And this is exactly why WSB's short squeeze theory is doomed to failure. It's not like once you beat Melvin that all of Wall Street just declares "okay, Gamestop is officially a $30 billion company and we will never bet against it again." The more WSB drives up the price, the more lucrative a short position becomes in the long run. And the more it attracts even more hedge funds into shorting. It's like a video game that has no ending, just the levels get harder and harder.
The difference with any traditional short squeeze is that there's always a catalyst that prevents the shorts from keeping their positions open. In the classic case it's a third party buying up a bunch of shares, then recalling them from the stock borrow market. In the Volkswagen squeeze it was the expiration of derivatives tied to Porsche's attempted acquisition of the company. WSB's original theory was that the gamma squeeze from options expiration would be the catalyst. But as of last Monday, those options were all deep in the money with crazy high implied vols. There's no gamma left to squeeze. WSB no longer even has a thesis, just memes.
With $3 trillion of AUM in the hedge fund industry, the only feasible end game is if WSB makes Gamestop the most valuable company in the world and criples the global financial system. Is it possible? Sure, lots of things are possible... I wouldn't bet on them.
I can virtually guarantee you that there won't be any meaningful short squeeze at current levels. The share price will be well below $100, before the short interest falls below 100%.
Another good reason to assume this wouldn't happen: the existing system will not let it.
You may argue that that is "changing the rules" or "cheating" or "being on the institutions side!", and you're right, but I would assume that the government forces all GME positions to be liquidated and halts all trading, no matter no many retail and/or institutional traders get upset by it, before allowing the collapse of the global financial system (again).
No matter what game you're playing, there are always "superior" rules, that are not written down. No matter what game you're playing, one of the over-arching rules is "no crippling the global financial system".
Why do you think that the SEC, Fed, and all aspects of the US Government would sit back and knowingly let a new financial crisis happen? It doesn't really matter who it's not fair to, it wouldn't happen. You can argue who will get the short end of the stick in the end, and why it's not fair, but that's secondary to my point.
Another good example of this is claims (which yes, have fizzled out over the last couple of days) that Melvin Capital has lost $100B dollars already, and only has $13B in assets (which, if you account for a firesale, is likely much less than that). That amount of money is pretty much the practical maximum that you could get out of Melvin Capital, even if they have done the shady and illegal things that have been alledged. At a point you can't get blood from a stone, no matter how much you feel that you are in the right.
This can go on until GME becomes part of S&P 500. At this point WSB doesn't even need to do anything because pension funds, and other institutional investors etc. will end up buying GME.
And I suppose that's because short interest isn't going down? Aside from the fact that other short-interest sources (all unofficial, by the way) shows that short interest cooled down last week. it also ignores the fact that it's possible to close short positions by transferring to another fund. I'd imagine there's plenty of funds willing to short GME at $300.
Plenty? What type of mathematical model would support a move like that? Are hedge funds predicting a government bailout? Or are they certain retailers will close on Monday?
Do you really need a mathematical proof of this? If a stock is $30 and you think the FMV is actually $20. Then you'd expect to make $10 from shorting it. If it's at $300 you'd expect to make $280. So the higher the price, the more money you expect to make from it, and the more tempting it is.
>Are hedge funds predicting a government bailout? Or are they certain retailers will close on Monday?
No not really, a sibling comment explains it better than I can: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25984493
How do we know this won’t just sputter for another week or two and then end in the most anticlimactic way possible?
Not sure what you mean by this, but I presume you're referring to options expiration. Some people, with a tenuous/non existent grasp of this stuff were running around screaming "naked shorts" and thinking that Citadel and other market makers were going to need to buy massive amounts of underlying to deliver against their short calls. But the entire reason a gamma squeeze works is because the MMs are buying in their delta as it moves against them. So that was never a very good theory. Opex also means that a lot of gamma expired, which would offset whatever opex buying actually needed to be done.
> everyone just updated their takes to Monday instead
The average Robinhooder/Twitter jockey perhaps. What actually happened is that S3 Partners, who do predictive analytics on short interest (which are officially released fairly sporadically) have suggested that their early take on Thu/Fri trading is that shorts covered a fairly large amount. Given that this whole squeeze is a momentum game requiring coordination and confidence amongst the longs, taking out a huge chunk of the fuel would likely impact the confidence of a long, which in turn ruins the coordination.
> How do we know this won’t just sputter for another week or two and then end in the most anticlimactic way possible?
We don't, it could sputter on. It could go up, down, or sideways. GME could be permanently a $300 company for all we know. Trades don't deal in absolutes, but rather probabilities.
If you have a link you'd be able to share that'd be awesome.
See the links near bottom of the page, some are subscriptions though