away in the long-side's accounts. Once you run out of shares to borrow and sell, you have no way to move the price anymore. You can't just drop a fat stack--excuse me, I mean suitcase (we're talking hedge fund money here after all)--of Benjamins on the ticker tape directly. Only shares. No more shares, no way to have any direct effect on the price whatsoever.
Ok, doesn't that just mean trading stops? Can't you just out-wait the long side then?
Well, you could.. until someone on the long side puts 1 share up on a 69420 ask, and an even crazier person actually buys at that price on the last tick on a Friday. Let's just say it gets really bad at that point.
Ok.. but how do the retail people actually get paid?
Well, to be quite honest, it's entirely up to each of them individually. You've seen the volumes being thrown around the past week+. I guarantee you every single retailer out there could have printed money multiple times trading that flow. If they choose to, and time it well. Or they could lose it all--this is the market. Some of them apparently seem to have some plan, or an implicit trust in certain individuals to help them know when to punch out. Maybe it works out, but maybe not. There will be financial casualties on the field for sure--this is the bare-knuckled capitalist jungle after all, remember? But everyone ponied up to the table with their own money somehow, so they all get to play in the big leagues just like everyone else. In theory, anyway.
And now, Probably the #1 question I've been asked on all of these posts has been: So what happens next? Do we get the infinity squeeze? Do the hedge funds go down?
Great questions. I don't know. No one does. That's what I've said every time, but I get that's a frustrating answer, so I'll write a bit more and speculate further. Please again understand these are my opinions with a degree of speculation I wouldn't normally put in a post.

The Market and the Economy. Main Street, Wall Street, and Washington

The pandemic has hurt so many people that it's hard to comprehend. Honestly, I don't even pretend to be able to. I have been crazy fortunate enough to almost not be affected at all. Honestly, it is a little unnerving to me how great the disconnect is between people who are doing fine (or better than fine, looking at my IRA) versus the people who are on the opposite side of the ever-widening divide that, let's be honest, has been growing wider since long before the pandemic.
People on the other side--who have been told they cannot work even if they want to, who wonder if congress will get it together to at least keep them from getting thrown out of their house if they have to keep taking one for the team for the good of all, are wondering if they're even living in the same reality.
Because all they see on the news each day is that the stock market is at record highs, or some amazing tech stocks have 10x'd in the last 6 months. How can that be happening during a pandemic? Because The Market is not The Economy. The Market looks forward to that brighter future that Economy types just need to wait for. Don't worry--it'll be here sometime before the end of the year. We think. We're making money on that assumption right now, anyway. Oh, by the way, if you're in The Market, you get to get richer as a minor, unearned side-effect of the solutions our governments have come up with to fight the pandemic.
Wow. That sounds amazing. How do I get to part of that world?
Retail fintech, baby. Physical assets like real estate might be a bit out of reach at the moment, but stocks will do. I can even buy fractional shares of BRK/A LOL.
Finally, I can trade for my own slice of heaven, watching that balance go up (and up--go stonks!!). Now I too get to dream the dream. I get to feel connected to that mythical world, The Market, rather than being stuck in the plain old Economy. Sure, I might blow up my account, but that's because it's the jungle. Bare-knuckled, big league capitalism going on right here, and at least I get to show up an put my shares on the table with everyone else. At least I'm playing the same game. Everyone has to start somewhere--at least now I get to start, even if I have to learn my lesson by zeroing my account a few times. I've basically had to deal with what felt like my life zeroing out a few times before. This is number on a screen going to 0 is nothing.
Laugh or cry, right? I'll post my losses on WSB and at least get some laughs.
Geez, some of the people here are making bank. I better learn from them and see if they'll let me in on their trades. Wow... this actually might work. I don't understand yet, but I trust these guys telling me to hold onto this crazy trade. I don't understand it, but all the memes say it's going to be big.
...WOW... I can pay off my credit card with this number. Do I punch out now? No? Hold?... Ok, getting nervous watching the number go down but I trust you freaks. We're still in the jungle, but at least I'm in with with my posse now. Market open tomorrow--we ride the rocket baby! And if it goes down, at least I'm going down with my crew. At least if that happens the memes will be so hilarious I'll forget to cry.
Wow.. I can't believe it... we might actually pull this off. Laugh at us now, "pros"!
We're in The Market now, and Market rules tell us what is going to happen. We're getting all that hedge fund money Right? Right?
Maybe.
First, I say maybe because nothing is ever guaranteed until it clears. Secondly, because the rules of The Market are not as perfectly enforced as we would like to assume. We are also finding out they may not be perfectly fair. The Market most experts are willing to talk about is really more like the ideal The Market is supposed to be. This is the version of the market I make my trading decisions in. However, the Real Market gets strange and unpredictable at the edges, when things are taken to extremes, or rules are pushed beyond the breaking point, or some of the mechanics deep in the guts of the Real Market get stretched. GME ticks basically all of those boxes, which is why so many people are getting nervous (aside from the crazy money they might lose). It's also important to remember that the sheer amount of money flowing through the market has distorting power unto itself. Because it's money, and people really, really, really like their money--especially when they're used to having a lot of it, and rules involving that kind of money tend to look more... flexible, shall we say.
Ok, back to GME. If this situation with GME is allowed to play out to its conclusion in The Market, we'll see what happens. I think all the long-side people get the chance to be paid (what, I'm not sure--and remember, you have to actually sell your position at some point or it's all still just numbers on your screen), but no one knows for certain.
But this might legitimately get so big that it spills out of The Market and back into The Economy.
Geez, and here I thought the point of all of this was so that we all get to make so much money we wouldn't ever have to think and worry about that thing again.
Unfortunately, while he's kind of a buzzkill, Thomas Petterfy has a point. This could be a serious problem.
It might blow out The Market, which will definitely crap on The Economy, which as we all know from hard experience, will seriously crush Main Street.
If it's that big a deal, we may even need Washington to be involved. Once that happens, who knows what to expect.. this kind of scenario being possible is why I've been saying I have no idea how this ends, and no one else does either.
How did we end up in this ridiculous situation? From GAMESTOP?? And it's not Retail's fault the situation is what it is.. why is everyone telling US that we need to back down to save The Market?? What about the short-side hedge funds that slammed that risk into the system to begin with?? We're just playing by the rules of The Market!!
Well, here are my thoughts, opinions, and some even further speculation... This may be total fantasy land stuff here, but since I keep getting asked I'll share anyway. Just keep that disclaimer in mind.

