Moving Where are the Shares Series to Must Read Directory

00-Getting-Started/2021-05-27-GME-Explained-for-New-Apes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+GME explained for new apes
+==========================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/lawrgood](https://www.reddit.com/user/lawrgood/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/GME/comments/nm40vh/gme_explained_for_new_apes/) | 
+
+---
+
+[🔬 DD 📊](https://www.reddit.com/r/GME/search?q=flair_name%3A%22%F0%9F%94%AC%20DD%20%F0%9F%93%8A%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+If you are new to the sub or have been struggling to wrap your head around the DD (due diligence), hopefully this can make things clearer.
+
+Why is GME's price changing?
+
+Short hedge funds (SHF) sold shares that they didn't own because they thought GME would go bankrupt.
+
+Think of it like an airline. There's only so many seats on the flight. The hedgies thought the flight was going to be cancelled so they printed some fake tickets and sold those too. Then the flight didn't get cancelled. Now, because there are only so many seats available, they need to stand at the gate and buy back the extra tickets, then rip them up so no-one tries to use them. It doesn't matter if that ticket was a real one or the fake one. They need to buy it and destroy it until only the original number remains.
+
+The problem is, everyone is really excited for the trip, so no-one wants to sell. So the price of the tickets is too high for the hedgies. Short term, they are printing even more tickets to give them cash to deal with the people at the front of the queue, but all that does is make the line longer. And there is still only the original number of seats on the plane.
+
+How can they sell shares that they don't own?
+
+If SHF think a stock will go down in price, they are allowed to locate and borrow shares from other people, sell them and try to buy them back later. To keep the metaphor going, they can give you a few bucks to hold your ticket and promise to sell it to me at today's price. Then if the price goes down they can buy it from you at the cheaper price to deliver to me.
+
+What we think has happened is, they didn't just borrow your ticket, they photocopied it and lent it to someone else at the same time as they sold it to me. As in, they lent out the shares they had borrowed. Because they have a few days to sort that out before anyone notices, they usually get away with it. Normally people buy and sell all the time so it gets lost in the noise.
+
+Isn't relending shares you've borrowed illegal?
+
+Yes. You aren't allowed to sell shares that don't exist. If you see the term "naked short selling" this is what they mean. There may be some misreporting going on to cover up the fact but punishments are relatively lean historically such as a proportionally small fine. There's been a lot of regulation changes in a short period of time which may be gearing up to deal with that.
+
+What's with the massive price spikes every so often?
+
+This is probably cyclical. If you see T+21 or T+35 mentioned this is referring to the time after a trade that they have to find that share they promised to give you. Market Makers get a little longer than your standard HF. Because shares are so hard to find, it could be that SHF have to keep kicking the can down the road. In our airline metaphor, this is them printing extra tickets. T+21 and T+35 would be the day that people are arriving to collect their tickets so the SHF needs to order more from the printers. The last week of May was when these two dates overlapped so lots of pressure to find shares to deliver.
+
+If the price keeps going up, who will pay?
+
+First the SHF has to buy back what they can from the market. If they run out of cash, the clearing house auction off all their stuff and buy back with that. If that's not enough, the clearing house is on the hook because they rubber stamped the trades. They can use the cash they have but, if they run out, they can ask for cash from their members.
+
+If that isn't enough, the DTCC is on the hook for failing to keep the records straight. If they run out of cash, it's down to the government for not intervening in the fraud soon enough. When it gets to this point, trillions will have been spent buying back shares.
+
+How long can they keep this going?
+
+No-one knows for sure. It seems that SHF are running low on money already. There have been massive sell offs across all their other holdings. This is why, when the market tanks, it's usually at the same time GME is doing well.
+
+There have been lots of rule changes too. The clearing houses are asking for more collateral (the money or assets that needs to be put up as assurance in order to keep or establish these short positions). They can also ask for reports more often and can force members to close their positions sooner.
+
+How do we know the SHF haven't bought back enough shares?
+
+There may be some misreporting going on. SHF's may be mislabeling short positions as long, not reporting them at all, or putting out press releases of how they have covered their positions. The fines for doing so are relatively minor, and if it means the difference between going bankrupt or getting another day to dig themselves out of a hole, there's a lot of incentive to cheat.
+
+There's been a large increase in whistleblower awards handed out by the SEC this year for information that leads to a penalty.
+
+The push to vote will shine a light on this. There is a shareholder meeting on June 9th and many have already voted. The vote count will give an insight into how many fake shares have been sold. Even this number will be lower than the true number. Remember that not all holders can/will vote.
+
+There are also other indicators that shares are hard to get hold of. Volumes traded each day have been declining meaning fewer shares are flying back and forth between traders. Shares have been harder to borrow than they were before.
+
+What's the company like?
+
+GME have had some great news lately. The incoming chairman is an e-commerce legend (Ryan Cohen) who is putting together a team to take the company into the future. He's already built a successful e-com company (Chewy) and is very customer focused with an eye for quality.
+
+The latest news is that they are developing an NFT to be built using Ethereum. This will allow for digital games to be traded in and resold. An NFT is an encrypted record of who owns a specific digital asset. When you buy a game download, a corresponding digital coin would be minted that says it belongs to you. If you want to sell it on, you could transfer ownership of that coin just like you do with bitcoin or Ethereum now.
+
+They also have no debt and $500+ million dollars in the bank.
+
+None of this is investment advice. Do not take advice from internet strangers. I am in no way qualified to give it. If you think I've got any part wrong, call me out in the comments. If you think I need to add something, ask. If you have more questions, I will try to answer but, I repeat, I know almost nothing.

01-Must-Read/House-of-Cards-by-atobitt/2021-05-27-House-of-Cards-Parts-2-and-3-AUDIO.md

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+House of Cards Part 2 & 3 AUDIO
+===============================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/GoryAmos](https://www.reddit.com/user/GoryAmos/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nlzhrr/house_of_cards_part_2_3_audio/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Discussion 🦍](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Discussion%20%F0%9F%A6%8D%22&restrict_sr=1)
+I'm one of those apes who needs to listen to the words while they read the words so I am making recordings of [u/atobitt](https://www.reddit.com/u/atobitt/)'s newest additions to the House of Cards trilogy. I figure I'm not the only ape who needs to hear stuff for it to make sense, so I'm sharing my recordings here. Please forgive any flubs and corrections of flubs - I'm reading it all in my head for the first time as I'm reading it all out loud.
+
+The mp3 for Part 2 is...
+
+The mp3 for Part 3 will be posted first thing in the AM, probably during pre-market. I'll update this post with the link when it's done.
+
+UPDATE: omg APES BROKE DROPBOX. I had no idea this would be this popular. My account's been suspended lol. I'm adding a feed to my libsyn podcast account and posting the links through that. Stay tuned, replacement link will be posted shortly
+
+DOUBLE UPDATE: This is now officially a podcast. Takes some time for it to show up on all the podcast apps, but in the meantime you can listen directly on libsyn here: [https://superstonkddaudio.libsyn.com](https://superstonkddaudio.libsyn.com/)
+
+I'll update again once Part 3 and Part 1 are done.
+
+THRUPDATE (that's a portmanteau i just coined for "third update"): Part 3 is LIVE: <https://superstonkddaudio.libsyn.com/house-of-cards-pt-3-by-uatobitt>
+
+The podcast name is SUPERSTONKDDAUDIO bc i'm an Ape and I forgot to use spaces.
+
+Spotify and Apple Podcast feeds are being worked on. Spotify should be live later tonight but Apple usually takes about a week to process a new podcast.
+
+I was so nervous to post the first recording last night - would Apes laugh? would Apes make fun? But I was nervous for naught! Apes support! Apes rejoice!
+
+So grateful for this community!
+
+I LOVE THIS STONK.

01-Must-Read/Sun-Never-Sets-on-Citadel-by-swede-child-of-mine/2021-06-18-The-Sun-Never-Sets-on-Citadel-Part-I.md

