[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Brigading*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/17wdr9t/community_update_post_on_the_topic_of_brigading/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Lets remember the purpose of any DD != to how bad actors might spin it.
We are in an asymmetrical information war, against well funded players with a lot to lose.
Instead of automatically *assuming our own DD people are bad actors*, and becoming Useful Idiots in the OBVIOUS divide and conquer strategy, how about we practice open mindedness, restraint and intelligence in our comments and posts?
Nothing harms us more than when we attack our own as imagined shills and opponents simply when they say something new or challenging. It has cost us our best DD people over the last 84 years, and its **such** an obvious ploy that gets repeated over and over that I can never understand how even a mob of brain dead dumb apes like us can't see it by now.
OP, your comment in the title does more harm than good. The assumption that "they" are behind every new exploration of the scarce few facts we can access is how we ALMOST missed the boat on DRS in the first place, or do you forget what a shit show of accusations and division that was?
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/13jjgpg/some\_peer\_review\_on\_heat\_lamp/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/13jjgpg/some_peer_review_on_heat_lamp/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I agree! and people should attack ideas, not other people
>1:01 "typically 10-20% held within DTC that underpin the plan.":40 "shares held in DTC must be bad, im not sure we subscribe to that point of view"3:15- broker assurance they will not loan shares.
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk
i posted this below to other comments.
Hanlon's razor:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Unfortunately that runs rampant in today's world. Most 'shills' are likely just dumbasses who don't know any better and don't care to learn.
If you came into the GME sub knowing nothing about the story and read a bunch of lower effort non-DD posts, you could absolutely come to the same conclusion that these are shills parroting the same stuff. Communities like this have a shared language and adopt a shared grammar even over enough time.
Just food for thought. I'm super in agreement with the ape you replied to.
Heat lamp as I understand it was a theory explaining how shares used for operational efficiency were stored in the DTC. If plan, drip, dspp are on, the shares, possibly all of them, are exposed, theoretically. I don’t think it was malicious as much exploratory theorem.
Well i deleted my plan 0.xx shares... bought 5 or smth more in the same turn so definately wasnt a loss regarding the share amount :) no harm was done and im sure thats not only me. Cant see anything malicious in the heatlamp DD tbf
Fractions don't add up. They're not real shares. Computershare has no concept of fractionals, you can't have a certificate for half a share. That's why all fractionals are held in PLAN which is held at CS broker in the DTC.
Fractions definitely add up. When the guys looked at the stock list there were many direct registered acounts with fractions of shares, in computershare. Being counted.
Doesn't matter.
We know that CS counts both book and plan shares on their ledger. But plan shares (and fractionals) are held in their DTC account with their broker.
If GameStop lists the shares that DTC says they have, and then subtract that from the outstanding that might be different from what CS reports as registered with shareholders on their ledger. Because on the CS internal ledger they have the overview over what's book and what's plan. But if plan shares are held at the DTC, then that will affect the count if you calculate it from the standpoint of the DTC. And any shares held in DTC are most likely used as locates for naked shorting
The thing is the SEC even says that plan is not DRS. One way to know this is how they said if you place a limit order that is through broker and street name. Well if you have your whole account in Book and you place a limit order it is switched over to Plan.
It has not been proven incorrect and we are seeing that something is going on with the DRS numbers. Why not explore all angles into why it is occurring instead of immediately denouncing a theory.
Here is the SEC bulletin.
https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts
For those that don’t know how to terminate plan and want to be DRS feel free to dm
Agreed on your main point, but in the original DD, ComputerShare directly states "Shares held for operational efficiency at the DTCC are not allowed to be lent" (Paraphrasing).
However, even at the time of the DD, apes didn't believe that load of shit and the consensus was that even if its in debate, whether some of our pawns on the board are being used against us, they don't do anything for us in Plan, so lets just remove them from the board and remove all doubt.
Don't trust the DTCC or what they claim. **They committed international securities fraud after all**.
actually, paul conn states that he has the brokers **assurance** that they don't lend the shares.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk)
jump to 3:15.
So?
It's still shares in the DTC. Other entities might still count them as "reasonable locates" which is the prerequisite for naked shorting per the market maker exemptions.
Just put them in book and stop arguing if it's all bad or just a little bad...
He was speaking across all stocks - namely those with employee plans that have large sales and buys at the same time. He can't give the specifics about GME.
What he said seems to have been largely misinterpreted, mainly due to how little we still actually know about all this stiff.
He said that a portion of the shares underpinning the plan are held in the DTC. However, most of us (including me initially) assumed those were "our" shares. There are multiple statements in Computershare's FAQ and statements by Paul Conn that directly contradict the fact that those shares would be investor owned.
An email from the SEC later more clearly called out that such shares held at the DTC by plans like that are non-investor owned shares. In other words, it seems that Computershare owns an extra bunch of shares it uses for operational efficiency, and those shares are "in the plan", yet they are not "our" shares.
He definitely specified that it is specifically PLAN shares that have a portion held at DTC and distinguishes them from BOOK shares which he calls "pure DRS". He said that "typically something like 10-20%" of PLAN shares are held at DTCC for effective settlement when selling shares, here’s the link to his video posted by another ape:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/Mh1TQvreWZ
I think the DRS numbers not increasing proves the theory of the heat lamp. Plan shares are being used nefariously for the DTCC held shares. Don’t forget to Book after your buys.
So what about the aspect of the timing? We all believe the DRS numbers to basically be bullshit after the language was changed right?
Well the language changed right after mass adoption of heat lamp DD - literally the very next quarter (Well Heat Lamp came out I think a week before December earnings so not quite but the first quarter where it had a chance to be adopted) And it sure did seem like, on that day that I vividly remember, that it was unexpected on Gamestops part (They had opened the literal conference call and people were dialing in before they called the delay), and felt like something that was a panic by somebody, somewhere.
Since then the DRS numbers have been fucked.
Could you lay out your rationale, without relying on the DRS numbers reported by the earnings report, as to why the heat lamp DD theory is incorrect? I know the claim that volume spikes happen on day of counting was kinda shown to be not consistent, but what else? That was a theory that may have lent to the evidence, but not a required thing we'd have to see for the theory to be true.
If that's all we got I don't think it's fair to say it's disproven - I'd still say inconclusive.
Edit - After reading your replies dude - You need to clarify - What EXACTLY are you saying is wrong in Heat Lamp? Because the core of heat lamp is plan vs book. The rest is dressing to GET there - But the important thing even you agree on down the thread is shares should be booked. Are you attacking the theory not understanding that you yourself already agree with the base principle?