A Study in Big Finance Power Moves: If you owe the bank $10,000, it's your problem...

What happens when you owe money you have no way to pay back? It's a scary question to have to face personally. Still, on balance and on average, if you're fortunate enough to have access to credit the borrowing is a risk that is worth taking (especially if you're reasonably careful). Lenders can take a risk loaning you money, you take a risk by borrowing in order to do something now that you would otherwise have had to wait a long time or maybe would never have realistically been able to do otherwise. Sometimes it doesn't work out. Sometimes it's due to reasons totally beyond your control. In any case, if you find yourself there you have no choice but to dust yourself off, pick yourself up as best as you can, and try to move on and rebuild. A lot of people had to learn that in 2008. Man that year really sucked.
Wall street learned their lessons too. Most learned what I think most of us would consider the right lessons--lessons about risk management, and the need to guard vigilantly against systemic risk, concentration of risk through excess concentration of leverage on common assets, etc. Many suspect that at least a few others may have learned an entirely different set of, shall we say, unhealthy lessons. Also, to try to be completely fair, maybe managing other peoples' money on 10x+ leverage comes with a kind of pressure that just clouds your judgement. I could actually, genuinely buy that. I know I make mistakes under pressure even when I'm trading risk capital I could totally lose with no real consequence. Whatever the motive, here's my read on what's happening:
First, remember that as much fun as WSB are making of the short-side hedge fund guys right now, those guys are smart. Scary smart. Keep that in mind.
Next, let's put ourselves in their shoes.
If you're a high-alpha hedge fund manager slinging trades on a $20bn 10x leveraged to 200bn portfolio, get caught in a bad situation, and are down mark-to-market several hundred million.. what do you do? Do you take your losses and try again next time? Hell no.
You're elite. You don't realize losses--you double down--you can still save this trade no sweat.
But what if that doesn't work out so well and you're in the hole >$2bn? Obvious double down. Need you ask? I'm net up on the rest of my positions (of course), and the momentum when this thing makes its mean reversion move will be so hot you can almost taste the alpha from here. Speaking of momentum, imagine the move if your friends on TV start hyping the story harder! Genius!
Ok, so that still didn't work... this is now a frigging 7 sigma departure from your modeled risk, and you're now locked into a situation that is about as close to mathematically impossible to escape as you can get in the real world, and quickly converging on infinite downside. Holy crap. The fund might be liquidated by your prime broker by tomorrow morning--and man, even the broker is freaking out. F'in Elon Musk and his twitter! You're cancelling your advance booking on his rocket ship to Mars first thing tomorrow... Ok, focus--this might legit impact your total annual return. You need a plan, and you know the smartest people on the planet, right? The masters of the universe! Awesome--they've even seen this kind of thing before and still have the playbook!! Of course! It's obvious now--you borrow a few more billion and double down again first thing in the morning. So simple. Sticky note that Mars trip cancellation so you don't forget.
Ok... so that didn't work? You even cashed in some pretty heavy chits too. Ah well, that was a long shot anyway. So where were you? Oh yeah.. if shenanigans don't work, skip to page 10...
...Which says, of course, to double down again. Anyone even keeping track anymore? Oh, S3 says it's $40bn and we're going parabolic? Man, that chart gives me goosebumps. All according to plan...
So what happens tomorrow? One possible outcome of PURE FANTASTIC SPECULATION...
End of the week--phew. Never though it'd come. Where are you at now?... Over $9000^\)!!! Wow. You did it boys, and as a bonus the memes will be so sweet.
^\)side note: add 8 zeros to the end...
Awesome--your problems have been solved. Because...
​
..
​
BOOM
​
Now it's EVERYONE's problem. Come at me, Chamath, THIS is REAL baller shit.
Now all you gotta do is make all the hysterical retirees watching their IRAs hanging in the balance blame those WSB kids. Hahaha. Boomers, amirite? hate when those kids step on their law--I mean IRAs. GG guys, keep you memes. THAT is how it's done.
Ok, but seriously, I hope that's not how it ends. I guess we just take it day by day at this point.
Apologies for the length. Good luck in the market!
Also, apologies in advance for formatting, spelling, and grammatical errors. I was typing this thing in between doing all kinds of other things for most of the day.
Edit getting a bunch of questions on if it's possible the hedge funds are finding ways to cover in spite of my assumptions. Of course. I'm a retail guy trying to read the charts and price action. I don't have any special tools like the pros may have.