@@ -0,0 +1,232 @@
+The Sun Never Sets On Citadel -- Part 1
+=======================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/swede_child_of_mine](https://www.reddit.com/user/swede_child_of_mine/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o2xz48/the_sun_never_sets_on_citadel_part_1/) | 
+
+---
+
+[DD 👨‍🔬](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22DD%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%94%AC%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+[Hello Superstonk](https://i.redd.it/y39nj0kvo2671.gif)
+
+Preface
+
+I became bothered by a question a few months ago. The GME saga started with MAJOR fight in the financial landscape between Team Citadel vs. Team Other (Blackrock, Vanguard, etc.), and Superstonk is here now because of Team Other getting Ryan Cohen on the board at GME, then "retail" landed on the scene, now Apes, etc. But this ONE question always bothered me:
+
+> What did Citadel do to piss everyone off? WHY would they want to give Citadel the most epic beat down in financial history?
+
+So I spent some time looking into that because it *must* be good and...
+
+*HO BOY, GET YOUR POPCORN, I'VE GOT SOME GOODS TO SHARE WITH YOU AND IT'S GONNA BE JUICY*
+
+* * * * *
+
+Note: this is a strategy post. [u/atobitt](https://www.reddit.com/u/atobitt/) and [u/criand](https://www.reddit.com/u/criand/) focus on macro topics about Citadel's structure in the overall market, but this series is going to be about financial industry strategy. I have a master's degree in business and specialize in strategy and operations. While I don't have direct experience in finance per se, I really enjoy finding the "hows" and "whys" behind what businesses do.
+
+Also, I'll give shout outs to the Apes who did relevant DD before this. Parts of this are my own discovery, parts are building on the work of those who came before :) This is an overall picture.
+
+Symbol indicators:
+
+-   [] - request for link to relevant DD ([r/Superstonk](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/) DD posts or legitimate sources)
+
+* * * * *
+
+1.0: Introduction
+
+The Price of $GME is artificial. Prior posts ([1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/mn0q9q/theory_all_the_pieces_pt_1_the_anatomy_of_the/), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ms9z0n/theory_all_the_pieces_pt_2_the_deep_end_of_the/)) have covered how Citadel and other players in the market have greedily, illegally conspired to change the price of stocks for their own profit. While Citadel's criminal price manipulation of GME represents a failed scheme to fabricate shares for profit, this was only a small corner of a much larger body of activity. *Citadel's overall activity shows a plan to monopolize markets worldwide and control securities transactions at the exchange level*.
+
+Yep.
+
+Buckle up :)
+
+* * * * *
+
+Key Term
+
+Market Maker (or "MM") -- a special role in a stock exchanges around the world. An MM's primary role is to provide liquidity, or "to make sure there are shares available to buy if people want them" as well as "make sure there is a buyer if people want to sell." Exchanges need it: liquidity makes for easy buying and selling.
+
+-   A MM is the intermediary for almost any securities transaction. It is positioned between the exchange and the brokers/dealers/funds that do not have access to the exchange, or they use the MM to do the buying work for them, lol. Or the MM is positioned on the other side of a transaction, supplying the securities in demand.
+
+-   A MM is always in a position of risk. They are constantly in a place to be on the losing side of a transaction if they "guess" wrong.
+
+-   Note: Citadel has many branches, but it's two major branches are its hedge fund and its MM. I will be referring only to its MM activity.
+
+* * * * *
+
+1.1: Plus Ultra
+
+Take a moment to marvel at how Citadel has installed themselves in [so many markets around the world](https://www.fi-desk.com/market-structure-meet-the-new-market-makers/). They are Market Makers and/or liquidity providers in nearly every major exchange on earth: (*Note: my undersrtanding of a liquidity provider is that it's a bit like a less-powerful MM*)
+
+[Citadel Securities own splash page](https://i.redd.it/tolp2scxfw571.png)
+
+-   US/North America: NYSE, NASDAQ, CBOE (not even going to bother with links here, you know they're there), [Toronto](https://www.tsx.com/trading/toronto-stock-exchange/order-types-and-features/market-maker-program/market-makers-list?id=5)
+
+-   Europe: [London/Ireland](https://www.financemagnates.com/forex/brokers/citadels-technology-arm-posts-30-decline-in-2019-revenue/), Amsterdam[], Frankfurt[]
+
+-   Asia/Pacific: Hong Kong, [Singapore](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-citadel-singapore/citadel-securities-hedge-fund-citadel-to-open-new-office-in-singapore-idUSKBN25K08J), Sydney [], Shanghai []
+
+-   (Apologies on missing links, I've saved so many links through this whole drama that I can't find some of my sources anymore. And this is not the full list, this is only what I could put together for this post.)
+
+Citadel is truly an intmidating company based on the position it occupies in markets worldwide.
+
+1.2: E Pluribus Unum
+
+So WHY has Citadel strived to achieve such a large footprint across the globe?
+
+*Because there is a flaw in the markets across the world: it depends on Market Makers.*
+
+-   Exchanges are set up to have several Market Makers providing liquidity.
+
+-   So the Market Maker has responsibilities for supply and demand of a given security.
+
+-   It's an essential service so exchanges empower MMs with exclusive powers and responsibilities.
+
+Take a look at the exclusive powers the NYSE gives its DMMs (like a "Super" Market Maker): [From the NYSE DMM page](https://i.redd.it/n16pu83yiw571.png)
+
+-   MMs have *Superpowers* and wield immense control over securities.
+
+-   Exchanges rely on incentives for winning bids (coupons) as a way of creating competition and fair prices at the exchange.
+
+MMs are intended to be balanced by competing against each other
+
+-   ...so that the customers (brokers) can get the best value, and the Market Makers are financially rewarded for their service...
+
+-   ...but that means the MMs are competing for as many transactions as possible on the exchange. As much as their risk can allow.
+
+So the better the MMs are at managing risk, the more control they have over the exchange (because they capture more of the transactions)
+
+-   And there are advantages for MMs who perform better and capture more volume -- they can leverage the volume to achieve better prices and capture even *more* transactions.
+
+-   You've probably seen this chart, but it shows the size that MMs have become: [Citadel is almost as big as the CBOE -- the main options exchange for the US](https://i.redd.it/idkn9cchpn571.png)
+
+-   (Citadel, Virtu, and G1 are all MMs.)
+
+-   The important part about that graphic is the NYSE, NASDAQ, and CBOE volumes *include the transactions with Citadel and Virtu*.
+
+The MMs are becoming (or already are) bigger than the exchanges themselves. And the exchanges depend on them.
+
+-   Furthermore, the exchange is limited -- to a certain location, structure, set of regluations, list of securities, etc. Almost all exchanges are for profit.
+
+-   But if the exchange provides no security that can't be bought on another exchange, then the exchange needs to compete on best price - or else it's revenue goes away.
+
+-   And exactly *who* at the exchange offers the best price?
+
+-   But a Market Maker is free to engage in multiple exchanges. So if a financial product is available in one exchange, but not another, and an MM is in both exchanges, then the Market Maker can offer it because it a separate entity (if it legally can).
+
+-   And the Market Maker is free offer their best price at multiple exchanges, or even directly.
+
+What advantage does the exchange itself have? They can't provide *anything* that the Market Makers themselves can't/don't provide.
+
+-   *As an analogy, if you are used to shopping for separate items across several stores -- food at the farmers market, clothes at the mall, etc. -- a company like Amazon or WalMart will have an advantage by selling the same items for a comparable price in one convenient place.*
+
+It's "malls" vs. "Target/WalMart/Amazon/Costco" all over. We all know who won that one.
+
+1.3: Man o' War
+
+I mentioned "volume" earlier -- that is going to be key here.
+
+-   Market Making is already very risky, but the size of the established players make it prohibitive for new entrants. A new MM would need significant advantages to compete against Citadel, Susquehanna, and Virtu who will have superior positioning, expertise, technology, market understanding, funding, risk tolerance...
+
+> "The way to think about Citadel is as the Amazon of trading," says Spencer Mindlin, a capital markets technology analyst at Aite Group. In an industry that relies heavily on technology, Citadel has forged ahead by playing "a game of scale. You reach a point where it's impossible for others to compete," he says. [emphasis mine] - [Quartz](https://qz.com/1969532/how-ken-griffins-citadel-transformed-financial-markets/)
+
+Backstory:
+
+-   In the early 2010's Ken tired to make Citadel an investment bank and failed (lol)....
+
+-   ...but it ended up being one of those "lemons to lemonade" things for him. Because Ken realized that other MMs were *banks*, which were a major disadvantage. You see, *Banks* were encumbered with "regulations", "capital requirements" and stupid "investors". But Market Makers didn't need a bank, so they didn't need to have those pesky constraints.
+
+-   Then Ken stopped trying to be a bank. Which meant he could capture the MM market.
+
+-   Citadel went on to buy out competing Market Maker assets from [Citi](https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/05/16/citadel-securities-buys-citi-market-making-assets/84437638/), [Goldman Sachs/IMC](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/citadel-securities-reaches-preliminary-agreement-to-acquire-dmm-unit-from-imc-301149075.html), and [KCG](https://www.tradersmagazine.com/departments/brokerage/citadel-purchases-kcg-dmm-business-becomes-1-on-nyse/) to grow his market share and reduce compeition.
+
+-   And now, the Market Maker field is NOT competitive. The number of DMMs in NYSE has decreased over the years.
+
+-   Citadel has heavily "leveled-up" and is bar none THE biggest player on the field.
+
+This is why Citadel is in so many exchanges. Successful practices can be copied from one exchange to the next, with market advantages and rewards that scale. Why shouldn't Citadel be a MM in every major exchange on earth?
+
+-   But you realize what this means, right?
+
+*The exchanges have become commodities.* They are necessary for fulfilling their role as a securites selling venue, but have no unique value to themselves.
+
+> "We already have 16 stock exchanges, over 30 ATSs and handful of market maker SDPs, do we really need the banks to further fragment liquidity?" [emphasis mine] - [Themis Trading](https://blog.themistrading.com/2020/12/14434/)
+
+The TRUE value to the market is a firm that spans multiple exchanges and offers the breadth of securities available at competitive prices.
+
+1.4: The Commonwealth
+
+*But, but -- what about compeition? What about Virtu, G1, and the MMs in other countries? I thought you said this was a cOmPEtITivE field.*
+
+It's true, Virtu & G1 do "compete" against Citadel. But they have an... "interesting" relationship which prompts some theories and requires further investigation.
+
+-   First, Citadel needs to maintain the appearance of a free market to avoid antitrust lawsuits. They also need other Market Makers to offload the transactions that they are unwilling to take. A duopoloy or even triopoly is fine as long as they control the market.
+
+-   Second, from Virtu's perspective (*they're the largest competitor so I'll use them here*), it doesn't make sense to go head-to-head directly with Citadel on transactions -- Citadel has better positioning and a technological edge.
+
+-   And directly competing with a superior opponent would be expensive for Virtu. However, they would stand to profit from joining with Citadel if they took the same positions as them.
+
+-   And wouldn't you know it, Apes have discovered that Virtu and Citadel are doing the *exact same things* across many tickers. Here are 2 famous ones: [MAX-D](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nyxs1f/learn_from_the_past_when_they_didnt_care_to_hide/), [GME](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nr6urb/i_look_up_top_brokers_for_gme_year_to_date_and/) [Any more Apes want to do asset comparison between Citadel & Virtu? CALLING SUPERSTONKS MOST QUANTED] (s/o to [u/BadassTrader](https://www.reddit.com/u/BadassTrader/), [u/JustBeingPunny](https://www.reddit.com/u/JustBeingPunny/), [u/Sti8man7](https://www.reddit.com/u/Sti8man7/))
+
+-   That said, Virtu could still compete *indirectly* - they would need to find a niche where they could gain an advantage and separate themselves from Citadel...
+
+-   ...and oh look Virtu seems [very focused on client experience](https://s21.q4cdn.com/422114427/files/doc_presentations/2020/09/Virtu-Financial-Presentation-Sept-2020-Draft-v3.pdf), where Citadel is focused on product and market position.
+
+So Virtu is disincentivized to directly compete against Citadel, and is incentivized to coordinate with and complement Citadel.
+
+Monopoly much?
+
+1.5: The Crown Jewel
+
+If you STILL believe that being a Market Maker IS competitive and that exchanges are NOT commoditized, and that Virtu and Citadel are taking the same positions for non-collusive reasons ("*Exchanges are the pumping heart of a free economy! Of course EXCHANGES have control and NOT the Market Makers, the Market Makers are just making the plays they see are winners*"), and you need even more convincing... I have bad news.
+
+About 9 months ago the MEMX exchange opened.
+
+*Why is that a big deal? Who opened the exchange?* [*Let's check the MEMX website...*](https://memx.com/)
+
+-   [Oh.](https://i.redd.it/ujeiloi5dw571.png)
+
+-   Citadel and Virtu (and some other players you might recognize) *OPENED THEIR OWN EXCHANGE.*
+
+-   [Yeah.](https://i.redd.it/0kxh46xwcw571.jpg)
+
+"*But, but -- they wouldn't open their own exchange to profit at the expense of the market, would they?*"
+
+-   [*On the MEMX own splash page*](https://i.redd.it/gff2fr1edw571.png)
+
+-   "*MEMX will represent the interests of its founders*" - MEMX.com
+
+-   So, founders first, everybody else after. FROM. THEIR. OWN. FUCKING. SPLASH. PAGE.
+
+"*But, but -- maybe it's just a small side thing and it's not really going anywhere?*"
+
+-   [Right. Yeah. Sure.](https://i.redd.it/owqyk8kxdw571.png)
+
+"*But, but -- wouldn't that piss off the other exchanges? They would want to attack the MEMX founders in some way, right?*"
+
+-   [Yup.](https://i.redd.it/hknpksgdew571.png)
+
+Exchanges have become so commoditized and Market Makers have such an entrenched advantage that the dominant Market Makers have opened their own exchange, MEMX, whose primary purpose is to serve their interests at the expense of other exchanges.
+
+"Free market."
+
+TL;DR
+
+Citadel is/was moving to monopolize securities transactions at the exchange level.
+
+-   Market Makers have the most control over transactions at exchanges.
+
+-   Citadel is the largest Market Maker across exchanges worldwide (*can't find the sauce []*).
+
+-   Citadel has more power than the exchanges do, offering more products, more ways to purchase them, in more venues than the exchanges.
+
+-   Citadel has even started its own exchange in September 2020, which is growing rapidly.
+
+-   MM Competition is deterred from directly competing with Citadel - they have too much influence, and competitors are incentivized to coordinate with Citadel, not compete.
+
+-   The number of MMs have decreased in major exchanges while Citadel's market share is growing.
+
+Structurally speaking, Citadel is in a position to directly control the price of many securities and transactions at the exchange level.
+
+And that's not even all of it. Part 2 coming soon...