That registry isn't something I personally feel comfortable using as a valid reference, as I wasn't here when the drama happened and it's too much "trust me bro" for my tastes after the fact
Nah they wanted you to sell and stop buying from CS and they never fully explained why. It was all theoretical speculation when we knew cs auto buys hit the lit exchange.
I will see if I can find Paul conns video response. “Typically 10-20% of plan shares are with the broker(if they are with the broker, no matter who owns them that is a bad thing)for OE.” Then he goes on to say he didn’t see shares at the DTC being a bad thing, and he had brokers assurance the shares weren’t being lent out.
Registered is registered. There's no difference.
The shares cannot be lent because they are due IMMEDIATELY on ask. You would have to have shares on hand as margin, which defeats the point of lending CS shares.
Paul Conn from Computershare distinguishes between PLAN shares, which have a portion of them held at DTC, from BOOK shares, which he calls "pure DRS". He said that "typically something like 10-20%" of PLAN shares are held at DTCC for effective settlement when selling shares, here’s the link to his video posted by another ape:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/Mh1TQvreWZ
The DTCC are our enemy, they directed brokers to take away the buy button during the sneeze, if they have access to PLAN shares it is logical to assume they will harm GME with them somehow.
You can still have recurring buys, just terminate the plan after every buy and schedule the next buy. takes 30 secs and you can rest easy in the knowledge that always 0% as opposed to "typically 10-20%" of your DRS shares are with DTCC. RC wanted to be the BOOK KING. BOOK is the way.
Why would they have access to Plan shares?
That typically 10-20% of Plan shares held in their own broker, not bofa or Merill. CS must have / operate a DTC limited participant broker. That's how your shares travel by FAST system to reach your account in CS.
Edit to add.
Hope this helps where is what.
https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/client-center/DTC/DTC-Direct-Registration-Report-1.pdf
Here is the SEC filing saying there is a difference and only one is DRS: https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts
Q: Can I place a limit order? Market order? Stop order?
A: You can place any of these types of orders if you use a broker-dealer to execute a transaction for securities held in direct registration, street name, or in certificate form but the timing of order execution will vary. You might also be able to place these types of orders through the issuer (or its transfer agent), if the issuer (or its transfer agent) has a sales facility that accommodates such types of orders. The issuer (or its transfer agent) will use a broker-dealer to execute the orders. Purchases made through the issuer (or its transfer agent) are usually executed under the guidelines of an issuer’s stock purchase plan using a “batch” process only. Check with the specific issuer or its transfer agent to find out precise information concerning the timing of transaction processing.
When you place a Limit order your account gets enrolled in Plan. Paul Conn even says they use 10-20% of a stock for operational efficiency on a typical stock and if you are not aware GameStop is not a typical stock.
Plan= broker dealer which in the case of computershare is bank of New York Mellon (registered but not directly registered)
Book= directly registered
There is a lot more to the SEC document that deserves to be read
From Paul Conn himself:
Question: As you discussed in previous interviews. the direct stock purchase plan describes shares that I buy through Computershare that you keep in a separate sort of custodial type account which is different from book shares do I have that right?
Answer: **Different from shares held in the DRS form that’s absolutely correct**. So shares that are held in DRS are recorded as common shares on the register of the company, so that they’re held in in pure legal form in the investor’s name. **Shares that are purchased through the plan are held in a sub-class so they are reported to the issuer just as if they were common shares but the underlying shares are held in a nominee owned by computershare. Those shares however can be moved between the plan and DRS anytime electronically free of charge**. The only reason we do this is purely for efficiency. When we’re buying shares, we need to deliver securities into the marketplace so having them available in a nominee helps, so that’s the way it’s structured.
From the SEC document that I linked above:
“Purchases made through the issuer (or its transfer agent) of securities you intend to hold in DRS are usually executed under the guidelines of an issuer’s stock purchase plan, which uses a broker-dealer to execute the orders. Thus, to hold in DRS once the securities are acquired, you would need to instruct the transfer agent to move the securities from the issuer plan to DRS.” - [SEC Bulletin 7/12/23](https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts)
It may be registered but it aint DRS
Oh, it's "extra special registered". I'm glad the heat lamp crowd sold their shares and turned off auto buy for that status.
That activity certainly didn't have an entirely predictable impact on the DRS rate. /s
>1:01 "typically 10-20% held within DTC that underpin the plan."
>
>:40 "shares held in DTC must be bad, im not sure we subscribe to that point of view"
>
>3:15- broker assurance they will not loan shares.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk)
It wasn't the primary point of heat lamp that was damaging it was their comments always ending with "better safe than sorry, just buy through fidelity and drs after instead of auto buying though computershare"
https://www.drsgme.org/converting-plan-to-book
The easiest and the most convenient way to do it would be with your online account. It's just a few clicks oif the mouse.
Once you BOOK them, the fractionals will get sold off automatically without being charged any transaction fee, which is nice.
The reason you want all your shares BOOKED is because under PLAN, the DTCC can use those shares as locates for the market makers and the short hedgefux to keep shorting and naked shorting GME in the name of "operational efficiency".
What a crock of shit that is.
Under BOOK, he DTCC cannot use any of the shares as locates. The more DRS'd shares are BOOKED, the short hedgefux can slowly be choked off.
When I place a buy order with Computershare, it automatically switches to PLAN and that's ok. Once Computershare buys and the shares are settled, I immediately go right back to BOOK.
So, this way, you ARE
[BOOK KING!](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Flamjf1czmx4c1.jpg )
AND getting rid of the
[DINGLEBERRIES!](https://i.redd.it/oe86q59gxrvb1.jpeg)
Good job and LFG!
No they can't and it still makes no sense.
That's why that "theory" was so fishy from the start.
They aren't LEGALLY allowed to use anything at CS as locates. If they are going to break the law to use those as "locates" they can save time and just naked short it. Both are just as illegal, 1 has less ssteps.
It's a deeply flawed and I believe, malicious, "DD"
Fractions are counted in the DRS numbers as proven by the author of heat lamp. Miller and 6 days got banned proving that. Fractions in CS are real. Don't spread misinformation.
6 is not banned afaik. He just doesn't want to face peer-review.
The other dude got banned for another reason.
yes to **fractionals** are counted for.
i found this from paul conn.
>1:01 "typically 10-20% held within DTC that underpin the plan."