Positions: $RSI 30 03/19 30C
Proof: https://imgur.com/a/swCCMjz
​
*This post is for informational purposes only, you should not construe any such information or other material as investment, financial, or other advice.*
​
TLDR: Rush Street Interactive ($RSI) is the #1 nationwide online casino company and the #3 or #4 sports book depending on the state. Short selling, unwarranted institutional wariness of share dilution and the general market focus on sports book instead of online casino has left $RSI grossly undervalued. A massive blow out at Q4 earnings will result in analyst upgrades and a rapid repricing by market makers and institutions seeking exposure to the emerging sector.
​
**Overview**
"Sports book is really just kind of a warm up in a lot of ways for an online casino where the real money is made" - Niccolo De Masi, CEO dMY technologies
​
Rush Street Interactive ($RSI) operates the BetRivers.com online casino and sports book. They are now fully licensed and operating in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia. They own and operate a casino in New York and already have a New York license making them well positioned for liberalization there. They merged with a dMY Technology Group SPAC on Dec. 31st 2020 with 240 million on the balance sheet to spend on growth.
The online casino business is fundamentally more profitable than sports betting because the average value of a casino player is estimated at $600 while a sports book player could be as little as $20. Estimates put the online casino market at DOUBLE the size of the online sports book market and the online casino industry is really just getting started as more states liberalize.
$RSI is expert at new market entry; they have been first to market in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, and Colorado and even when they aren't first they are capable of capturing market share in competitive markets such as New Jersey. They also have products which women play which accounts for at least half of the market in online casino. The female market is one that the pure sports book plays miss out on.
Also for some fucking reason they operate a casino and sports book in Colombia (rushbet.co) and may make large expansions into other parts of south America as legalization continues. This means they have the expertise necessary for global expansion in the future although the states remains their primary focus and growth driver.
​
**The Financials and Strategy**
Unlike other companies in the space Rush Street is already profitable in 2020 and has a strong focus on Return On Invested Capital (ROIC). Q3 gross revenue was $71.9 Million. Q4 revenue is going to be a blow out. Combing through state gambling revenue data and breaking that down by market share my estimate is that Q4 revenue could be as high as $120 Million.
Paired with this blow out will be a **guidance raise to $500 Million for 2021**, which is 2/3 of DraftKings 2021 guidance of $750M.
https://imgur.com/a/xkfcayC
​
What is striking when compared to $DKNG is that their advertising spend was only a quarter of revenue in Q3 while $DKNG spent 155% of their revenue. This will change as they begin to focus on growth, but it shows they are very good at getting return on ad spend. This company should actually be valued close to $DKNG based on growth potential once guidance is raised.
https://imgur.com/a/RQQXtGg
​
Their focus on attracting **female gamers** is also important to their long term growth potential. The sports book plays with cross sells to casino such as $DKNG will not be able to grow through the female demographic in the same way. **This cannot be understated** as one of the major strategic advantages of $RSI.
https://imgur.com/a/xzJj26n
​
As I said before I expect their trend of rapid growth to continue for Q4 earnings, certainly going to be a blow out based on looking at state gambling revenue numbers. My estimate is that their revenue will be around 110M for Q4. I also expect guidance to be raised to 500M for 2021 due to strong performance in existing markets and the recently opened Michigan market as well as their sports book launch in Virginia.
https://imgur.com/a/ckTqHhh
​
**Short sellers have entered the chat**
The short interest on $RSI sits at 5.08 M shares as of 01/14/21 representing a 30% increase. Now why would a company already valued at 2.8 Billion and with a comparative valuation of 8-10 Billion compared with $DKNG and $PENN be so heavily shorted at such a low market cap? My conclusion is that an institution with 10s of millions to throw at shorting this stock wants to take advantage of fear of share dilution from warrant calling or to establish a better entry prior to earnings.
​
**Commander in GILF Cathie Wood is Bullish on the sector**
On Feb. 2nd ARK disclosed that they had purchased 620,300 shares of $DKNG. This is extremely bullish for the sector. I am highly confident that after Q4 earnings ARK will be purchasing shares in $RSI as well due its strategic advantages relative to $DKNG and exposure to the female demographic. For such a small market cap company this will be a major catalyst.
​
**Institutions are bullish**
Fidelity has increased their holdings to 14% as of today: https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001793659/8f10b0d8-a3d2-447c-bc75-87587d0a4670.pdf
Alliance Bernstein holds a 6% position reported today: http://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001793659/e883778d-e759-4a85-91c1-3242ed110720.pdf
​
**Final notes**
Jerome "The Bus" Bettis, Steelers legend and hall of fame running back, is their brand ambassador... This company knows their target audience and how to appeal to them, likely more 'classic' ambassadors to come to attract even more boomer and Gen X degenerates. Keep in mind these are the gamblers with big money to spend, the average age of an online casino gambler is 42.
This stock has been grossly underpriced due to short selling. The terms of the SPAC deal were not unfavorable and all the insiders held their shares through the merger banking on growth in the market - **management owns 77% of the company**. This is a true value play on a well managed company in an emerging industry with a market size in the hundreds of billions. I plan to hold shares long term.
​
I will post a part 2 breaking down their latest S-1 filing and Q4 revenue by state when they release their Q4 earnings date.
​
Do your own research.
References:
https://www.legalsportsreport.com/sports-betting/revenue/
https://fintel.io/doc/sec-rush-street-interactive-inc-ex991-2021-january-05-18632-947
https://s26.q4cdn.com/794539746/files/doc_presentations/2020/RSI-Investor-Presentation-15-Oct-2020.pdf
https://ir.rushstreetinteractive.com/news/news-details/2020/RUSH-STREET-INTERACTIVE-ANNOUNCES-THIRD-QUARTER-2020-RESULTS-AND-RAISES-FULL-YEAR-GUIDANCE/default.aspx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQWEhWuPmzU
https://www.thestreet.com/investing/draftkings-surges-as-stake-bought-by-ark-next-generation
​
Positions: $RSI 30 03/19 30C
I will be adding 04/16 25cs each week until earnings.
Exit strategy: "What's an exit strategy?" - u/deepfuckingvalue
Update 021321: IMPORTANT after a commenter pointed out that technically they could report as late as April 2nd I AM RECOMMENDING THAT EVERYONE ROLL OUT TO APRIL 16TH 35Cs