01-Must-Read/Sun-Never-Sets-on-Citadel-by-swede-child-of-mine/2021-07-03-The-Sun-Never-Sets-on-Citadel-Part-2.md

@@ -0,0 +1,449 @@
+The Sun Never Sets on Citadel -- Part 2
+=======================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/swede_child_of_mine](https://www.reddit.com/user/swede_child_of_mine/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/od4bb1/the_sun_never_sets_on_citadel_part_2/) | 
+
+---
+
+[DD 👨‍🔬](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22DD%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%94%AC%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+[Part 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o2xz48/the_sun_never_sets_on_citadel_part_1/)
+
+Apes, I'm stunned. I've rewritten this post several times because of what I've discovered. I haven't seen it anywhere else on Superstonk.
+
+All of this is intertwined. I won't be able to get to all of the pieces of Citadel in this part so this DD will continue... and build... into Part 3.
+
+This is a fucking ride.
+
+* * * * *
+
+Preface, part 1: Kudos
+
+First I'd like to follow up on some key critiques from [Part 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o2xz48/the_sun_never_sets_on_citadel_part_1/) and give kudos:.
+
+-   EU MMs -- MAJOR kudos to [u/NoughtyNought](https://www.reddit.com/u/NoughtyNought/) who did digging on finding [the list of EU MMs](https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/list_of_market_makers_and_primary_dealers.pdf).
+
+-   DE markets -- MAJOR kudos to [u/LNhamburg](https://www.reddit.com/u/LNhamburg/) who has been looking into European markets since February and even followed up on my post with an [awesome post of their own](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o3c7ar/a_european_footprint_after_reading_the_sun_never/).
+
+But first, I need to apologize. I erroneously said Citadel was an MM across the EU in Part 1. I found conflicting sources, and Citadel *is* an MM in Ireland, but I should have clarified. I'll explain more on "how" and "why" I missed this later, but props to these Apes above who did their Due Due Diligience, I am in your debt. (*"To err is human..."*)
+
+-   Several users also pointed out: MEMX lists several "friendly" institutions, including BlackRock and Fidelity, as founders, not just Citadel and Virtu.
+
+-   This is true! Kudos to the several users who broght this up: [u/mattlukinhapilydrunk](https://www.reddit.com/u/mattlukinhapilydrunk/), [u/Robin_Squeeze](https://www.reddit.com/u/Robin_Squeeze/)
+
+So what should we make of Citadel being at MEMX? *Does Citadel really control MEMX -- or even monopolize the market -- if Blackrock, Virtu, and Fidelity are there too?*
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.0: Introduction
+
+The price of $GME is artificial. Prior posts have shown how $GME is being illegally manipulated by key players to the financial system, namely Citadel. These companies abuse their legitimate privileges to profit themselves at the expense of the market and investors. But it goes much deeper: Citadel is now positioned to do more than just monopolize securities transactions. Citadel is positioned to BE the market for securities transactions.
+
+Wait, what?
+
+Buckle up.
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.1: KING, I
+
+Citadel's influence on the market is all due to one quality: Volume.
+
+Volume is king.
+
+-   There is no way to understate it. Remember [this chart?](https://i.redd.it/idkn9cchpn571.png) Citadel and Virtu's combined volume being larger than ANY exchange is only the *beginning*, it's our *starting point*.
+
+Do you want to know why it's taking so long to MOASS?
+
+-   Look at this [tweet estimating the fees the MMs make off of volume.](https://i.redd.it/0ruptccy0u871.png) - [sauce](https://twitter.com/EricBalchunas/status/1354775322445701128)
+
+-   MMs made an estimated $350M+ in four days. January 27 (the "sneeze") [volume was 24.8 billion equities traded](https://www.marketsmedia.com/us-equity-trading-volume-reaches-record/) for a single day.
+
+-   (we now know the MMs also took the full income of the shares they sold since they were selling pledged shares and never delivered)
+
+-   This illustrates how the MMs generate revenue off of any volume. They do this with nearly any security or transaction they make a market for.
+
+*So the same activities that empower Apes to create the MOASS also provide the MMs with more resources to prolong the arrival of MOASS.*
+
+What a fuckin' paradox.
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.2: Kneel before the crown
+
+Volume is king. Once a firm hits a critical mass of transactions, it become impossible NOT to deal with that firm. For example:
+
+Exchanges
+
+-   The NYSE & Nasdaq view Citadel/MEMX as a threat. Look at this article posted on the Nasdaq website [regarding MEMX](https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/the-answer-to-memx-2020-07-06):
+
+> "MEMX will provide market makers with the ability to bypass the exchanges entirely." (*lol, so pissy*)
+
+*(credit to *[u/Fantasybroke](https://www.reddit.com/u/Fantasybroke/)* for their *[*awesome comment*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/o2xz48/the_sun_never_sets_on_citadel_part_1/h2936st/)*)*
+
+-   As much as these exchanges might be "frenemies" with Citadel, they still need to function as businesses.
+
+-   This pandemic posed a major issue for the NYSE: *how could they do IPOs* -- a critical function for exchanges -- *when all traders were remote?*
+
+-   They relied on Citadel. [Nine times](https://www.businessinsider.com/how-citadel-securities-dmms-are-handling-ipos-remotely-2020-5).
+
+-   There was *no other firm* that had the capability to execute. Only Citadel.
+
+Brokers
+
+-   Awhile back there was a post about how a broker sent notice to clients saying in effect that they wouldn't know how to source their transactions in the event of Citadel defaulting. Users should expect delays in transactions if that happened.
+
+-   (*eToro? WeBull? Schwab? TDA?* *Superstonk I need the source, help![]*)
+
+-   If confirmed, this implies major brokerages are becoming or already are reliant on Citadel for basic, essential functions.
+
+[WHAT. THE. FUCK.](https://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/tom-delonge-wtf1.gif)
+
+Let me it say again another way: we are at a point where MAJOR BROKERAGES AND EVEN EXCHANGES DO NOT KNOW HOW TO FUNCTION WITHOUT CITADEL.
+
+But it's bigger than that -- it's not just key players in the market that are reliant on Citadel.
+
+But first.
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.3: The Four Corners
+
+> *We... manufacture money.*\
+> *-- Ken Griffin*
+
+That Ken Griffin quote stood out to me, I have a background in operations with experience in manufacturing & logistics. "Manufacture" implies certainty of output, given the correct inputs. Looking at Citadel's actions in the context of manufacturing - supply and demand -- we can reverse engineer the strategy. Understand how we got here. Let's go. (*This is important groundwork, but if you need to skip you can jump to "2.4: Corner 3: Buyer"*)
+
+Overview
+
+You can think of the financial industry as one that manufactures "transactions", in the same way that the automotive industry manufactures "vehicles" of all varieties.
+
+To manufacture a transaction requires a buyer, a seller, a product, and is produced in a venue (a.k.a. a "Transaction factory").
+
+-   The national "supply" comes from the collection of the different "factories": exchanges, ATS's (Dark Pools), SDP's (single-company terminals), etc. Each of the venues produces a slice of the overall Transactions pie chart.
+
+-   Supply of "raw materials" (lol) - buyers and sellers with products - flow into the various factories. Exchanges have been the primary "Transaction factories" for centuries. NYSE and Nasdaq still produce a large portion of US transactions every year.
+
+-   These exchanges employ Market Makers as a permanent stand-in buyer, seller, or provider of products at the exchanges -- whatever is needed. Exchanges charter MMs to provide the missing pieces to complete the transactions, and provide the MMs with special abilities to do so. Because exchanges benefit from having MMs.
+
+So...
+
+if you were a Market Maker, and you already provide the raw materials for buyer, seller, and product pieces of "production," what would you want to do next if you wanted to grow?
+
+You would want a venue. Then you could manufacture transactions independently.
+
+So guess what Citadel wants to do?
+
+But -- is Citadel is ready? Do they really have enough Products, Sellers, and Buyers to supply a "factory" of their own?
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.2: Corner 1: PRODUCT
+
+Product is about range. Range of available products is CRITICAL feature demanded by clients, as well as the necessary volume.
+
+Storytime:
+
+-   A few months back a reddit user commented about their experience working at a financial firm (*for the love of everything I can't find the comment now -- Superstonk help again!?[]*). I don't remember the username, probably something like "stocksniffer42" or whatevs, lol. Let's call him "Greg."
+
+-   Greg would occasionally need to make securities transactions at a nearby terminal, a couple times a week. Price wasn't really important to Greg.
+
+-   But what WAS significant was availability. Greg had providers he preferred because they had what he needed. When they didn't it was super inconvenient for him because THEN Greg would have to search through enough providers to find what he needed. The more "availability" that a certain provider offered, the more likely Greg used them.
+
+-   This is pretty much the Amazon/WalMart/Target strategy. You're more likely to buy from them since they have everything. Even if it's not the lowest price.
+
+Exchanges have a limited offering -- CBOE doesn't offer the same products as NYSE and vice-versa.
+
+Huh, look at that. Citadel is a MM for multiple exchanges - CBOE, NYSE, and NASDAQ. Looks like Citadel can offer options, securities, bonds, [swaps](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-01/ken-griffin-gets-redemption-in-swaps-market-once-ruled-by-banks), and pretty much [any product under the sun](https://www.citadel.com/disclosures/).
+
+Seems like they have "Product" pretty well sorted. What about the other pieces?
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.3: Corner 2: SELLER
+
+Generally, Sellers are interested in only PRICE. However, price is the LEAST important aspect of all demand, believe it or not. (*Note: we'll assume some interests overlap between buyer and seller because the same party can alternate roles.*)
+
+Price is supported market-wide by a sense of trust and pre-arranged transaction costs:
+
+-   Price is set nationally by the NBBO -- [the National Best Bid and Offer](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nbbo.asp). A national price range that establishes trust with buyers and sellers. Everybody abides by it. [Nobody will be scamming anyone on price in the NBBO](https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/bartlett_mccrary_latency2017.pdf). Because...
+
+-   Venues (like exchanges) don't make money off price, they make it from member fees, or sub-penny fees.
+
+-   Product prices can vary quickly, so it's somewhat relative. Precision pricing isn't a concern for the vast majority of non-HFT trades.
+
+-   Buyers will proceed if the price is within their acceptable range and doesn't have an undue markup.
+
+-   Market Makers make very little money on individual transactions, usually.
+
+-   (We individual retail investors may want maximum profit through a single transaction (**cough** DIAMOND HANDS **cough**)... but not Market Makers.)
+
+However, institutional sellers have an additional price agenda:
+
+-   Volume sellers don't want to flood the market of their given security, dropping the price right as they sell. They want to offload the asset in a price-friendly way.
+
+-   Strategic sellers don't want the marketplace to know that they changed a position, they want to keep their transactions private.
+
+These sellers would want a venue that won't affect the public price and remains private.
+
+So price agenda is relative - it's up to each party to decide their interests. At the point of transaction price is either pre-negotiated (for volume sells), or else *precise* price does not matter for non-HFT transactions. (*Would you sell $XYZ at $220.05 but NOT at $220.02?*)
+
+Strategically, if Citadel wanted to increase its volume of sellers it would need:
+
+-   the ability to absorb large volumes of securities (i.e. buy a lot at a competitive price)
+
+-   source a large volume of buyers to match with the sellers.
+
+-   have a private transaction venue to attract sellers of any volume
+
+Interesting. Seems like Citadel is probably already doing a lot of this activity through the exchanges or Dark Pools they might be connected to.
+
+How about the last piece?
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.4: Corner 3: BUYER
+
+A Buyer is interested in one thing: EASE OF ACCESS.
+
+*Like Greg, a buyer wants easy access to a range of securities, acceptable prices, and easy access to to sellers.*
+
+Citadel can be all of these and/or provide them, but, wait --
+
+How exactly can clients BUY from Citadel?
+
+*Maybe clients can buy from Citadel on the public exchanges?*
+
+-   True, but Citadel could still lose the bid. Or pay additional fees, or lose on the bid-ask spread.
+
+-   Also, that's no good for Citadel. It means the clients are coming to the exchanges, which are the venues Citadel is trying to compete against.
+
+*Perhaps their target clients are institutions that want the kind of lower-cost, lower-visibility option that a Dark Pool offers? Can clients buy from Citadel on one of the many Dark Pools/ATSs?*
+
+-   Yes, but the Dark Pools can be "pinged" by HFTs to reveal positions and interest. Someone else could front run the transaction.
+
+-   And again, the venue would be making the transaction, not Citadel.
+
+*So why doesn't Citadel do their own Dark Pool then? Why should the US's largest Market Maker pay to use someone else's Dark Pool?*
+
+-   Okay, let's check if Citadel Has their own ATS. Hmmm... that's weird. There is [no ATS registered to Citadel](https://www.sec.gov/files/data/alternative-trading-system-ats-list/atslist053121.pdf). *Anywhere.*
+
+-   (Dark Pools have to [register through form ATS-N](https://www.sec.gov/divisions/marketreg/form-ats-n-filings.htm) due to SEC regulation ATS)
+