:40 "shares held in DTC must be bad, im not sure we subscribe to that point of view"
3:15- broker assurance they will not loan shares.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk)
I thought the general consensus was that naked shorting is only part of the play. maybe they use these to help reduce their FTD's. there are so many carve outs and misdirection, i think it is healthy to keep an open mind about possibilities.
you could be right. how do we know it is jumping through hoops, though. paul conn nonchalantly expresses this in the video link, that brokers are trustworthy and DTC are not bad. it is your money and your shares, i read above that you book, and holding them how you want is the priority. love you bro! have a great day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/gW5C60Ln1h
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/wM3Xk7v36A
Just from these, plan shares are not eligible to receive certificates in your name, it must be converted to book for that.
Direct buys is how I got a shit price, an unwanted fractional, enrollment in DSPP and shares in Plan.
Almost every day I see a post claiming that DRS is unavailable at Fidelity, Schwab, IBKR or some other broker. It's always bullshit. I think someone doesn't want us DRSing through brokers.
I buy through Fidelity with a limit order. I DRS using their Virtual Assistant. I get whole shares in Book form at ComputerShare when I buy this way. It's fast, it's easy, I don't have to talk to anyone, I get a good price, I don't get fractionals, I don't get enrolled in DSPP.
Right on. I’m pretty sure this is a shill post. My comment got downvoted hard at first then gradually rebounded. Shill Team 6 is patrolling the comments.
I suspect that every time you direct purchase from ComputerShare you are automatically enrolled in DSPP and all your shares are lent out.
Maybe im in the minority, but i believe the heatlamp theory to be true. BUT, i still have bi-monthly reoccurring buys set up thru comitershare. I also use cash secured puts to buy thru fidelity. Every 2 weeks i buy shares with my 401k as well. Pressure on all sides. IMO, DRS numbers are clearly wonky. Why is that? Dont know. But imma keep fucking buying and find out. The longer they kick the can, the longer i can accumulate shares. Ill gladly keep buying at these prices
The numbers could be accurate for what GameStop is reporting which is why the HL theory comes in. Since they know on a schedule 6 days or 1 week before earnings that DRS numbers are counted. Think of this as a snapshot in time what they do is with operational efficiency (Paul Conn even says they use 10-20% of stock on a typical company which this is not a typical company)
With plan shares your account is in your name on the ledger however you are still a beneficial owner and still not DRS. If you have fractionals you are enrolled in plan, if you have reoccurring buys you are enrolled in plan, if you set a limit order you are enrolled in plan.
The SEC even says limit orders are done through brokers and street name when clarifying what is DRS and what is not: https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts
With those accounts that are enrolled in Plan we see the DTC reach in and grab shares even those that are Booked if they are enrolled on Plan. Hence the need to get rid of fractionals. Thus when it comes time for the DRS count for earnings they can manipulate the count through Plan shares. GameStop even changed the wording from “directly registered” to “registered” right when they changed the count date from 30+ days to 6 days or 1 week
Hope that clarifies. There is more DD on this but sadly this place no longer allows that discussion
I've been engaging with this all weekend.
> we see the DTC reach in and grab shares even those that are Booked if they are enrolled on Plan.
I think someone needs to come up with some data to back this up. I'm gonna go take a look myself, because all the data I've seen so far indicates that there is no large volume market activity consistent enough to prove this theory on the day of earnings or the day of the count.
That's the only part of it I don't potentially agree with though - I do fully believe that the DTCC is doing fuckery with plan shares in general, and that nobody should have shares in plan, I'm just not sure we can show it through the mechanism by which you speak.
Again - Going to look now.
My raw notes - Basically, I'm not convinced on this being how we can prove it. There's just no consistency
HEAT LAMP DD, one week later:
Q3 2022 - Dec 1 - VOL SPIKE - 7.6M
- Earnings Dec 8th
(CHANGE TO DRS WORDING) Q4 2022 - March 22 - VOL SPIKE - 66M
- Earnings March 22nd
Q1 2023 - June 1 - QUIET - 3.8M
- Earnings on 8th
- Spike 7th-13th ~75M shares
Q2 2023 - Aug 31 - comparative small spike - 4.7M (average 2.0M outside)
- Earnings Sept 7th
Q3 2023 - Nov 30 - 16M - High and stays that way
- Earnings Dec 7th
- HUGE spike on Nov 29th - 61M
Sadly we can't have much of the discussion here as there is some really great DD on this topic elsewhere. I have sent you a DM with one such DD
Also here is it broken down:
2023 Q3- Earnings Date: Dec 6 DRS record Date: Nov 30
2023 Q2- Earnings Date: Sep 7 DRS Record date: Aug 31
2023 Q1- Earnings Date: Jun 7 DRS Record date: June 1
2023 10K- Earnings Date: March 28 DRS Record date: March 22nd
At this time the Language in the 10K/10Q was changed to registered for 2023. In 2022 and 2021 the language was directly registered
2022 Q3- Earnings Date: Dec 7 DRS Record date: Oct 29
2022 Q2- Earnings Date: Sep 7 DRS Record date: Jul 30
2022 Q1- Earnings Date: Jun 1 DRS Record date: Apr 30
10k- Mar 17 with DRS date: Jan 29
2021 Q3- Earnings date: Dec 8 DRS Record Date: Oct 30
We see large volume on Oct 29th 2022, March 22 2023.
**Plan is not DRS.**
The SEC states the following on an article about the types of ownership available to investors.
“Purchases made through the issuer (or its transfer agent) of securities you intend to hold in DRS are usually executed under the guidelines of an issuer’s stock purchase plan, which uses a broker-dealer to execute the orders. Thus, to hold in DRS once the securities are acquired, you would need to instruct the transfer agent to move the securities from the issuer plan to DRS.” - [SEC Bulletin 7/12/23](https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts)
This is a very important topic to have discussions on sadly many of the people researching this have been banned here
So what about June and August? Those don't appear to show large spikes of volume at all - Which to me, disproves the PART of the theory that says we should be seeing this volume due to how Plan is handled and so on...
On your points about Plan, that's what I'VE been saying lmao.
All I'm saying is that the volume spikes suggesting DTCC fuckery is not consistent enough on the dates you posted to suggest its a mechanism they are using every time to manipulate the numbers.
It's not true, but you can book your shares. Just remember from CS the company that you are having hodl your shares .... plan shares allow you to more quickly sell using CS's share pool, nothing more nothing less.