Reposting because last post didn’t seem to go through due to network errors. Disclosure: I have no position in IPOE, nor will I ever initiate one. Disclaimer: Not a financial advisor. Do your own DD.
Note: I did this write-up for a friend; it’s obscenely long. If nobody here reads it, I won’t be particularly upset. But I’m posting it on the off-chance someone will find it interesting. I have seen a significant number of comments, in the daily threads and elsewhere, in which people call SoFi their “long-term fintech hold” or otherwise declare their intention to hold IPOE/SoFi significantly longer than a trader playing SPACs typically would - in some cases, all the way through merger and into the great unknown. Heck, I’ve even seen some commenters describe it as a “forever hold.” If that describes you, I would strongly suggest you think twice about that decision.
For months, the #1 piece of advice on this sub, beyond all else, has been to buy pre-rumor, post-Bloomberg rumor, or on an LOI - as close to NAV as possible - and sell shortly after the DA bump. Additionally, SPACs that have seen significant declines in their share prices in the days/weeks/months following a DA, as most do, could often be ripe for buying in anticipation of a run-up to the merger date. Buying after a huge run-up, with intentions of holding for the “long-term,” is hardly a strategy that can reasonably be expected to generate good risk-adjusted rates of return, especially in such a wildly speculative corner of the market.
In other words, it seems the players are becoming consumed by the game, and forgetting the rules in the process. Fascinatingly, this is an almost universal characteristic of frothy, speculative market bubbles. During the initial phase of the dot-com bubble, most retail investors were buying into pre-revenue, cash-incinerating companies at IPO, believing - often correctly - that hype would build for the company (it just has so much potential!!!) and that, as a result, they could subsequently flip those shares to another buyer at a significantly higher price. For a while, they were right. So what went wrong? Retail traders started to truly believe. It was no longer a case of playing the “greater-fool” game. They no longer bought shares and held them until other people started to believe in the potential of those companies; they started to genuinely believe in the narratives those companies were crafting and the vision of the future they were presenting to their investors. Instead of selling the sales pitches, they began falling for them. Eventually, the pool of capital sitting idle waiting to be deployed into the next “game-changing” company dried up…and the rest, I suppose, is history.
Which brings me to SoFi. Specifically, why their nosebleed valuation is not particularly attractive and the downside risks are, at least on this sub, massively under-appreciated.
To begin, let’s take a brief look at the history of the company, something that most posters on this sub seem to have surprisingly little knowledge of. In the aftermath of the Great Financial Crisis, the big banks massively de-leveraged their consumer lending portfolios. Student loan debt was one of the primary targets during this de-leveraging campaign, because, despite being non-dischargeable in bankruptcy proceedings (at least for now), it is, like most non-collateralized loans, quite risky for lenders. As such, the big banks became quite hesitant to issue new student loan debt - or refinance existing debt - at reasonable interest rates.
Enter SoFi.
SoFi, founded in 2011, attempted to capitalize on this opportunity. By offering to consolidate and refinance student loans, especially for high-earning recent college graduates, at reasonable interest rates, SoFi began putting together a large customer base that it believed it could easily cross-sell other financial products to - home loans, banking services, wealth management services, and the like. Backed by some of the most prestigious VC firms and investors, it looked like a sure winner. And, briefly, it was. Even as their marketing budget exploded, in early 2017 SoFi, believe it or not, actually expected to turn a profit of $200 million on $650 million in revenue. The same year, SoFi entered M&A talks with Charles Schwab, but ultimately talks fell apart when Schwab balked at the $8-10B valuation SoFi was seeking. Nonetheless, things were looking very good for the company.
And then everything went very, very wrong. SoFi, which had made a name for itself by offering student loan refinancing to prime borrowers from elite schools with very high incomes, saw its loans start to massively underperform expectations. Nonetheless, despite a massive $200M write-down in Q2 on underperforming loans, it still managed to book a $126 million profit on $547 million in revenue, though company guidance indicated that they expected further deterioration in the performance of their loan portfolio in the coming year. Those dire expectations seem to have been borne out; by 2018, the company was deep in the red, with EBITDA of -$227 million for the year. Their cross-selling model, which they are still describing as a key part of their business strategy, seems to have failed catastrophically - by early 2018, SoFi’s home loans were losing the company an astounding $10,000 apiece, on average.
And thus began the company’s long and hard dive into the red, from which it has not yet recovered. The decline was - to put it bluntly - catastrophic. Revenues collapsed, with 2018 revenues declining over 50% YoY to $241M. Desperate to save their rapidly-failing business, investors determined that they would need to start buying growth - at almost any cost. The company’s marketing and advertising spending shot through the roof, culminating in a deal to buy the naming rights to the LA Rams/Chargers stadium for an eye-popping $400 million. So how much growth has the >$500M in spending since then actually bought them? Let’s see.
To take a look at where things currently stand, let’s take a look at their shockingly amateurish investor presentation. (As a brief aside - for anyone still doubtful that the company is selling hype, just take a quick glance through their investor presentation. It’s littered with the logos and names of the most egregiously overvalued tech companies currently on the market (why on Earth should the name “Tesla” appear anywhere in their pitch deck, other than under an executive’s name??). And ”AWS of fintech?” Seriously?). Interestingly, their presentation claims that the company is targeting “high earners not well served (HENWS) ages 22+ predominantly earning $100,000+.” Sound familiar? It’s precisely the strategy that monumentally failed the company, beginning in Q2 2017. And, perhaps most intriguingly, it’s a strategy the CEO disavowed just last year, when he promised SoFi’s investors he would allow trading in fractional shares to target individuals who “can’t afford to buy their first stock”, and therefore, as the WSJ reporter notes, would be “unlikely to have expensive degrees from fancy schools.” In other words, SoFi was going to additionally target a completely different - and much less valuable - client base for their brokerage platform. But what’s the issue, you say? After all, shouldn’t companies be nimble, and rapidly adjust their strategy to reflect changing conditions in their target markets? And maximize market share at almost any cost? Perhaps.
Or perhaps not. In my opinion, SoFi, in their investor presentation, is now attempting to massively oversell the value of their current client base. Their user growth does, admittedly, seem somewhat impressive. But it appears to come at an incredibly high cost. Their financial services segment, where presumably most recent user growth has been generated, is obscenely unprofitable. Last year, it reported a $133M loss on $11M in revenue. It’s also quite clear that the growth there is decidedly inorganic, and therefore the staying power of those gains is questionable at best. That said, the biggest problem here is the shockingly low revenue figures, which I believe indicate that SoFi is acquiring massive numbers of “low-value” customers, and paying out the nose to do so. I know everyone here (myself included) loves to hate on Robinhood, but...in the 2Q 2020, their trading platform generated $180M in revenue, just from selling order flow. IN A SINGLE QUARTER. I really hate to admit it, but that’s incredibly impressive. On an annualized basis, RH is generating an incredible $55 ARPU by selling order flow. And it’s important to remember that SoFi’s user base is incredibly small, in comparison. In 2020, their “SoFi Invest” platform had a paltry 334k users. RH had over 13 million. SoFi, however, projects 150% YoY growth for their brokerage platform. To be completely honest? I think that’s bullshit. The massive influx of retail traders into the market due to COVID has already happened. And, to put it bluntly, Robinhood won. Sure, there may be something of a minor exodus from the platform due to their incredibly poor handling of the whole meme stock fiasco. But, seriously...you think those disgruntled traders will be going to SoFi? A platform with very limited capabilities (they still don’t have options trading?!) and a clunky UI that doesn’t even offer margin trading?!
“But not everybody trades options! Surely at least some of the Robinhood exiles will land at SoFi!!” Yes, this is probably true. But, unfortunately, options traders are the real cash cows for these discount brokerages. Of the $180M in revenue RH generated in Q2 last year, $111M was from selling order flow on options. That’s an absolutely massive 62%. And those traders now only have 2 choices: they are either going to forgive RH and stick with them, or move to a big-boy broker like TDA, Vanguard, Fidelity, or IBKR.The reality is this: only the least valuable Robinhood customers are likely to land at SoFi. Acquiring the more valuable customers further down the line will be incredibly expensive, if not outright impossible.
But SoFi is more than a brokerage firm, so let’s stick a valuation on that portion of their business and move on. Robinhood is planning a $20B IPO; let’s say the market triples that and gives it a 60B valuation. Robinhood, as of EoY 2020, has roughly 40x as many users, and their users are MUCH more valuable based on ARPU figures. But let’s be incredibly generous and value SoFi Invest at $2B.
Let’s see what else SoFi has to offer. The vast majority (83%, to be exact) of their revenue comes from their lending platform, which offers primarily student loan consolidation and refinancing and personal loans. Because both types of loans are non-collateralized, let’s treat them as identical. So how much are other student loan providers worth? Turns out, not a whole lot. Navient, for example, trades at just 6x earnings. At that multiple, SoFi’s lending operations would be worth just $500 million. But they’re a tech company, right!! So let’s multiply that by a factor of 10 for no reason whatsoever and agree that SoFi’s lending operations are worth $5B.
Finally, we have Galileo, their “technology platform.” What is Galileo? It’s primarily a payments processor, but it also provides bank account infrastructure services. Last year, it generated $103M in revenue; that same year, it was acquired by SoFi for $1.2B. Let’s assume, for no good reason, that SoFi underpaid by a factor of 3, and value Galileo at $3.6B. (Note that this is 36x revenue; another payment processor, Payoneer, just announced a DA with FTOC. At the current trading price, the market is valuing Payoneer at roughly 10x revenue.)
At Friday’s closing price, the implied valuation of SoFi is roughly $20B. Even with the silliest assumptions I could stomach, that’s at least double what I came up with. Yes, there have been a number of very positive changes at the company over the last 2 years. Their home loan business appears to at least generate them a small profit, and their unsecured debt portfolio appears to be much less risky that it was when things turned south in mid-2017. But rectifying some of their previous failures can hardly justify their massively bloated current valuation; even with ridiculous, completely unjustified multiples like the ones I arbitrarily chose above, there’s simply no way that kind of valuation can be justified.
Which brings us full circle. I don’t have a clue what the short-term price action of IPOE stock will look like. If I did, I would have opened a position in it last Friday. But I can assure you that the current implied valuation is completely nonsensical. Maybe you will buy the stock, and find a “greater fool” to sell it to at a much higher price sometime in the near future. Perhaps you will double your money overnight. Maybe you will hold it for 10 years, and by then SoFi will have eclipsed even JP Morgan. Despite the decidedly unexceptional nature of all of their offerings, maybe the “one-stop-shop” approach to personal finance will make them an unstoppable juggernaut. But understand that you’re making a gamble. A huge gamble. On a company that is attempting to execute a solid turnaround strategy, but has not yet succeeded. My advice? Stick to the tried and true strategy of this sub. As difficult as it may be sometimes, do not forget the rules of the game. In almost all cases, once you stop playing the game, the game plays you.
GLTA.