+*So if Citadel has to compete for buyers in exchanges, and they pay to go through Dark Pools, then why, or how, do clients buy from Citadel? How does Citadel get its volume?*
+
+Easy.
+
+Citadel Connect.
+
+*Wait, what?*
+
+[Citadel Connect](https://i.redd.it/v35705zpru871.png).
+
+That's right. You've been in these subs for 6 months and you haven't heard of Citadel Connect? Citadel's "not a Dark Pool" Dark Pool? (That's not by coincidence, btw).
+
+[*MOTHERFUCKER WHAT?!?!*](https://i.redd.it/wy0fpnnb0u871.jpg)
+
+Citadel Connect is an SDP, not an ATS. The difference is the reporting requirements. SDPs do not have to make the disclosures that either the exchanges or even the ATSs (a.k.a. Dark Pools) have to.
+
+-   (FINRA once took a look at [regulating SDPs](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/finra/2019/34-86315.pdf), but decided [not to](https://i.redd.it/328lgq1s1v871.png)).
+
+[Yep.](https://media0.giphy.com/media/UvtKiyeWYEhRC/giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47d9juouou9jrbshblwc2adl6q17tv6g424rp2kvoi&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
+
+There is a laughable amount of search results for Citadel Connect on Google. There are no images of it that I could find. I believe it is an API-type feed that plugs into existing order systems. But I couldn't tell you based on searches. I found no documentation -- just allusions to its features.
+
+-   So when the SEC regulated ATSs in 2015, Ken shut down Citadel's actual Dark Pool, [Apogee](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-citadel-darkpool/citadel-securities-to-close-apogee-dark-pool-sources-idUSKBN0MN22Q20150327), in order to avoid visibility altogether. Citadel started routing transactions [through Citadel Connect](https://www.reuters.com/article/citadel-darkpool/citadel-sees-volume-surge-in-its-citadel-connect-dark-pool-idUSL2N0LQ17H20140221) instead.
+
+-   Citadel Connect doesn't meet the definition of an ATS. There is no competition -- no bids, no intent of interest, no disclosures -- nothing. It is one order type from one company.
+
+-   Order type is IOC (Immediate Or Cancel), and the output is binary -- a type of "yes" or "no". You deal only with Citadel.
+
+-   *"Citadel, here's 420 shares of $DOOK, will you buy at $6.969?"*
+
+-   "YES" --> *transaction complete*, or
+
+-   "NO" --> *end transaction*
+
+-   Since it's private, the only information that comes out of the transaction is what's reported to the tape, 10 seconds after the transaction.
+
+*Okay, so you're just buying from a single company, that doesn't seem like a big deal. And aren't there are *[*a lot of other SDPs*](https://blog.themistrading.com/2020/12/14434/)*? So why is this a problem?*
+
+By itself? Not a problem. Buyers and sellers love it, I'm sure.
+
+However...
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.5: KING, II
+
+Volume is king.
+
+Citadel does such volume that it is considered a "securities wholesaler", one of only a few in the US. Like Costco, or any wholesale business, it deals in bulk. But Citadel can deal in small transactions, too.
+
+Citadel has a massive network of sales connections through its Market Maker presence at US exchanges. It capitalizes on the relationships through Citadel Connect, turning them into clients.
+
+-   Citadel has a market advantage with its volume of clients.
+
+Citadel Connect integrates into existing ATSs and client dashboards (here's an example from [BNP Paribas](https://i.redd.it/dojfd7lyru871.png) - [sauce](https://globalmarkets.cib.bnpparibas/app/uploads/sites/4/2021/05/execution-venues-us-version.pdf)). Like Greg's testimonial, I suspect it's easy for just about any financial firm to deal directly with Citadel.
+
+-   Citadel has an ease of access advantage.
+
+And given Citadel's wide range of products it conducts business in and is a Market Maker for, I'm sure Citadel is an attractive option for just about anyone in the financial industry who wants to buy or sell a financial product of any kind. Competitive prices. Whether in bulk or in small batches. Whether privately or publicly. However frequently, or whatever the dollar amount might be.
+
+-   Citadel has a privacy and pricing advantage.
+
+Like Amazon, WalMart, and Target, Citadel is offering *everything*: a wide range of products, nearly any volume, effortless ease of access, the additional powers of an MM, and a nearly ubiquitous presence. Doing so lets Citadel capture a massive amount of market share. So much that it is prohibitive to other players, relegating them to smaller niche offerings and/or a smaller footprint.
+
+-   Citadel has market presence advantage.
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.6: The Final Piece: VENUE
+
+So guess what Citadel wants to do?
+
+But... do you get it? Have you figured it out?
+
+Citadel doesn't need to get a venue.
+
+Citadel *IS* the venue.
+
+Citadel is [internalizing](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/internalization.asp) a substantial volume of transactions from the marketplace. It's conducting the transactions inside its own walls, acting AS the venue in itself.
+
+Said another way, Citadel is "black box"-ing the transaction market, and it's doing so at a [massive volume](https://i.redd.it/drdcsznn0u871.png) - [sauce](https://www.rblt.com/market-reports/let-there-be-light-us-edition-24).
+
+-   *Okay, so it sounds like Citadel is just buying and selling from multiple parties, and making a profit off the spread. Every firm does that, though, right? It's just arbitrage, it doesn't make them an exchange.*
+
+Citadel is offering the features of an exchange, or even benefiting from existing exchanges (i.e. the NBBO, MM powers across multiple exchanges) without any of the regulations of an exchange. It can offer more products, more easily, more quickly, more cheaply, and more privately than an exchange could. It's so non-competitive that IEX - yeah, the exchange - [wrote about the decline of exchanges](https://medium.com/boxes-and-lines/the-rising-tide-of-broker-costs-and-the-shrinking-pool-of-competitors-40d4d389e59a):
+
+> "...trends of the past decade have seen a sharp increase in costs to trade on exchanges, a sharp decrease in the number of exchange broker members, and a steady erosion in the ability of smaller or new firms to compete for business."
+
+It is doing this at the same time that brokers and even exchanges are relying on Citadel more and more. And, by the way - *why are they so reliant on Citadel in the first place?* Glad you asked.
+
+Volume is limited. So the more volume Citadel takes...
+
+-   ...the less volume there is for the competition.
+
+-   ...the more reliant the other players are on Citadel for buying and selling.
+
+-   ...the less profit for competitors, so the more expensive their services have to be.
+
+This "rich-get-richer" advantage is known as a "virtuous cycle" (hah -- "virtuous") -- one of the most sought-after business advantages.
+
+Citadel is capturing and internalizing more and more transactions, driving up costs for exchanges and making the competition smaller and smaller while also making them more dependent on Citadel to conduct critical business operations.
+
+"Free market"
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.7: "...to forgive, devine."
+
+Apes, I told you I would follow up on "how" and "why" I missed on Citadel not being an MM across the EU.
+
+The EU marketplace is structured differently than the American markets, with different rules and roles. I knew Citadel had a massive presence in the EU, I just missed the role. I think you can put together [why](https://i.redd.it/axa0gpvap1971.png).
+
+* * * * *
+
+2.8: TL;DR
+
+Citadel is moving beyond monopolizing the MM role, it has captured a massive portion of all securities transactions and is moving them off-exchange. For an undisclosed portion of transactions, Citadel IS the market.
+
+-   Citadel positioned itself to provide every piece required to provide transactions -- buyers, sellers, product -- at an unrivaled scale, allowing it to be a wholesale internalizer.
+
+-   ("Internalizing" here is shorthand for "one company acting as a private exchange without exchange regulations or oversight").
+
+-   Citadel does this through an SDP called "Citadel Connect," which is a type of Dark Pool that doesn't require disclosure.
+
+-   Citadel's overall volume and market position are prohibitive to new competition and also drives away all but the largest competitors.
+
+-   Even exchanges are losing volume to Citadel's OTC market share, threatening the exchanges' position in the market.
+
+Citadel is capturing more and more of the transactions market, experiencing less competition, as it enjoys more and more entrenched advantages, at the expense of the market and the investor.
+
+This is the groundwork that will set us up for Part 3.
+
+* * * * *
+
+Part 3 coming soon...
+
+* * * * *
+
+EPILOGUE: Dieu et mon droit
+
+"But it's bigger than that -- it's not just key players in the market that are reliant on Citadel."
+
+Including this after the TL;DR for all to see. This is why I was delayed.
+
+This is a 2 minute video from Citadel's own page. [Watch it.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVfxEBE-nI4&t=158s) It blew me away when I saw it, and I'll explain why below. Transcription mine (streamlined version):
+
+> *Mary Erodes:* That's a really important shift. The groups that used to make markets, i.e. step in when no one else was there, were the banks. They have shrunk by law. So when we need liquidity in the future... [points at Ken] He's has a fiduciary obligation to care only about his shareholders and his investors. He doesn't have an obligation to step in to make markets for the sake of making markets. It will be a very different playbook when we go through the liquidity crunch that eventually will come.
+
+> *Ken Griffin:* I think this is very interesting, "what is the role [Citadel] will play in the next great market correction?" ...[In financial crashes] no one buys the asset that represents the falling knife. The role of the market maker is to maximize the availability of liquidity to all participants. Because the perception and reality that you create liquidity helps to calm the markets. We worked with NYSE and the SEC to re-architect trading protocols... The role of large investment banks has been supplanted by not only Citadel Securities, but by a whole ecosystem of statistical arbitrage that will absorb risk that comes to market quickly.
+
+[emphasis mine]
+
+Let me summarize. Mary and Ken commented that:
+
+-   The old way of stabilizing financial crises was through multiple banks negotiating a solution to stabilize the economy.
+
+-   Banks can no longer do this due to regulations and their position in the market.
+
+-   Citadel (Ken) sees a Market Maker's role as a stabilizer, to make sure there are no violent price swings.
+
+-   Citadel worked with NYSE and SEC to re-architect the markets/economy on this belief that MMs will stablize and calm markets.
+
+IF this is true, and IF what Ken spoke of is an accurate reflection of how the market is now structured, then here is the subtext and implications:
+
+-   Market Makers, specifically Citadel and Virtu, are now the ECONOMY'S "immune system," they are the first and best line of defense against catastrophic collapse.
+
+-   Their function is to make sure that no single security or asset class can expose the market to overwhelming risk.
+
+-   They manage this risk through statistical arbitrage and coordination with authorities (NYSE & SEC) on behalf of the market.
+
+-   Citadel worked with the oversight organizations to influence the structure of the overall market.
+
+Going deeper:
+
+Everyone in this room knew about naked shorting. And that Citadel was a primary culprit.
+
+Which implies that somewhere, at some point, a deal was reached, tacitly or explicitly. The NYSE and SEC were in on it (at the time):
+
+Citadel/MM's get to control securities prices with relative impunity. Naked shorting and all.
+
+And in return, Citadel is responsible for making sure that no more crashes happen.
+
+[WHAT THE FUCK.](https://i.giphy.com/media/kGweWfIbaezO8/giphy.webp) I have no words.
+
+IF this is true, the implications for the MOASS are...
+
+-   Citadel defaulting is the equivalent of the entire economy getting full blown AIDS and spinal cancer at the same time. Knocking out the immune system and the functional response chain of the market.
+
+-   This leaves the market vulnerable to violent price swings that can instantly bankrupt other players
+
+-   ...which is why the DTCC is so concerned about member defaulting and transferring of assets...
+
+-   ...and another reason why the MOASS is taking so long: every player in the economy needs Citadel's assets need to remain intact, to stabilize the market and continue acting as the immune system.
+
+This video is from 2018. It has been over 2 years since then, at the time of this writing.
+
+Buy. Hodl.
+
+* * * * *
+
+Note 1: [u/dlauer](https://www.reddit.com/u/dlauer/) if you're reading this I'd like to connect re:part 3 - HMU with chat (DMs are off)\
+Note 2: If you guys find the links I couldn't find (i.e. "Greg", and the brokerage letter saying Citadel defaulting would delay their transactions) - comment and I'll update!\
+Note 3: Apes, I've seen responses to part one that end in despair. Be encouraged - regulators (NYSE, SEC, et. al) don't seem to like the current setup anymore. Gary Gensler's speech last month was laser-focused on Citadel and Virtu (and also confirms this DD):
+
+> Further, wholesalers have many advantages when it comes to pricing compared to exchange market makers. The two types of market makers are operating under very different rules. [...]
+
+> Within the off-exchange market maker space, we are seeing concentration. One firm has publicly stated that it executes nearly half of all retail volume.[2] There are many reasons behind this market concentration --- from payment for order flow to the growing impact of data, both of which I'll discuss.
+
+> Market concentration can deter healthy competition and limit innovation. It also can increase potential system-wide risks, should any single incumbent with significant size or market share fail.
+
+I don't think the guy likes Citadel very much lol
+
+* * * * *
+
+Edit: I'm seeing some responses that think this post implies Citadel is all powerful or controls everything. Very much not the case. Apes have them by the balls. Buy and Hodl, as always. But it helps to know exactly *what* we are up against, and *why* the MOASS is taking time. Also, we don't really want Citadel to just change the name on the building and get a new CEO - that doesn't really solve the problem, does it?

