It's the principle of it. If everyone who bought decided to sell when it went up and not hold there would be no chance of a squeeze.
Imagine if everyone did that with GME too which I know you're big on. Obviously you can do what you want but what was the point if you're gonna just jump back in?
Tbh I feel you on that front. I do it for the principle. I bought in at 9 cause the shorts borrow fee was 80%
But on the other hand I also have never been convinced the shorts were in real trouble from AMC. When you talk about Citadel's long position, the fact that there was never evidence of the entire float being shorted when the float was at it's lowest/SI at the highest, the gigantic dilutions, the constant dumps, the borrow fee cratering in a day etc, people stick their heads down the anti FUD hole. Which I can get as a GME holder.
But I cant ignore the context that if big money/a corporation were to make a play at the expense of the new breed of ape investor's stubbornness, AMC is exactly how it would play out.
-
The company giving themselves bonuses immediately after share dilutions Check.
-Constant gigantic dilutions, check
- Misinformation (repurposing GME DD, Twitter nikkas & YouTubers half assed research being the core of the movment) check.
-CEO's trying to be all up in the cameras & collecting clout, check.
-Media is encouraging the hype train, making a 180 from January. Check
At least with GME I can be certain the share liquidity shortage with my own math, the media's consistent FUD, the community's DD is lightyears ahead of any stock research I've ever read(Straight from SEC/Finra filings. Not bullshyt firms like S3 or Ortrex. Peer reviewed sometimes by experts), consistent bullish retail investor trends and Ryan Cohen's moves being consistent with playing the squeeze.
I know GME hurts the shorts 100% but am 50/50 on whether AMC is a trap. So AMC profits go to GME.
Why let Wanda and Adam Aron have all the fun?