Positions: $RSI 03/19 30C
Proof: https://imgur.com/a/swCCMjz
This post is for informational purposes only, you should not construe any such information or other material as investment, financial, or other advice.
TLDR: Rush Street Interactive ($RSI) is the #1 nationwide online casino company and the #3 or #4 sports book depending on the state. Short selling, unwarranted institutional wariness of share dilution and the general market focus on sports book instead of online casino has left $RSI grossly undervalued. A massive blow out at Q4 earnings will result in analyst upgrades and a rapid repricing by market makers and institutions seeking exposure to the emerging sector.
Overview
"Sports book is really just kind of a warm up in a lot of ways for an online casino where the real money is made" - Niccolo De Masi, CEO dMY technologies
Rush Street Interactive ($RSI) operates the BetRivers.com online casino and sports book. They are now fully licensed and operating in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia. They own and operate a casino in New York and already have a New York license making them well positioned for liberalization there. They merged with a dMY Technology Group SPAC on Dec. 31st 2020 with 240 million on the balance sheet to spend on growth.
The online casino business is fundamentally more profitable than sports betting because the average value of a casino player is estimated at $600 while a sports book player could be as little as $20. Estimates put the online casino market at DOUBLE the size of the online sports book market and the online casino industry is really just getting started as more states liberalize.
$RSI is expert at new market entry; they have been first to market in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, and Colorado and even when they aren't first they are capable of capturing market share in competitive markets such as New Jersey. They also have products which women play which accounts for at least half of the market in online casino. The female market is one that the pure sports book plays miss out on.
Also for some fucking reason they operate a casino and sports book in Colombia (rushbet.co) and may make large expansions into other parts of south America as legalization continues. This means they have the expertise necessary for global expansion in the future although the states remains their primary focus and growth driver.
The Financials and Strategy
Unlike other companies in the space Rush Street is already profitable in 2020 and has a strong focus on Return On Invested Capital (ROIC). Q3 gross revenue was $71.9 Million. Q4 revenue is going to be a blow out. Combing through state gambling revenue data and breaking that down by market share my estimate is that Q4 revenue could be as high as $120 Million.
Paired with this blow out will be a **guidance raise to $500 Million for 2021**, which is 2/3 of DraftKings 2021 guidance of $750M.
https://imgur.com/a/xkfcayC
What is striking when compared to $DKNG is that their advertising spend was only a quarter of revenue in Q3 while $DKNG spent 155% of their revenue. This will change as they begin to focus on growth, but it shows they are very good at getting return on ad spend. This company should actually be valued close to $DKNG based on growth potential once guidance is raised.
https://imgur.com/a/RQQXtGg
Their focus on attracting **female gamers** is also important to their long term growth potential. The sports book plays with cross sells to casino such as $DKNG will not be able to grow through the female demographic in the same way. **This cannot be understated** as one of the major strategic advantages of $RSI.
https://imgur.com/a/xzJj26n
As I said before I expect their trend of rapid growth to continue for Q4 earnings, certainly going to be a blow out based on looking at state gambling revenue numbers. My estimate is that their revenue will be around 110M for Q4. I also expect guidance to be raised to 500M for 2021 due to strong performance in existing markets and the recently opened Michigan market as well as their sports book launch in Virginia.
https://imgur.com/a/ckTqHhh
Short sellers have entered the chat
The short interest on $RSI sits at 5.08 M shares as of 01/14/21 representing a 30% increase. Now why would a company already valued at 2.8 Billion and with a comparative valuation of 8-10 Billion compared with $DKNG and $PENN be so heavily shorted at such a low market cap? My conclusion is that an institution with 10s of millions to throw at shorting this stock wants to take advantage of fear of share dilution from warrant calling or to establish a better entry prior to earnings.
Cathie Wood is Bullish on the sector
On Feb. 2nd ARK disclosed that they had purchased 620,300 shares of $DKNG. This is extremely bullish for the sector. I am highly confident that after Q4 earnings ARK will be purchasing shares in $RSI as well due its strategic advantages relative to $DKNG and exposure to the female demographic. For such a small market cap company this will be a major catalyst.
Final notes
Jerome "The Bus" Bettis, Steelers legend and hall of fame running back, is their brand ambassador... This company knows their target audience and how to appeal to them, likely more 'classic' ambassadors to come to attract even more boomer and Gen X degenerates. Keep in mind these are the gamblers with big money to spend, the average age of an online casino gambler is 42.
This stock has been grossly underpriced due to short selling. The terms of the SPAC deal were not unfavorable and all the insiders held their shares through the merger banking on growth in the market - **management owns 77% of the company**. This is a true value play on a well managed company in an emerging industry with a market size in the hundreds of billions. I plan to hold shares long term.
I will post a part 2 breaking down their latest S-1 filing and Q4 revenue by state when they release their Q4 earnings date.
Do your own research.
References:
https://www.legalsportsreport.com/sports-betting/revenue/
https://fintel.io/doc/sec-rush-street-interactive-inc-ex991-2021-january-05-18632-947
https://s26.q4cdn.com/794539746/files/doc_presentations/2020/RSI-Investor-Presentation-15-Oct-2020.pdf
https://ir.rushstreetinteractive.com/news/news-details/2020/RUSH-STREET-INTERACTIVE-ANNOUNCES-THIRD-QUARTER-2020-RESULTS-AND-RAISES-FULL-YEAR-GUIDANCE/default.aspx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQWEhWuPmzU
https://www.thestreet.com/investing/draftkings-surges-as-stake-bought-by-ark-next-generation
Positions: $RSI 03/19 30C
I will be adding 04/16 25Cs each week until earnings
Exit strategy: "What's an exit strategy?" - u/deepfuckingvalue
Forgot to add: http://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001793659/8f10b0d8-a3d2-447c-bc75-87587d0a4670.pdf Fidelity just doubled their position to almost 15%
Update 021221: Everyone that went in on my initial entry is down 40% right now. As I said I plan to continue to buy 03/19 25Cs each week until earnings. If you’re worried about further losses wait until the day before earnings to load up, you may miss a run up though.
Update 021321: IMPORTANT after a commenter pointed out that technically they could report as late as April 2nd I AM RECOMMENDING THAT EVERYONE ROLL OUT TO APRIL 16TH 35Cs