02-Resources/2021-07-01-Resources.md

@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
 | :---: | :---: |
 | [GameStop Newsroom](https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/news-releases-0) | Stay up to date with GameStop's latest strategic initiatives. |
 | [GameStop Investor Relations](https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/home) | Source for GameStop's financial news. |
+| [Ape's Guide to the Galaxy](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/mnss65/the_apes_guide_to_the_galaxy_a_compilation_of_dds/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) | Compilation of DD, News, Announcements, Tools, and Resources |
 | [GME DD](https://gmedd.com/) | Resource that aggregates a compilation of GME due diligence. |
 | [GME Timeline](https://gmetimeline.com/) | Comprehensive timeline of GME-related events. |
 | [GME Technical Analysis](https://www.investing.com/equities/gamestop-corp-technical) | Tracks technical analysis, news, and other insights for a particular stock. |

DD/2021-05-26-Reverse-Repos-Showing-Possible-Evidence-of-Forced-Liquidations.md

@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+Reverse Repos Showing Possible Evidence of Forced Liquidations
+==============================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/AcedVector](https://www.reddit.com/user/AcedVector/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nlxom6/reverse_repos_showing_possible_evidence_of_forced/) | 
+
+---
+
+[DD 👨‍🔬](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22DD%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%94%AC%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+Pre-DD Message:
+
+Hello you beautiful apes! Before I get into this DD I just wanted to say that I am so proud of everyone for holding against these wall street crooks. We're finally starting to see some change happen and more and more people are starting to catch on to how fucked of a position the hedgies are really in right now, and it genuinely makes me happy that we've come from just some stupid retail investors looking for a quick buck to an educated mastermind of apes who scour the sub for DD and knowledge. With all that said, let's get into the DD!
+
+The Good Stuff:
+
+As I myself was scouring this sub for info I had come across an interesting [post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nlu3wb/coincidental_link_in_decreasing_parties_for/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) by [u/qwert4the1](https://www.reddit.com/user/qwert4the1/) (show them some love!) who had found a connection between the price surges in GME and the amount of counterparties within the reverse repo agreements. Specifically, they had mentioned that on days when there was a significant price increase compared to the norm (today, May 26th, would be a good example), the amount of counterparties who were accepted in the reverse repo agreements the day of or the day after had *decreased*. Now, why is this incredibly important if this connection holds true and how can it point to some interesting conclusions? To understand that, we have to understand the main prerequisite to these repo reverse agreements, which is according to the Fed FAQ page:
+
+[An 80 billion max per counterparty, hm?](https://preview.redd.it/pv3jripp9k171.png?width=465&format=png&auto=webp&s=9f6e860076f899e8ad04354d7b02514dad450106)
+
+We also have to understand that in these overnight reverse repo agreements, the Desk (The Open Market Trading Desk the Fed uses for these transactions) sells treasury securities that it holds in the System Open Market Account (SOMA) to these eligible counterparties. What that means is that the aggregate counterparty amount of treasury securities that can be lended overnight is limited by the amount that is held in SOMA. As of May 19th, here are these amounts:
+
+[Take note of the 4 TRILLION that it has in Treasury Notes and Bonds.](https://preview.redd.it/1lp15o74dk171.png?width=962&format=png&auto=webp&s=6fce3b40c66599b746de3b854f70768facf85ea3)
+
+So in other words, there are 2 limitations to take note of for overnight RRP agreements:
+
+1.  80 billion max per counterparty
+
+2.  4 trillion held in SOMA
+
+Why are these limitations important to take note of? Well, because the logical conclusion to draw is that the Fed uses these limitations to some extent in order determine whether they should accept or reject a counterparty in the agreement. This leads into why I feel the connection between the counterparties and the price surges in GME are important, because in my mind there's only a couple of explanations as to why the amount of counterparties in the ON RRP agreement would *decrease* as the price in GME *surges*:
+
+1.  The aggregate amount treasury securities lent to the counterparties in these agreements are reaching an uncomfortable amount so they are choosing their counterparties more carefully.
+
+2.  Marge is calling some of the counterparties that could potentially have the treasury bonds be used as collateral for short positions in some certain stocks ( perhaps GME? ;) )and are forcefully liquidating them, thus they don't need to be part of the agreement. Side note: (If some of the counterparties are banks, then the hedge funds that banks are potentially lending these treasury bonds/notes to for collateral could be margin called and forcefully liquidated, thus the bank having no reason to ask for the bonds does not take part in the agreement.)
+
+3.  A mix of the two
+
+Conclusion:
+
+Here's why I think we might be seeing both *forced liquidations* as well as *more selectivity from the Desk* in lending treasury securities, given that the connection between the counterparties and price surges in GME is correct:
+
+-   The 1st point alone wouldn't be enough of a reason to necessarily be more selective in choosing counterparties, as the current amount being lent (450 billion as of today) is about less than a quarter of the amount of the treasury notes/bonds in SOMA, and there are more than FOURTY counterparties as of the latest agreement.
+
+-   If there are forceful liquidations happening among the counterparties(which are most likely banks), it serves as a threefold hit:
+
+1.  Less counterparties would be needed in these agreements, lowering the counterparty amount but raising the average amount of treasury bonds/notes lent per counterparty.
+
+2.  With the average amount lent per existing counterparty increasing, the Fed has to take more into account what the counterparties are using these treasury bonds/notes for.
+
+3.  If most of the existing counterparties are banks, who lend these treasury bonds/notes to hedge funds for collateral in a short position, and they learn the banks they have lent to beforehand but not anymore (from hedgies being forcefully liquidated) are being connected to margin calls and forced liquidations, the Fed would be less inclined to lend these bonds/notes to the banks currently in the agreement as time goes on as it would become more risky to do so.
+
+-   These three points working in tandem with each other would lead to the Fed having a strong enough reason to be more selective to counterparties in future agreements, while also serving as a explanation for liquidations being a partial cause to the decrease in the amount of counterparties as as result of a GME price surge.
+
+Sources:
+
+[FAQs: Overnight Reverse Repurchase Agreement Operational Exercise - FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK (newyorkfed.org)](https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/rrp_faq)
+
+[Repo and Reverse Repo Agreements - FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK (newyorkfed.org)](https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/domestic-market-operations/monetary-policy-implementation/repo-reverse-repo-agreements)
+
+[Repo and Reverse Repo Operations - Federal Reserve Bank of New York (newyorkfed.org)](https://apps.newyorkfed.org/markets/autorates/tomo-results-display?SHOWMORE=TRUE&startDate=01/01/2000&enddate=01/01/2000)
+
+[System Open Market Account Holdings of Domestic Securities - FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK (newyorkfed.org)](https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/soma-holdings)
+
+As always, thank you for reading my DDs you guys. I will try to hang in the comments for edits as well if anything. :)
+
+Edit: 1.8k likes!! Holy mackerel thank you guys I appreciate your support very much. 🤠🙏
+
+Edit 2: WOW you guys are blowing this post out of the water! Thanks for 7k likes everybody! :)
+
+Edit 3: I would like to point out some amazing counterpoints to this DD in the comments, as I feel it is always important to address both sides of the argument. No DD is perfect(mine certainly isn't) so I would like to thank you guys for bringing these points up:
+
+1.  Why use bonds/notes as collateral when they can just use cash when it comes to short positions in stocks?
+
+2.  If the Fed has been more selective in ON RRP agreements, wouldn't it be showing in their acceptance rate (which has always been 100%)
+
+3.  Correlation does not equal causation, the GME price surge doesn't necessarily have to 100% be connected to a decrease in the counterparties.
+
+I'll admit, I don't have much of a rebuttal to these as they are solid points, and I appreciate you guys bringing it up because it helps me keep more things in mind to create stronger, more effective DD in the future.
+
+Edit 4: A fellow ape in the comments gave a link to the list of eligible counterparties for RRP agreements:
+
+<https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/rrp_counterparties>
+
+Most if not all of these counterparties are banks, so it lends credence to the idea that banks would be lending these treasury bonds to hedgefunds, as well as the banks themselves needing bonds as well (since there is a lot of cash but not collateral in the bonds market at the moment)

DD/2021-05-27-Guaranteed-Short-Squeeze-Trigger-The-NFT-Crypto-or-Digital-Dividend.md