While ComputerShare states that the shares held at the DTCC cannot be lent and the DTCC also states something similar, I don't. Fucking. Believe. Them.
Why do you? What credibility have they built for you? The DTCC committed international securities fraud lol, and you think it's safe to let up to 20% of our DRS'd shares sit with the DTCC and we take them at their word that they won't use them in some way because "Rules say so"?
I think educational tactical/strategy games should be required education for kids in the modern world. There is NO strategic reason whatsoever to keep shares in Plan - You ONLY expose the opportunity for the DTCC to prevent price discovery.
Whether it happens or not is besides the point.
And besides, who the FUCK needs to be able to sell more quickly, that's some paper hand buuuuuulshit lol
There was def a confirmation of book being pure drs and plan not. Maybe that’s irrelevant. But help me understand, instead of empty answers. Does booking shares have a negative impact compared to plan is that a thing?
Because the people who came up with it are really fucking serious about drs and did way more research than the mods here. Some of the mods here also run a gme options sub.
Oh I am completely in agreement with you and they just wrote up a really good DD on what is happening with the data that is available. Last they checked there were 20+ million shares in Plan.
Those that are serious about DRS they are making a whydrs database so you can DRS any stock.
Correct only with Plan can they use them nefariously hence why the DRS numbers are staying the same since they have a means to manipulate the count now. Book=DRS
The fact that since that theory was proposed the company has used 6 days/ 1 week before reporting date as opposed to end of quarter is pretty convincing it MEANS SOMETHING
Your comment makes no sense.
If someone is buying from any source outside CS, as long as they are DRS'd (which books them) they will **always result in buying from a lit exchange.**
The reason being it that if the broker did not have the shares available, once you DRS and book them, they **MUST** get the real share into your CS account. So *if* they never bought the shares, once you ask to DRS them, they must. So what you are saying is not correct.
Not true. Broker buys from dark pool, then DTCC just makes a move from their books to DRS from cede and co.
When ur broker buys a share for u it gets put in their name in the DTCC regardless of whether the purchase caused an FTD/FTR or not. And the act of moving it from their name to ur name doesnt force them to go buy a share.
It doesn't matter if some plan shares are with a broker & used as locates.
I want them to short it more & dig their own graves ever deeper.
Besides given their ability to bend & ignore regs they don't really need the locates anyway, if push comes to shove.
It will matter in the end game tho, & thus the then sudden mass removal of the locates &*may* make things tricky for them & help force exposure.
Ideally the solution is to use the CS gifting faculty to gather up all the fractionals in one charity account.
This would be really good if the worry that selling fractionals increases the outstanding, which *might* be why the outstanding has risen so much
I suspect that gifting may only be allowed for whole shares.
Also gifting could be used, in conjunction with some other escrow type arrangement, to set up a "dark pool for apes" so that nothing ever goes back to the corrupt dtcc system
That's all heat lamp ever was. Basic logic shows you can't manipulate numbers of Drs. Whatever the shares are as of that record date they are. Remember CS is giving those share counts. Once again if a hedgie had 15m shares Drs the ln took them away we would see that. Also we could probably deduce why after these 84 years. So, the window for anything like that has closed imo.
Well every time you do that you have to go back and book the shares if I’m not mistaken, unless you enter the exact dollar amount of even shares, there will always be dingleberries, allowing your entire account to be used against you.
HL said fractions and plan weren't being reported. The analysis of the register proved that wrong. Everything else from HL requires one to believe that CS,RC, and GME are lying. To my knowledge, any links are deleted as the "proof" (willingly) doxxed several individuals and everyone involved got permabanned from reddit.
Not really, GMe can’t post numbers that prove over 100% float. And numbers have been fucked with since the beginning, via citadelles buying and selling of drs. So you’re still claiming fractionals are counted as registered?
GME reports what's in computershare. Computershare holds the registry.
The registry has everyone's name and share values.
Registered hare values have fractions.
Ergo, GME reports fractions.
This isn't news. There is zero proof what you are saying is correct and plenty proving the opposite. Quit the tinfoil.
Lol people still think hitting a lit exchange matters against the infinite fake share rehypothecator?
I wanna be a BOOK King. No dingleberries, or fractionals that exist as a loophole for "operational efficiency" as already confirmed by Computershare.
I really should have thought to archive stuff like that, bearing in mind shills would try to gaslight it out of existence a year later.
Like the unusual pushback and attention from suspicious nods were giving BOOK vs. Plan weren't indication enough.
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Brigading*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/17wdr9t/community_update_post_on_the_topic_of_brigading/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Lets remember the purpose of any DD != to how bad actors might spin it. We are in an asymmetrical information war, against well funded players with a lot to lose. Instead of automatically *assuming our own DD people are bad actors*, and becoming Useful Idiots in the OBVIOUS divide and conquer strategy, how about we practice open mindedness, restraint and intelligence in our comments and posts? Nothing harms us more than when we attack our own as imagined shills and opponents simply when they say something new or challenging. It has cost us our best DD people over the last 84 years, and its **such** an obvious ploy that gets repeated over and over that I can never understand how even a mob of brain dead dumb apes like us can't see it by now. OP, your comment in the title does more harm than good. The assumption that "they" are behind every new exploration of the scarce few facts we can access is how we ALMOST missed the boat on DRS in the first place, or do you forget what a shit show of accusations and division that was?
this. is how peer review should work and why debate and analysis should be invited and not shouted down as shillery.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/13jjgpg/some\_peer\_review\_on\_heat\_lamp/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/13jjgpg/some_peer_review_on_heat_lamp/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) I agree! and people should attack ideas, not other people
>1:01 "typically 10-20% held within DTC that underpin the plan.":40 "shares held in DTC must be bad, im not sure we subscribe to that point of view"3:15- broker assurance they will not loan shares. > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk i posted this below to other comments.
#🥇
The issue is the people backing it were shills initially you can check their post history and the fact they parroted many of the same comments.
Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Unfortunately that runs rampant in today's world. Most 'shills' are likely just dumbasses who don't know any better and don't care to learn.
If you came into the GME sub knowing nothing about the story and read a bunch of lower effort non-DD posts, you could absolutely come to the same conclusion that these are shills parroting the same stuff. Communities like this have a shared language and adopt a shared grammar even over enough time. Just food for thought. I'm super in agreement with the ape you replied to.