I tried to make it easy to skip around if you just want to see the financials or estimates. Just scroll to them if you don't care what the company is or their sectocompetition/management. TL;DR at bottom with final thoughts.
Introduction
“FuboTV ($FUBO) is an American streaming television service that focuses primarily on channels that distribute live sports, including NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, MLS and international soccer, plus news, network television series and movies.
Launched on January 1, 2015 as a soccer streaming service, FuboTV changed to an all-sports service in 2017 and then to a virtual multichannel video programming distributor (vMVPD) model. As a vMVPD, FuboTV still calls itself sports-first but its expanded channel lineup targets cord cutters, offering a selection of major cable channels and OTT-originated features that can be streamed through smart TVs, mobile and tablets and the web. The service is available in the United States, Canada and Spain as of 2018."
From their home page:
They are the only competitors in their space of digital sports broadcasting, offer 4K streaming and upscaling of live sports, cloud DVR capability ranging from 250 or 1000 hours on standard plans, and is available on Roku, Apple TV, Amazon Fire TV, Chromecast, Samsung Smart TVs, Xbox One, Android TV, Android Smart TVs, and Android/iOS smartphones and tablets, with plans ranging from $24.99/month to $79.99/month (not including add-ons).
They have also recently acquired one company and have made plans to acquire another to allow for in-house sports betting. They have stated in a press release that they plan to release a sportsbook before the end of the year. This will push them into a broader spectrum outside of only TV and sports streaming, and into the sports betting sector along with DraftKings ($DKNG), FanDuel ($PDYPY), and Penn National Gaming ($PENN).
Plans and Add-ons
FuboTV offers three standardized plans as of February 8, 2021: the Family plan is priced at $64.99/month (normally $75.97/month), Elite at $79.99/month (normally $100.95/month), and Latino Quarterly at $24.99/month, along with offering additional add-ons. Each plan offers a range of channels, cloud DVR capabilities (which allows fast-forwarding through commercials), and casting to multiple devices simultaneously. Only the Elite plan does not offer a 7-day free trial (Channels page).
The Family plan includes 117 channels (mostly news and entertainment with roughly 40 that offer sports, including ESPN), up to 250 hours of DVR space, and casting to 3 devices at once. The quarterly prepaid includes a free upgrade to 1000 hours of DVR space and 5 casting devices at home with 3 on the go (Channels page).
The Elite plan includes 164 channels (includes an additional “47 entertainment channels”), up to 1000 hours of DVR space, and casting to 5 devices at home with 3 on the go. This plan does not offer a quarterly prepaid (Channels page).
The Latino Quarterly plan includes 250 hours of DVR space and can be streamed on up to 3 devices at once, but only has 32 channels. This plan needs to be prepaid every 3 months for a total charge of $74.97 and does not offer a monthly service (Channels page).
Upgrades include additional DVR space--1000 hours for an additional $6.99/month for the Family and Latino Quarterly--and increased device casting--an additional 2 devices at home with 3 on the go for another $9.99/month for the Family and Latino Quarterly plans. You can also add a variety of channels and sports packages (the Latino Quarterly has fewer channel add-ons compared to the Family and Elite plans, which both have the same channel varieties). Sports Plus with NFL RedZone is an additional $10.99/month, but includes all professional and college sports broadcasting services for football, basketball, baseball, hockey, tennis, fighting, etc. (Channels page).
Fubo has recently removed its former Standard plan, which included only 65 channels, up to 2 casting devices, and only 30 hours of DVR support for $60/month.
Financials and Growth
Fubo has yet to file an annual report as they have gone public in October of 2020, but they have filed a 10-Q for Q3 2020. All numbers in thousands.
Assets-
Between December 31, 2019 and September of 2020, assets have increased from $368,225 to $799,313 (a 117% increase) . Total current assets increased from $17,973 to $58,016, but accounts receivable decreased from $8,904 to $6,975--this may be attributed to the increase in prepaid subscriptions which increased from $1,445 to $12,177 which shows strong customer satisfaction and retention.
Liabilities-
Liabilities have increased from $145,049 to $290,376 (a 100% increase). The largest contributors to their liabilities are “Due to related parties” increasing from $665 to $85,847, “Warrant liabilities” increasing from $24 to $28,085, and “Accounts payable” from $36,373 to $61,679. Long-term borrowings have decreased from $43,982 to $25,905.
Revenues-
Subscription revenues increased by $53,433, totaling $92,945 for the year. Total revenues including advertisements and licensing have increased by $61,202, totaling $112,669 for the year and an increase of 47% YOY. Q4 revenue is estimated to be between $94,000 and $98,000 which would be a 77-84% increase YOY.
Expenses-
Subscriber related expenses total $114,315 for the year. Total expenses have totaled $500,249 for the year.
Subscribers-
Ended Q3 with 455,000 paid subscribers, a YOY increase of 58%, and plans to end 2020 with over 545,000, an increase of 72% YOY.
Competition
Its closest competitors are Hulu + Live TV (owned by Disney ($DIS)), YouTube TV (owned by Alphabet ($GOOG)), and Sling TV (owned by Dish Network ($DISH)).
Hulu + Live TV