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+The guaranteed short squeeze trigger: The NFT/Crypto/Digital Dividend
+=====================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/integ3r_p0sitron](https://www.reddit.com/user/integ3r_p0sitron/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nmd7cr/the_guaranteed_short_squeeze_trigger_the/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Education 👨‍🏫 | Data 🔢](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Education%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%8F%AB%20%7C%20Data%20%F0%9F%94%A2%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+Others have pointed this out, but it seems there's still a lack of awareness or realization of how serious this is.
+
+The crypto dividend is NOT a joke.
+
+There is one PROVEN way to trigger the short squeeze and it was done by Overstock last year. In 8. march 2020 OSTK traded at around $3 per share. After the crypto dividend was released the stock soared to $120. While the crypto dividend itself, which you received 10 per share soared to over 8 dollars per tZero.
+
+Why it works:
+
+When a hedgie shorts a stock, he borrows it through the broker from its real owner and sells it. Because the one who purchases it believes he is also an owner, a single share has 2 owners. When a company then pays a dividend. Both owners expect a dividend, yet the company only pays dividend to one owner because the broker only holds 1 real share. The dividend for the fake share is paid out of the shorters pocket to make the whole system function.
+
+If gamestop pays a Crypto / NFT / Digital dividend, then in order for the system to continue, the shorter will have to find and acquire this NFT dividend and give it to the guy he borrowed the GME share from. However, this is literally impossible. NFTs are non-fungible. There is simply no way for him to acquire it or something equivalent because only holders of GME will get it. This means the broker will have no choice but to force all the shorts to exit their positions before the Ex. Dividend, triggering the short squeeze.
+
+TL;DR:
+
+All that is necessary to trigger the squeeze, is for the gamestop NFT team to make a meme ape or diamond hands or rocket NFT artwork and hand it out as a property dividend to shareholders. This will automatically trigger the squeeze. So please meme the NFT dividend into reality.
+
+[![r/Superstonk - The guaranteed short squeeze trigger: The NFT/Crypto/Digital Dividend](https://preview.redd.it/q67cuc42ep171.png?width=1016&format=png&auto=webp&s=04e6b6031037d7976e242b8a50d129a68f6a2cea)](https://preview.redd.it/q67cuc42ep171.png?width=1016&format=png&auto=webp&s=04e6b6031037d7976e242b8a50d129a68f6a2cea)
+
+EDIT: Thanks for all the awards and attention. It falls to you to to keep the dream alive of the digital dividend. Some common questions I've seen:
+
+How will I get the dividend? How will it work?
+
+There are many ways to skin a cat here, so the simple answer is don't worry about it until it is actually going to happen. I've seen someone say that for overstock their broker held it until they transferred it to their own account on a tradable exchange (since the broker didn't deal with cryptocurrencies). The logistics aren't complicated. Here is one hypothetical way: You hold the stonk until the ex. dividend date, that means you will receive the dividend. GME issues dividend to stockbrokers who are holding the share on your behalf, this means the broker will have to create cryptowallets to hold the payout (this is not a complicated process, don't worry), it is then the brokers responsibility to make sure you can get it from them and you will need your own wallet (again not complicated). **"***What about gas fees?"* Yes, this is a problem right now but there are ways around it. They could use a layer 2 solution, or they could use a different blockchain, basically if there's a will here there's a way.
+
+WTF? An NFT can't be a dividend.
+
+Yes it can. Pretty much anything can be a dividend. It is called a property dividend.
+
+Nuance between an NFT dividend and a Crypto dividend
+
+If gamestop minted a GME token that is essentially a GMECoin which you use as a currency, then it is fungible as opposed to an NFT which is non-fungible. It will trigger the squeeze but will be less effective each time they pay out such a dividend because once it is in circulation, hedgies can buy it off the market to maintain a short position. If you got an NFT artwork however, you would get a personal artwork with a unique ID that signifies it as the specific artwork you received as a dividend for the stock you held. It cannot really be exchanged for any other and each time the company pays such a dividend it would be unique so a hedgie can't buy one of the older NFT artworks and pay it to you as a dividend to stay in a short position. *"**But these artworks that we receive will all pretty much have the same value so TECHNICALLY they'll be fungible"* This is entirely subjective. Lets say you received a Rare Pepe artwork as an NFT dividend and you could use that rare pepe in a video game, then that rare pepe will be the specific rare pepe that you personally used to beat the game, win a tournament or whatever. That would make it non-fungible in the eyes of some. If you like the NFT that you got, well then it's non-fungible. If you wouldn't trade your NFT for someone elses even though they are mostly the same, well then they're still not fungible. Wouldn't you want the NFT that DFV received as his digital dividend? It can't be any other. Also, each time there's a dividend payment, It can be a different NFT set, which means hedgies will NEVER be able to get them on the market before it is paid out meaning shorts can be squeezed for ever, again and again.
+
+What happens if the broker refuses to margin call the shorts and refuses to give you the divvy?
+
+I would imagine that they could be sued. If you own the share, that entitles you to the divvy.
+
+Can they weasel out of this somehow?
+
+The brilliance of the crypto divvy is that it is a checkmate move. There are no tricks they can pull at the DTCC or the OCC or whatever, no accounting games they can pull, no fake shares or NFTs they can pull out of thin air to stay in a short position. When you're checkmated, the game is over. The crypto divvy bypasses ALL of the institutions. If the institutions are the chess pieces protecting the hedgie king, the crypto divvy is the orbital strike on the king directly. The divvy is also genius because it encourages people to hold. You want the divvy right? Well then you gotta hold.
+
+Ok so hedgie has to close before ex. dividend, can't he short the top after the squeeze and manipulate the stock down again?
+
+Gamestop can simply promise to release another NFT dividend and hedgie will have to buy all the memes all over again. And again, and again until he learns his lesson.

DD/2021-05-28-Clearing-up-the-Fed-Reverse-Repos-and-What-it-Could-Indicate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+Clearing up the Fed Reverse Repos and What it Could Indicate
+============================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/c-digs](https://www.reddit.com/user/c-digs/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nmxmri/clearing_up_the_fed_reverse_repos_and_what_it/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Possible DD 👨‍🔬](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Possible%20DD%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%94%AC%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+EDIT: [u/CalamariAce](https://www.reddit.com/u/CalamariAce/) shared a great video which summarizes a similar conclusion that does a great job of explaining it: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMgUlW7zSzg#t=950>
+
+First and foremost, more than ever, before you read the rest of this post:
+
+I am not a financial advisor and do not interpret anything written below as financial advice.
+
+I think that nearly every post on the Fed RRP and the increasing amounts has been interpreting this data incorrectly and understanding why it is happening could be very important in understanding the events in the upcoming days/weeks/months.
+
+The lightbulb moment happened for me when I read [u/HODLTheLineMyFriend](https://www.reddit.com/user/HODLTheLineMyFriend/) 's post: [Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nmcn1e/reverse_repo_overnight_lending_chart_update_for/) post from yesterday.
+
+User [u/wehadmagnets](https://www.reddit.com/u/wehadmagnets/) posted snippets and a reference to [a Financial Times article](https://www.ft.com/content/cdec7f2e-6129-412c-b118-8906a2a0f92f) that drew my attention.
+
+I post the TL;DR points of interest below and highlight the key points:
+
+-   Today's Reverse Repo was the largest ever
+
+-   "Investors" (more than just banks) are seeking places to park cash, as other 'safe' places are drying up and/or having zero or negative rates
+
+-   "It is also not over yet." -- analyst at Oxford Economics
+
+-   Cash reserves ballooning due to "the Fed's purchases of $120bn of Treasuries and agency mortgage-backed securities each month"
+
+-   Money-market funds are getting swamped with people's cash (<speculation>flight from equities?</speculation>)
+
+-   Fed is trying to avoid negative rates in money market
+
+-   No one thinks it's over
+
+-   Fed may have to raise interest rates on RRP or reserve balances in member banks to keep the federal funds rates from going lower (at 0.06 on target of 0.0-0.25)
+
+This is when it clicked for me and my subsequent discussion with [u/Criand](https://www.reddit.com/u/Criand/) helped clarify why I think the RRPs are increasing.
+
+Understanding assets versus liabilities for a commercial bank
+
+A few weeks back, I was watching Gary Gensler's MIT series on Blockchain.
+
+*(Aside: if you have any interest in currency, economics, finance, technology, or banking, I strongly recommend the series because Gensler breaks down complex topics into a very easy to digest format. The series is highly recommended because it will give you a whole new perspective on currency, fiat currency, the gold standard, etc.****)*
+
+In [the second lecture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5auv_xrvoJk), I remembered he said something that caught my attention:
+
+[![r/Superstonk - Clearing up the Fed Reverse Repos and What it Could Indicate](https://preview.redd.it/flr1sh3j8v171.png?width=778&format=png&auto=webp&s=e5847fc0983eb936712fab9768967e9378a9b2ff)](https://preview.redd.it/flr1sh3j8v171.png?width=778&format=png&auto=webp&s=e5847fc0983eb936712fab9768967e9378a9b2ff)
+
+A recommended video if you are at all curious to really understand the gold standard, fiat currency, economics, ledgers, banking, and finance
+
+[At 51:42](https://youtu.be/5auv_xrvoJk?t=3102), he starts a discussion about fiat currency and ledgers. Of currency, he states:
+