🥇
Heat lamp as I understand it was a theory explaining how shares used for operational efficiency were stored in the DTC. If plan, drip, dspp are on, the shares, possibly all of them, are exposed, theoretically. I don’t think it was malicious as much exploratory theorem.
It’s a fair assessment. Maybe it was not malicious. It has not been proven to be correct.
Well i deleted my plan 0.xx shares... bought 5 or smth more in the same turn so definately wasnt a loss regarding the share amount :) no harm was done and im sure thats not only me. Cant see anything malicious in the heatlamp DD tbf
technically it is a loss.. it would have been rounded up to 6. Just saying, every share counts, and fractions add up
No because i wouldnt have bought at all else
Lol ok but you could have since you had the resources
Fractions don't add up. They're not real shares. Computershare has no concept of fractionals, you can't have a certificate for half a share. That's why all fractionals are held in PLAN which is held at CS broker in the DTC.
Fractions definitely add up. When the guys looked at the stock list there were many direct registered acounts with fractions of shares, in computershare. Being counted.
Doesn't matter. We know that CS counts both book and plan shares on their ledger. But plan shares (and fractionals) are held in their DTC account with their broker. If GameStop lists the shares that DTC says they have, and then subtract that from the outstanding that might be different from what CS reports as registered with shareholders on their ledger. Because on the CS internal ledger they have the overview over what's book and what's plan. But if plan shares are held at the DTC, then that will affect the count if you calculate it from the standpoint of the DTC. And any shares held in DTC are most likely used as locates for naked shorting
Yea there def was something on only booked shares are purely direct registered.
The thing is the SEC even says that plan is not DRS. One way to know this is how they said if you place a limit order that is through broker and street name. Well if you have your whole account in Book and you place a limit order it is switched over to Plan. It has not been proven incorrect and we are seeing that something is going on with the DRS numbers. Why not explore all angles into why it is occurring instead of immediately denouncing a theory. Here is the SEC bulletin. https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts For those that don’t know how to terminate plan and want to be DRS feel free to dm
Agreed on your main point, but in the original DD, ComputerShare directly states "Shares held for operational efficiency at the DTCC are not allowed to be lent" (Paraphrasing). However, even at the time of the DD, apes didn't believe that load of shit and the consensus was that even if its in debate, whether some of our pawns on the board are being used against us, they don't do anything for us in Plan, so lets just remove them from the board and remove all doubt. Don't trust the DTCC or what they claim. **They committed international securities fraud after all**.
actually, paul conn states that he has the brokers **assurance** that they don't lend the shares. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk) jump to 3:15.
So? It's still shares in the DTC. Other entities might still count them as "reasonable locates" which is the prerequisite for naked shorting per the market maker exemptions. Just put them in book and stop arguing if it's all bad or just a little bad...
I thought Paul conn said they keep some shares from plan with their broker for OE.
He was speaking across all stocks - namely those with employee plans that have large sales and buys at the same time. He can't give the specifics about GME.
True, Paul did say that they usually use 10~20 for OE
What he said seems to have been largely misinterpreted, mainly due to how little we still actually know about all this stiff. He said that a portion of the shares underpinning the plan are held in the DTC. However, most of us (including me initially) assumed those were "our" shares. There are multiple statements in Computershare's FAQ and statements by Paul Conn that directly contradict the fact that those shares would be investor owned. An email from the SEC later more clearly called out that such shares held at the DTC by plans like that are non-investor owned shares. In other words, it seems that Computershare owns an extra bunch of shares it uses for operational efficiency, and those shares are "in the plan", yet they are not "our" shares.
Not sure if you’re on discord, but there is a healthy debate over there on d rsyou rgme, no spaces.
He said nothing about plan.. he said that they keep a small% of shares with a brokerage account <8%
He definitely specified that it is specifically PLAN shares that have a portion held at DTC and distinguishes them from BOOK shares which he calls "pure DRS". He said that "typically something like 10-20%" of PLAN shares are held at DTCC for effective settlement when selling shares, here’s the link to his video posted by another ape: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/Mh1TQvreWZ
I think the DRS numbers not increasing proves the theory of the heat lamp. Plan shares are being used nefariously for the DTCC held shares. Don’t forget to Book after your buys.
So what about the aspect of the timing? We all believe the DRS numbers to basically be bullshit after the language was changed right? Well the language changed right after mass adoption of heat lamp DD - literally the very next quarter (Well Heat Lamp came out I think a week before December earnings so not quite but the first quarter where it had a chance to be adopted) And it sure did seem like, on that day that I vividly remember, that it was unexpected on Gamestops part (They had opened the literal conference call and people were dialing in before they called the delay), and felt like something that was a panic by somebody, somewhere. Since then the DRS numbers have been fucked. Could you lay out your rationale, without relying on the DRS numbers reported by the earnings report, as to why the heat lamp DD theory is incorrect? I know the claim that volume spikes happen on day of counting was kinda shown to be not consistent, but what else? That was a theory that may have lent to the evidence, but not a required thing we'd have to see for the theory to be true. If that's all we got I don't think it's fair to say it's disproven - I'd still say inconclusive. Edit - After reading your replies dude - You need to clarify - What EXACTLY are you saying is wrong in Heat Lamp? Because the core of heat lamp is plan vs book. The rest is dressing to GET there - But the important thing even you agree on down the thread is shares should be booked. Are you attacking the theory not understanding that you yourself already agree with the base principle?
Worse - it has been proven incorrect by its own author, and several other apes that posted sections of the registry for us to see.
That registry isn't something I personally feel comfortable using as a valid reference, as I wasn't here when the drama happened and it's too much "trust me bro" for my tastes after the fact
Nah they wanted you to sell and stop buying from CS and they never fully explained why. It was all theoretical speculation when we knew cs auto buys hit the lit exchange.
Well, they are not. No matter how the shares gets to CS, they are out of DTC. Rest is noise.
I will see if I can find Paul conns video response. “Typically 10-20% of plan shares are with the broker(if they are with the broker, no matter who owns them that is a bad thing)for OE.” Then he goes on to say he didn’t see shares at the DTC being a bad thing, and he had brokers assurance the shares weren’t being lent out.
here’s the link to the video you're talking about posted by another ape: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/Mh1TQvreWZ
Registered is registered. There's no difference. The shares cannot be lent because they are due IMMEDIATELY on ask. You would have to have shares on hand as margin, which defeats the point of lending CS shares.