• Includes league networks
• 50 hours of free DVR (200 hours for $9.99/month)
• More than 74 channels
• Unskippable ads on DVR without upgrade to 200 hours
• 2 streams at a time
• $64.99/month
• Can add ESPN+ and Disney+ for an additional $7/month

YouTube TV

• Includes league networks
• Unlimited DVR storage
• More than 85 channels plus YouTube Red Originals
• 3 streams at a time
• Sports Plus package for an additional $10.99/month
• NBA LeaguePass for an additional $40/month or $119.99 annually
• Starting at $64.99/month

Sling TV Blue

• Includes league networks
• DVR up to 50 hours (200 hours for $5/month)
• More than 45 channels
• 3 streams at a time
• Sports Extra package for an additional $11/month
• Starting $35/month
• Can be combined with Sling TV Orange for a total of $50/month

Sling TV Orange

• Includes league networks
• DVR up to 50 hours (200 hours for $5/month)
• More than 30 channels
• 1 stream at a time
• Sports Extra package for an additional $11/month
• Starting at $35/month
• Can be combined with Sling TV Blue for a total of $50/month

The vMVPD Sector
Cord-cutting has become increasingly popular over the last few years with consumers dropping traditional cable and satellite networks in favor of streaming services--such as Hulu, Netflix, Disney+, etc.--and vMVPD services.
In 2019 alone, 6.3 million people cut their cable connection, totaling 39.3 million. In a survey of what they might miss most from cable networks, 52% said they don’t miss anything, 23% missed live events on TV, 22% missed news, and 19% missed live sports. Although not all of those that miss aspects of cable will pay for another subscription service, the sentiment exists for a sports-focused platform that offers other large networks as well.
Another report by Parks Associates reveals that 17% of vMVPD subscribers switched from traditional TV within the last twelve months. In the same report, a survey conducted on current broadband households determined that 43% were “likely to switch to a… vMVPD within the next 12 months." The potential growth exists for the live digital broadcasting space, although it is slowing down.
With the spread of COVID and quarantines, people have been spending more time at home. When things open and quarantines end, that will be the true test for these providers as people will spend less time watching TV.
The Sports Betting Sector
Legal sports betting has taken a huge leap in recent years with the introduction of online sports betting; the ability to place wagers from anywhere at any time and have instant gratification has boomed with its slow legalization. This sector has a forecasted value of $150 billion with other competitors already having a completed project and vast market share. In 2019, DraftKings ($DKNG) and FanDuel (PDYPY) controlled 83% of the market share.
FuboTV plans to join into this space with its own sportsbook. Their recent acquisition of Balto Sports in December of 2020, whose business was in simulating fantasy sports games, is Fubo’s first step into sports wagering. They plan to create a free-to-play gaming system alongside online sports wagering.
Their next planned acquisition, which was announced in January of 2021, will be to acquire Vigtory, a sports betting and interactive gaming company. According to BusinessWire, they plan to utilize Vigtory’s “sportsbook platform and digital gaming assets, and its consumer-driven betting technology, to develop a frictionless betting experience for fubo’s customers."
These recent acquisitions set Fubo up to create an all-in-one viewing and betting experience, which could add new customers to their subscriber list and seal them into online wagering.
It has been over two years since the Supreme Court has denied the federal ban on sports betting, which would have made online betting illegal in all of the United States. Currently, more than two dozen states have legalized sports betting, but most have only legalized in-person betting. More states may be willing to legalize to take advantage of the increased revenues and taxes associated with gambling and online wagering. As of 2020, six additional states plan to legalize some form of betting, although some are only allowing in-person. There are an additional 14 states that are considering the notion to allow legal gambling, whether in-person, online, or tribal.
Management and Investors
David Gandler - CEO / Director / Co-Founder
Appointed as CEO and director in April of 2020. Prior to Fubo, Gandler had a 15 year career in marketing and advertising in local broadcast and cable TV within both general and Hispanic markets at companies such as Time Warner, Telemundo, and Scripps Networks Interactive.
Alberto Horihuela - CMO / Co-founder
In charge of marketing, Horihuela was head of Latin America for SVOD service DramaFever.
Simone Nardi - CFO
Nardi has worked as SVP and CFO of Scripps Networks Interactive where he was responsible for the finance and strategic planning for the company’s international business. Was also a key player in refinancing TVN S.A.’s billion dollar debt.
Large Investors