+> It represents central bank liabilities and that's important. It's a liability of a central bank it's not an asset. It's their liability side...There's also a second form of money and that's when you make a deposit in a bank that's a liability of a commercial bank.
+
+[At 54:22 he says](https://youtu.be/5auv_xrvoJk?t=3262):
+
+> But it is a liability on the books and records. so it is a matter of accounting in double-entry bookkeeping.
+
+The entire discussion starting from 51:42 is fantastic and I strongly urge everyone to take the time to watch it.
+
+On the other hand, government securities are considered an asset and not a liability. [This article does a great job of breaking it down](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-macroeconomics/chapter/banking-profits-and-losses-name/):
+
+> For a bank, the assets are the financial instruments that either the bank is holding (its reserves) or those instruments where other parties owe money to the bank---like loans made by the bank and U.S. government securities, such as U.S. Treasury bonds purchased by the bank.
+>
+> When bank customers deposit money into a checking account, savings account, or a certificate of deposit, the bank views these deposits as liabilities. After all, the bank owes these deposits to its customers, and are obligated to return the funds when the customers wish to withdraw their money. In the example shown in Figure 1, the Safe and Secure Bank holds $10 million in deposits.
+
+[![r/Superstonk - Clearing up the Fed Reverse Repos and What it Could Indicate](https://preview.redd.it/eq8mzoenzu171.jpg?width=757&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c69c7eca4829a6ec4ab98371ce1b3193e223f82)](https://preview.redd.it/eq8mzoenzu171.jpg?width=757&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c69c7eca4829a6ec4ab98371ce1b3193e223f82)
+
+Notice the assets on the left include US Government securities and the liabilities on the right represent deposits or customer cash.
+
+So why would a bank want to purchase Treasuries?
+
+This is the fundamental question and the answer is really simple and where the dots finally connected for me: every single night, they are accumulating more and more customer deposits in cash or cash equivalent accounts relative to the assets on their balance sheet and this is throwing their bookkeeping out of whack.
+
+To make up for this, every single day they need to wipe these liabilities off of their books and to do this, they use the RRPs to exchange them for assets in the form of Treasuries because it's "free" at the moment. The amount they are swapping does not represent the amount of cash deposits they have, but rather the amount needed to balance their liabilities to their assets (and it may not be a 1:1 ratio; may be some other ratio that they need to adhere to).
+
+[u/Criand](https://www.reddit.com/u/Criand/) asked a very important question in our discussion:
+
+Why overnight notes and not longer term?
+
+Because they need the cash back the next day for operations. If a customer withdraws the cash or uses the cash to enter into another transaction, they need to have it in their ledger.
+
+So every night, the banks are wiping this liability off of their books by converting them into assets in the form of Treasuries. Then the very next day, they swap it back for cash because they need the cash for normal operations.
+
+Rinse and repeat each day until the cash deposits start to decrease relative to their assets(hold this thought).
+
+What does this mean for apes?
+
+I'm going to repeat this again: I am not a financial advisor and not a single one of you should construe this as financial advice.
+
+About three weeks ago, I moved all of my wife's 403b and my kids' 529s into cash. This means I parked the gains in money market accounts *and now it's a liability for my bank*. (Again, I am not implying that any of you should do this, only providing background for how I connected the dots.)
+
+This is where bullet 5 up above turned the lightbulb on for me: what if there is a huge wave of capital flight from equities into money market accounts? What if this is what is throwing off the ledgers of these banks? What if all of the wealthy and those "in the know" already know what is coming and are converting their assets into liabilities on the ledgers of the banks by moving their accounts to cash in the form of money market accounts?
+
+The capital flight from equities has started and this is what we are seeing reflected with the Fed RRP. This could be the clearest signal that there is anticipation of a big downward crash. The reason this continues unabated and grows is because this is all by the books and precisely what this mechanism is designed to do: soak up liability on the books of the commercial banks. It's just that in this case, those liabilities are customer deposits which are accumulating in money market accounts.
+
+But the market has been green?
+
+This is speculation at this point, but I think it's really simple.
+
+Two weeks ago, I finally started to dump the remaining securities I was holding as I converted everything to cash. I only had F, GM, and GE left. Then this week, all three have had absolutely stellar returns(all the more reason you should not take any of this as financial advice because I left thousands in gains on the table by paperhanding F, GM, and GE). What gives? I am guessing that there is a market-wide pump and dump happening right now where banks are basically finding new bagholders before everything dives.
+
+The preceding two weeks of red in the market had three purposes:
+
+1.  Banks needed to capture some gains and liquidity
+
+2.  Create the illusion of a pullback and "value" to find new bagholders
+
+3.  Driving up the price of equities is also a mechanism for increasing their asset to liability ratio at least temporarily
+
+The above is purely speculation and do not manage your portfolio and your life savings based on any of my bullshit speculation; do your own DD and come to your own conclusions. I emphasize again that there are two ways for them to fix their ledgers: swap cash deposits for Treasuries or somehow increase the value of their assets. If it's the latter, we could see the start of another bull run and I could be completely wrong; I literally have no idea.
+
+Is it really that simple?
+
+Look, I'm a big fan of Occam's Razor. It's really that simple.
+
+1.  Bank customers are converting their investments to cash or the value of the assets they are holding are decreasing relative to the deposits
+
+2.  Cash deposits are a liability on the books of commercial banks
+
+3.  Every day, they need to balance their liabilities with their assets
+
+4.  As the cash builds up, they need a mechanism to convert them to an asset
+
+5.  But they also need to be able to easily convert it back to cash for normal operations the next day; they need an asset that is highly liquid
+
+6.  The Fed RRP operation is a free way to do this and balance their books
+
+7.  Every single one of the counterparties is now carrying an excess of cash because customers are pulling out of equities OR the value of their assets are decreasing (loans and CMBS are both "assets" for a bank)
+
+I am firmly in the camp that there is nothing nefarious going on with the Fed RRPs; it's really as simple as the banks wiping the liabilities off of their books at night and getting back the cash the next day.
+
+What one *should* be concerned about and start pondering is *why* they are in a state of having excess deposits *relative to their assets*.
+
+Remember that thought I asked you to hold: the linchpin is that they must balance their assets and liabilities on their ledgers. So this Fed RRP ballooning indicates that there is a severe imbalance which they are correcting with the RRP. Either their cash deposits are surging, their assets (like loans and CMBS) are dropping, or a bit of both is happening.
+
+What about the previous periods of high activity in 2014-2017?
+
+If you look at the charts, this has occurred previously as well. Notably in 2014 - 2017. But I think that this is relatively easy to understand.
+
+[![r/Superstonk - Clearing up the Fed Reverse Repos and What it Could Indicate](https://preview.redd.it/c99f25db4v171.png?width=528&format=png&auto=webp&s=e3673edb823f072a73e8d1adaccfebc83c610d7f)](https://preview.redd.it/c99f25db4v171.png?width=528&format=png&auto=webp&s=e3673edb823f072a73e8d1adaccfebc83c610d7f)
+
+Yellow and blue text are mine. There is a high volume of customer deposits on the ledgers of the banks entering and exiting the 2016 election cycle. Then we've had a tremendous run in equities since 2017 so banks have had less cash to balance.
+
+What is unique is that this buildup right now is so massive and does not correspond to typical times when a bank would need to balance their ledger.
+
+This daily increasing amount means that every single day, more and more of their customers are moving their deposits to cash or their assets are losing value or some mix of both.
+
+TA;DR analogy to [u/rocketseeker](https://www.reddit.com/u/rocketseeker/)
+
+Let's say you're running drugs and you obviously deal with a lot of cash.
+
+Holding onto all of this cash is a *liability* because it's easy for someone to steal it from you (for example) or what if you get caught by the po-po with all this cash? You need something that's as good as cash without the downsides.
+
+So ideally, you have some way to change your paper cash (a *liability*) to something that's harder to steal (an *asset*) and less risky if some police officer shakes you down. You need something that has three qualities:
+
+1.  It should be stable so if you put in $1, you get back $1
+
+2.  It should be easy to convert it back to cash any time (be highly liquid)
+
+3.  It should have a pretty stable supply
+
+Property and real estate? Too difficult to flip it back into cash when you need it. Cars? Bitcoin? Gold chains? Same problems and very volatile; convert $1 and you may not get back $1 tomorrow.
+
+I don't know the right equivalent for a drug lord because there are very few real-world equivalents to government debt like Treasuries, [but maybe you convert it into Tide laundry detergent](https://nymag.com/news/features/tide-detergent-drugs-2013-1/) because 1) it's hard to steal and 2) there's always demand for Tide; you just go to the local laundromats and sell it to them to get cash back, 3) if the police discover your stash of Tide, what are they gonna do 🤣? You've just found a way to convert *a liability* into *an asset.*
+
+Now whenever you have an abundance of cash, you convert it to Tide. When you need your cash, you sell the Tide and get your cash back.
+
+That's what's happening with the banks and the Fed. The banks have a lot of customer cash depositsOR their assets have lost value and cannot balance their books. So they exchange their cash for Tide (Treasuries) so that they have less liabilities relative to their assets. And they are doing this every single day with increasing frequency because they are holding onto more customer deposits in cash/cash equivalent OR their assets are losing value relative to the amount of cash deposits they have.