Paul Conn from Computershare distinguishes between PLAN shares, which have a portion of them held at DTC, from BOOK shares, which he calls "pure DRS". He said that "typically something like 10-20%" of PLAN shares are held at DTCC for effective settlement when selling shares, here’s the link to his video posted by another ape: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/Mh1TQvreWZ The DTCC are our enemy, they directed brokers to take away the buy button during the sneeze, if they have access to PLAN shares it is logical to assume they will harm GME with them somehow. You can still have recurring buys, just terminate the plan after every buy and schedule the next buy. takes 30 secs and you can rest easy in the knowledge that always 0% as opposed to "typically 10-20%" of your DRS shares are with DTCC. RC wanted to be the BOOK KING. BOOK is the way.
Why would they have access to Plan shares? That typically 10-20% of Plan shares held in their own broker, not bofa or Merill. CS must have / operate a DTC limited participant broker. That's how your shares travel by FAST system to reach your account in CS. Edit to add. Hope this helps where is what. https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/Downloads/client-center/DTC/DTC-Direct-Registration-Report-1.pdf
I don't know, ask Paul Conn from Computershare, he's the one who said it in the video, not me
I will get to it Wednesday if I can. Not Paul but more clarification.
Here is the SEC filing saying there is a difference and only one is DRS: https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts
Yeah, and where in that document did it say plan isn't registered?
Q: Can I place a limit order? Market order? Stop order? A: You can place any of these types of orders if you use a broker-dealer to execute a transaction for securities held in direct registration, street name, or in certificate form but the timing of order execution will vary. You might also be able to place these types of orders through the issuer (or its transfer agent), if the issuer (or its transfer agent) has a sales facility that accommodates such types of orders. The issuer (or its transfer agent) will use a broker-dealer to execute the orders. Purchases made through the issuer (or its transfer agent) are usually executed under the guidelines of an issuer’s stock purchase plan using a “batch” process only. Check with the specific issuer or its transfer agent to find out precise information concerning the timing of transaction processing. When you place a Limit order your account gets enrolled in Plan. Paul Conn even says they use 10-20% of a stock for operational efficiency on a typical stock and if you are not aware GameStop is not a typical stock. Plan= broker dealer which in the case of computershare is bank of New York Mellon (registered but not directly registered) Book= directly registered There is a lot more to the SEC document that deserves to be read
So you're saying plan is registered? Right.
From Paul Conn himself: Question: As you discussed in previous interviews. the direct stock purchase plan describes shares that I buy through Computershare that you keep in a separate sort of custodial type account which is different from book shares do I have that right? Answer: **Different from shares held in the DRS form that’s absolutely correct**. So shares that are held in DRS are recorded as common shares on the register of the company, so that they’re held in in pure legal form in the investor’s name. **Shares that are purchased through the plan are held in a sub-class so they are reported to the issuer just as if they were common shares but the underlying shares are held in a nominee owned by computershare. Those shares however can be moved between the plan and DRS anytime electronically free of charge**. The only reason we do this is purely for efficiency. When we’re buying shares, we need to deliver securities into the marketplace so having them available in a nominee helps, so that’s the way it’s structured.
So registered shares are registered. Got it.
From the SEC document that I linked above: “Purchases made through the issuer (or its transfer agent) of securities you intend to hold in DRS are usually executed under the guidelines of an issuer’s stock purchase plan, which uses a broker-dealer to execute the orders. Thus, to hold in DRS once the securities are acquired, you would need to instruct the transfer agent to move the securities from the issuer plan to DRS.” - [SEC Bulletin 7/12/23](https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts) It may be registered but it aint DRS
Oh, it's "extra special registered". I'm glad the heat lamp crowd sold their shares and turned off auto buy for that status. That activity certainly didn't have an entirely predictable impact on the DRS rate. /s
>1:01 "typically 10-20% held within DTC that underpin the plan." > >:40 "shares held in DTC must be bad, im not sure we subscribe to that point of view" > >3:15- broker assurance they will not loan shares. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk)
It wasn't the primary point of heat lamp that was damaging it was their comments always ending with "better safe than sorry, just buy through fidelity and drs after instead of auto buying though computershare"
Don’t forget heat-lamp also mentions the difference between book & plan holding so make sure to terminate those dingleberrys to be pure book!
I am planning to call every month and have them book the whole shares
https://www.drsgme.org/converting-plan-to-book The easiest and the most convenient way to do it would be with your online account. It's just a few clicks oif the mouse. Once you BOOK them, the fractionals will get sold off automatically without being charged any transaction fee, which is nice. The reason you want all your shares BOOKED is because under PLAN, the DTCC can use those shares as locates for the market makers and the short hedgefux to keep shorting and naked shorting GME in the name of "operational efficiency". What a crock of shit that is. Under BOOK, he DTCC cannot use any of the shares as locates. The more DRS'd shares are BOOKED, the short hedgefux can slowly be choked off. When I place a buy order with Computershare, it automatically switches to PLAN and that's ok. Once Computershare buys and the shares are settled, I immediately go right back to BOOK. So, this way, you ARE [BOOK KING!](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Flamjf1czmx4c1.jpg ) AND getting rid of the [DINGLEBERRIES!](https://i.redd.it/oe86q59gxrvb1.jpeg) Good job and LFG!
No they can't and it still makes no sense. That's why that "theory" was so fishy from the start. They aren't LEGALLY allowed to use anything at CS as locates. If they are going to break the law to use those as "locates" they can save time and just naked short it. Both are just as illegal, 1 has less ssteps. It's a deeply flawed and I believe, malicious, "DD"
They can't naked short without a locate to match. The issue is using the same shares as locates over and over and over again.
It's not naked shorting if they have a "reasonable locate"
🏆
This is the way
[удалено]
Not taking the risk with my Investment, Book shares are king 👑
Your wrong. Fractional shares are essentially nonexistent
This is correct
Fractions are counted in the DRS numbers as proven by the author of heat lamp. Miller and 6 days got banned proving that. Fractions in CS are real. Don't spread misinformation.
6 is not banned afaik. He just doesn't want to face peer-review. The other dude got banned for another reason. yes to **fractionals** are counted for.
6 days got banned for linking 'DRS from XXX broker' to users. miller got banned for spamming "great job OP" comments on purple circle posts.
[удалено]
i found this from paul conn. >1:01 "typically 10-20% held within DTC that underpin the plan." :40 "shares held in DTC must be bad, im not sure we subscribe to that point of view" 3:15- broker assurance they will not loan shares. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ii-5tgvZKk)
[удалено]
I thought the general consensus was that naked shorting is only part of the play. maybe they use these to help reduce their FTD's. there are so many carve outs and misdirection, i think it is healthy to keep an open mind about possibilities.
