Hacker News Reader

Comment by bigram | Hacker News Reader

It's not clear to me what you think the error is. That the majority of the price action was caused by retail and not short sellers covering their position doesn't negate the fact that shorts were forced to cover their positions and did so. The language and charts in the SEC report show as much.

View on HN

Where exactly does the SEC state that the majority of all the short positions have been closed? I can't find this in that report.

In the section "Short Selling and Covering Short Positions" is a chart on page 27 that shows the short interest for GME. It shows the short interest dropping precipitously, meaning that the majority of positions were closed.

They did not cover. When enough people DRS their shares it will become clear.

How many shares need to be DRS'd?

Then how do you explain the massive drop in short interest in the graph in the sec report? Short interest can’t drop without shorts covering…

There are many ways of hiding short positions like with ETFs. Look at the XRT (an ETF holding GME).

So you are saying the SEC report is wrong about the short interest?

I didn't say that. I'm saying there are many ways of hiding short positions.

XRT has been highly shorted for well over a decade because pretty much all of the stocks in it are failing brick and mortars, including gamestop. What does that have to do with GameStop’s short position?

your account was created 5 hours ago, this was posted 6 hours ago. you seem to be quite opinionated about this topic. any reason why that is?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com