• Islet Management, LP with 5,108124 shares
• Morgan Stanley with 3,317,333 shares
• FMR LLC with 1,262,907 shares
• BlackRock Inc. with 956,678 shares
• Merger with FaceBank for $100 million revolving credit

Analysts and Estimates
Average analyst ratings put Fubo at a Buy to Strong Buy rating with an average price target of $45.50 with a high of $60 and a low of $30. EPS estimates are estimated to be -5.23 for 2020 and -1.64 for 2021.
Currently has a short float of about 75%, but the short volume has been holding at roughly 15-20% over the last month and has drastically declined from its October short volume of over 50%.
Originally valued at $700 million less than a year ago, a current valuation of $3.19 billion is respectable for this company and is on par for its current performance.
Risks

• Marketing fails and Fubo is never known as a household name, so consumers stick with other more known providers
• Their sportsbook fails and becomes dead weight and wasted money
• Subscriber count and streaming drops as quarantine lifts, reducing revenues while maintaining expenses
• Consumers opt for cheaper options
• People paying for the sports package cancel when the season is over, creating a boom and bust cycle if not managed correctly

Final Thoughts / TL;DR
With its drastic growth over the last year (400% in the last 4 months), support from FaceBank and well-known investors, and plans to join the sports betting sector, FuboTV has potential to become a household name and grow well beyond its current valuation by combining both sports broadcasting and online sports betting into one convenient place. Although unlikely to overthrow any of the current forces, it can become the best live sports broadcaster that people can turn to when they cut cable but want to keep live sports. It has many hurdles to overcome (creating their sportsbook, better marketing, increasing subscriber count, etc.) before it is any real competition to its already established competition.
At a $3.19 billion market cap and very high (75%) short interest, it will be very difficult to realize consistent growth, but it is on par for a company with almost $100 million in revenue.
My Position
25 shares at $47.30
​
Edit: edited final thoughts/TL;DR
Please provide feedback! First time actually researching and compiling information for a company and not just reading about them on here. Also, please ask questions to clear up any confusion; it was kinda hard to put everything together neatly, so I might have accidentally left stuff out or oveunder explained some things.

Edit: I am aware of the possible squeeze incoming and am already in possession of 7 amc @3.43 I just really UNIRONICALLY like the stock
Edit 2: Someone let me know that I had made a clerical error, 99 billion should have been 9.9 billion
Hello, I have been a lurker of the sub for just over 2 years, this is my first DD so please don't hold back and let me know what my blind spots are.
AMC is currently trading at 6.83 when im writing this and I see it possibly going a little lower but I do believe that ~ 7$ is a good price for this stock considering the rebound it could make in the coming months/years.
AMC and theaters in general are a very important part of American culture, or at least have been for a long time, covid could change all of this I am aware; however I do not believe that hollywood is willing to give up a 9.9 Billion dollar a year industry because someone ate batman. In 2019 theaters generated an estimated revenue of 9.9B this number fell harshly and predictibly due to Covid laws, but their alternative was something no one even considered trying. Paying $30 to watch a movie via a streaming platform... This is something I think even idiots look at and think "wow this is a rip", and there is no alternative to this as movie studios simply cannot rely on subscription revenue to create a movie that can survive by todays standards.
One of the major things about theaters that draws people in is the sheer quality of the tech, where as we could spend 10 or 20 thousand on a tv and sound system, these theaters spend that per speaker, for an uncompromised experiance unobtainable at home without cutting edge and expensive technology that is by no means "popular" or "accessible".
My personal opinion is that AMC will probably climb past the 10$ mark when they can resume normal operation, me and all of my friends have been talking about theaters and how they are in a "make-it-or-break-it" scenario, this is probably my biggest worry in terms of this stock, there is a VERY real chance that people will simply not care about theaters after all this is over, but I am counting on Hollywood to not let that happen, I believe they would fight tooth, nail, and every apendage they had to keep theaters in America.
ACTUAL DD:
Old Financials: Prior to COVID-19, AMC had found itself in a small rut of sorts, their overall revenue was only up .19%, they were spending much more on advertisements than usual and they were also dealing with a lower than average operating income (down 48.68% 2018-2019) and they finished out the year in debt, they had lost 149.10M
New Financials: 2020 has been an absolute shit show for AMC, they are down across the board by > 90%, and their last reported operating income in september was -675.40M and the finished the year out 905.80M in the red. Q1 2020 obviously had lessened effects on the company as the US was undecided for a while on how seriously we were going to take it. Their Gross profits have also fallen: Q4 (2019): +939.60M - (+3.15%) Q1 (2020): +616.40M - (-20.32%) Q2 (2020): +14.20M - (-98.75%) Q3 (2020): +84.10M - (-89.90%) It is also worth mentioning their net income across the quarters has went from -149.10M in Q4 2019 to -3.64B Q3 2020
OPINION: I think that AMC is currently in a dangerous predicament in terms of hemmoraging money each quarter, however I do believe that Hollywood has enough of a vested interest to turn this into a possibly money maker. No one is calling for theaters to go away, people like them and they enjoy the atmosphere that comes with the experiance, we love the memes of a 20$ popcorn and a 50$ soda, but I really believe Americans like the cinema.
Position: 20 Jan 23 3.5$ call I belive in AMC long-term (at least for the next few years), I am very much so considering a LEAPs position on AMC, I wouldn't be mad being stuck with 100 shares of AMC, and considering the risk and reward, my breakeven is $8.50, I really believe that sometime between now and 2023 AMC will at LEAST go to 8.50, hopefully higher, but if lower than its DIAMOND HANDS INTO THE GROUND.
TLDR: AMC has issues and its a gamble, but goddamnit I like it
PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY FALLACIES, LOGICAL ERRORS, OR ANY OUTSTANDING MISTAKES THIS IS MY FIRST DD AND I WANT BECOME A MORE ACTIVE USER. I AM HERE TO LEARN AND MAKE A LITTLE MONEY, AND ANY ADVICE YOU GIVE IS MUCH APPRECIATED