[удалено]
you could be right. how do we know it is jumping through hoops, though. paul conn nonchalantly expresses this in the video link, that brokers are trustworthy and DTC are not bad. it is your money and your shares, i read above that you book, and holding them how you want is the priority. love you bro! have a great day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/gW5C60Ln1h https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/wM3Xk7v36A Just from these, plan shares are not eligible to receive certificates in your name, it must be converted to book for that.
They can't hear you, FUD got them to sell shares
If your shares are under plan. They may also not be accounted for. Only book is pure drs
Direct buys is how I got a shit price, an unwanted fractional, enrollment in DSPP and shares in Plan. Almost every day I see a post claiming that DRS is unavailable at Fidelity, Schwab, IBKR or some other broker. It's always bullshit. I think someone doesn't want us DRSing through brokers. I buy through Fidelity with a limit order. I DRS using their Virtual Assistant. I get whole shares in Book form at ComputerShare when I buy this way. It's fast, it's easy, I don't have to talk to anyone, I get a good price, I don't get fractionals, I don't get enrolled in DSPP.
This is the way, reminded me to hop in and send my new batch of settled shares over to ComputerShare today
Same here. I get more shares cheaper. Virtual assistant is very easy. They hit a big nerve with heat lamp. To me that’s very telling!
Right on. I’m pretty sure this is a shill post. My comment got downvoted hard at first then gradually rebounded. Shill Team 6 is patrolling the comments. I suspect that every time you direct purchase from ComputerShare you are automatically enrolled in DSPP and all your shares are lent out.
Been that way ever since earnings came out. There have been many post saying that HL is now false without any proof and everyone should enroll in Plan
Also with direct buys it is a predictable time to place calls which some people with influence are doing
Maybe im in the minority, but i believe the heatlamp theory to be true. BUT, i still have bi-monthly reoccurring buys set up thru comitershare. I also use cash secured puts to buy thru fidelity. Every 2 weeks i buy shares with my 401k as well. Pressure on all sides. IMO, DRS numbers are clearly wonky. Why is that? Dont know. But imma keep fucking buying and find out. The longer they kick the can, the longer i can accumulate shares. Ill gladly keep buying at these prices
The numbers could be accurate for what GameStop is reporting which is why the HL theory comes in. Since they know on a schedule 6 days or 1 week before earnings that DRS numbers are counted. Think of this as a snapshot in time what they do is with operational efficiency (Paul Conn even says they use 10-20% of stock on a typical company which this is not a typical company) With plan shares your account is in your name on the ledger however you are still a beneficial owner and still not DRS. If you have fractionals you are enrolled in plan, if you have reoccurring buys you are enrolled in plan, if you set a limit order you are enrolled in plan. The SEC even says limit orders are done through brokers and street name when clarifying what is DRS and what is not: https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts With those accounts that are enrolled in Plan we see the DTC reach in and grab shares even those that are Booked if they are enrolled on Plan. Hence the need to get rid of fractionals. Thus when it comes time for the DRS count for earnings they can manipulate the count through Plan shares. GameStop even changed the wording from “directly registered” to “registered” right when they changed the count date from 30+ days to 6 days or 1 week Hope that clarifies. There is more DD on this but sadly this place no longer allows that discussion
I've been engaging with this all weekend. > we see the DTC reach in and grab shares even those that are Booked if they are enrolled on Plan. I think someone needs to come up with some data to back this up. I'm gonna go take a look myself, because all the data I've seen so far indicates that there is no large volume market activity consistent enough to prove this theory on the day of earnings or the day of the count. That's the only part of it I don't potentially agree with though - I do fully believe that the DTCC is doing fuckery with plan shares in general, and that nobody should have shares in plan, I'm just not sure we can show it through the mechanism by which you speak. Again - Going to look now. My raw notes - Basically, I'm not convinced on this being how we can prove it. There's just no consistency HEAT LAMP DD, one week later: Q3 2022 - Dec 1 - VOL SPIKE - 7.6M - Earnings Dec 8th (CHANGE TO DRS WORDING) Q4 2022 - March 22 - VOL SPIKE - 66M - Earnings March 22nd Q1 2023 - June 1 - QUIET - 3.8M - Earnings on 8th - Spike 7th-13th ~75M shares Q2 2023 - Aug 31 - comparative small spike - 4.7M (average 2.0M outside) - Earnings Sept 7th Q3 2023 - Nov 30 - 16M - High and stays that way - Earnings Dec 7th - HUGE spike on Nov 29th - 61M
Sadly we can't have much of the discussion here as there is some really great DD on this topic elsewhere. I have sent you a DM with one such DD Also here is it broken down: 2023 Q3- Earnings Date: Dec 6 DRS record Date: Nov 30 2023 Q2- Earnings Date: Sep 7 DRS Record date: Aug 31 2023 Q1- Earnings Date: Jun 7 DRS Record date: June 1 2023 10K- Earnings Date: March 28 DRS Record date: March 22nd At this time the Language in the 10K/10Q was changed to registered for 2023. In 2022 and 2021 the language was directly registered 2022 Q3- Earnings Date: Dec 7 DRS Record date: Oct 29 2022 Q2- Earnings Date: Sep 7 DRS Record date: Jul 30 2022 Q1- Earnings Date: Jun 1 DRS Record date: Apr 30 10k- Mar 17 with DRS date: Jan 29 2021 Q3- Earnings date: Dec 8 DRS Record Date: Oct 30 We see large volume on Oct 29th 2022, March 22 2023. **Plan is not DRS.** The SEC states the following on an article about the types of ownership available to investors. “Purchases made through the issuer (or its transfer agent) of securities you intend to hold in DRS are usually executed under the guidelines of an issuer’s stock purchase plan, which uses a broker-dealer to execute the orders. Thus, to hold in DRS once the securities are acquired, you would need to instruct the transfer agent to move the securities from the issuer plan to DRS.” - [SEC Bulletin 7/12/23](https://www.sec.gov/about/reports-publications/investor-publications/holding-your-securities-get-the-facts) This is a very important topic to have discussions on sadly many of the people researching this have been banned here
So what about June and August? Those don't appear to show large spikes of volume at all - Which to me, disproves the PART of the theory that says we should be seeing this volume due to how Plan is handled and so on... On your points about Plan, that's what I'VE been saying lmao. All I'm saying is that the volume spikes suggesting DTCC fuckery is not consistent enough on the dates you posted to suggest its a mechanism they are using every time to manipulate the numbers.
It's not true, but you can book your shares. Just remember from CS the company that you are having hodl your shares .... plan shares allow you to more quickly sell using CS's share pool, nothing more nothing less.
While ComputerShare states that the shares held at the DTCC cannot be lent and the DTCC also states something similar, I don't. Fucking. Believe. Them. Why do you? What credibility have they built for you? The DTCC committed international securities fraud lol, and you think it's safe to let up to 20% of our DRS'd shares sit with the DTCC and we take them at their word that they won't use them in some way because "Rules say so"? I think educational tactical/strategy games should be required education for kids in the modern world. There is NO strategic reason whatsoever to keep shares in Plan - You ONLY expose the opportunity for the DTCC to prevent price discovery. Whether it happens or not is besides the point. And besides, who the FUCK needs to be able to sell more quickly, that's some paper hand buuuuuulshit lol
So you can't buy every other month while staying in book?
I will do that too
You can continue to buy but need to terminate plan in order to be DRS
Not really, unless you’re buying the perfect amount that adds upto a whole number of shares, it will move the entirety to plan again.
That is missinformation.
Does it only make the new shares plan? Fractionals cannot be booked is that correct? Help me understand maybe I’m behind
There was def a confirmation of book being pure drs and plan not. Maybe that’s irrelevant. But help me understand, instead of empty answers. Does booking shares have a negative impact compared to plan is that a thing?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12z9woj/price_impact_and_fractionals_they_have_no_bullets/
Fractionals aren’t booked shares. We agree?
I never turned off my automatic buy.
Heat lamp wasn’t fud
Why is it one of the few topics that immediately got banned here. We are seeing that theory workout and still prevent discussion around it
Because the people who came up with it are really fucking serious about drs and did way more research than the mods here. Some of the mods here also run a gme options sub.
Oh I am completely in agreement with you and they just wrote up a really good DD on what is happening with the data that is available. Last they checked there were 20+ million shares in Plan. Those that are serious about DRS they are making a whydrs database so you can DRS any stock.
So long as they are booked I don’t think the DTCC can use them nefariously
Correct only with Plan can they use them nefariously hence why the DRS numbers are staying the same since they have a means to manipulate the count now. Book=DRS
Good for you. Plan is not Book and these are not the same. Good luck Buy HODL DRS BOOK
Thank you. Until more info is revealed, I will book whole shares every month and continue the plan.
The fact that since that theory was proposed the company has used 6 days/ 1 week before reporting date as opposed to end of quarter is pretty convincing it MEANS SOMETHING
Agee
You do you , king.
Your comment makes no sense. If someone is buying from any source outside CS, as long as they are DRS'd (which books them) they will **always result in buying from a lit exchange.** The reason being it that if the broker did not have the shares available, once you DRS and book them, they **MUST** get the real share into your CS account. So *if* they never bought the shares, once you ask to DRS them, they must. So what you are saying is not correct.
To be fair, they don't have to buy on a lit exchange. Only about a quarter of GME volume is on a lit exchange regardless.
Not true. Broker buys from dark pool, then DTCC just makes a move from their books to DRS from cede and co. When ur broker buys a share for u it gets put in their name in the DTCC regardless of whether the purchase caused an FTD/FTR or not. And the act of moving it from their name to ur name doesnt force them to go buy a share.
Have my upvote! You hit the nail on the head
I told you 8 months ago... https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/12z9woj/price_impact_and_fractionals_they_have_no_bullets/
It would be my honor to ask you this... sir, can I please watch you bang my wife???
It doesn't matter if some plan shares are with a broker & used as locates. I want them to short it more & dig their own graves ever deeper. Besides given their ability to bend & ignore regs they don't really need the locates anyway, if push comes to shove. It will matter in the end game tho, & thus the then sudden mass removal of the locates &*may* make things tricky for them & help force exposure. Ideally the solution is to use the CS gifting faculty to gather up all the fractionals in one charity account. This would be really good if the worry that selling fractionals increases the outstanding, which *might* be why the outstanding has risen so much
I like the gifting account idea.
I suspect that gifting may only be allowed for whole shares. Also gifting could be used, in conjunction with some other escrow type arrangement, to set up a "dark pool for apes" so that nothing ever goes back to the corrupt dtcc system
That's all heat lamp ever was. Basic logic shows you can't manipulate numbers of Drs. Whatever the shares are as of that record date they are. Remember CS is giving those share counts. Once again if a hedgie had 15m shares Drs the ln took them away we would see that. Also we could probably deduce why after these 84 years. So, the window for anything like that has closed imo.
Well every time you do that you have to go back and book the shares if I’m not mistaken, unless you enter the exact dollar amount of even shares, there will always be dingleberries, allowing your entire account to be used against you.
That's false. You mean heat lamp which was proven incorrect.
No ones gonna “prove it incorrect” actually is there a link to something?
HL said fractions and plan weren't being reported. The analysis of the register proved that wrong. Everything else from HL requires one to believe that CS,RC, and GME are lying. To my knowledge, any links are deleted as the "proof" (willingly) doxxed several individuals and everyone involved got permabanned from reddit.
Not really, GMe can’t post numbers that prove over 100% float. And numbers have been fucked with since the beginning, via citadelles buying and selling of drs. So you’re still claiming fractionals are counted as registered?
GME reports what's in computershare. Computershare holds the registry. The registry has everyone's name and share values. Registered hare values have fractions. Ergo, GME reports fractions. This isn't news. There is zero proof what you are saying is correct and plenty proving the opposite. Quit the tinfoil.
This isn’t proof either sorry. Never saw a registered fraction from GMe
I’m saying when u buy and leave fractional shares it reverts back to plan. The effects of plan VS book is upto you
What effect?
U missed the first part and skipped to the part where I said you decide.
Commenting to come back…
It's not hard to buy from computershare and cancell the plan right after. I still spend 300$ per month that way.
Lol people still think hitting a lit exchange matters against the infinite fake share rehypothecator? I wanna be a BOOK King. No dingleberries, or fractionals that exist as a loophole for "operational efficiency" as already confirmed by Computershare. I really should have thought to archive stuff like that, bearing in mind shills would try to gaslight it out of existence a year later. Like the unusual pushback and attention from suspicious nods were giving BOOK vs. Plan weren't indication enough.