DD/2021-05-28-Why-I-am-Ecstatic-GME-is-Taking-a-Dump-and-the-Possible-Correlation-with-AMC-and-Crypto.md

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+Why I am Ecstatic GME is Taking a Dump, and the Possible Correlation with AMC and Crypto
+========================================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/C2theC](https://www.reddit.com/user/C2theC/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nn370o/why_i_am_ecstatic_gme_is_taking_a_dump_and_the/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Possible DD 👨‍🔬](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Possible%20DD%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%94%AC%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+Apes, lend me your ears.
+
+I am pumped that GME took a fat dive from $268.80 down to below $235.00 as of this post. Why? Because it means we've figured out the *modus operandi* of the shorts, and HFs are fuk.
+
+TL;DR HODL, because GME is going to the moon. 🚀
+
+T+35/T+21 Cycles
+
+This is real, and the juiciest part of this post. As I noted in my [Cyclical Patterns in Failure-To-Deliver (FTD) and Short Interest Reporting](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nezp94/cyclical_patterns_in_failuretodeliver_ftd_and/), written upon the DD of those before me, the T+35/T+21 cycles are consistent, empirical, measurable, and now, *predictable*. Read the DD of [I've estimated the current SI% based on the SI Report Cycle and Deep ITM CALL purchases.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nc1lny/ive_estimated_the_current_si_based_on_the_si/) by [u/Criand](https://www.reddit.com/u/Criand/) for more details.
+
+In the chart below, we can see that each T+21 cycle (there are around five, which I've noted above the GME chart ), in every twenty-one trading sessions, GME has a regular spike. The mechanics of this are likely to be kicking-the-can-down-the-road for the FTD cycles, and even if there might be doubters about the underlying cause, you cannot doubt the observable data that this happens exactly every twenty-one days on schedule. If the sun rises every twenty-four hours, who cares if the Earth rotates around the Sun or the Sun rotates around the Earth (shout-out to Galileo Galilei who stood up to the shills of his day)---the sun still rises every twenty-four hours.
+
+Additionally, I am tracking possible cycles for dips in the yellow lines below the chart. Though I am not sure if there is a definite pattern yet, it is human nature (actually the nature of every system due to entropy) to do the same thing over and over on a repeating basis, such as the timing of morning/night routines of showering and brushing your teeth, aka personal hygiene.
+
+The one pattern I have seen is that on each Short Interest Reporting Settlement Date, marked by "SIR," GME takes a dump. *Especially* after a run such as the one this week. If the pattern as depicted by the yellow lines holds true, watch out for another dump on the first day of trading next Tuesday.
+
+[![r/Superstonk - Why I am Ecstatic GME is Taking a Dump, and the Possible Correlation with AMC and Crypto](https://preview.redd.it/k6g14efb6w171.png?width=2433&format=png&auto=webp&s=a63cec898848e621d7b3325722b59dbe130afd24)](https://preview.redd.it/k6g14efb6w171.png?width=2433&format=png&auto=webp&s=a63cec898848e621d7b3325722b59dbe130afd24)
+
+A cyclical pattern emerges
+
+AMC Correlation
+
+If you were a HF that was deep in the red shorting GME, consider this strategy:
+
+1.  Buy OTM AMC calls
+
+2.  Spend money to keep the GME price down, let AMC rocket, and let retail FOMO set in
+
+3.  Entice people to paper-hand GME, then sell those AMC calls to them
+
+4.  Buy OTM GME puts
+
+5.  Take the cash generated and drive down the GME price
+
+6.  Sell now-ITM GME puts and pay yourself back
+
+By doing the above, you can end up spending very little or breaking even on your capital and achieve:
+
+-   Pushing down both the price of GME and AMC at no cost to you!
+
+-   Deflate the morale of GME apes that we missed out on AMC riches
+
+-   Deflate the morale of AMC ape-cousins that they didn't sell at the peak or bought at the top
+
+-   Give a story to Main Stream Media (MSM) to report that the MoASS is over, and that AMC is now -30%, from the peak, never mentioning the +120% from last Friday
+
+AMC Price Action
+
+What drove the price action for AMC this week? This section is all speculative, and there are multiple possibilities, some or all or none of which may be true:
+
+1.  There is no news, and there are no sellers, so the only driver for the price action are the shorts themselves
+
+2.  It is not even 2p EST and the volume on AMC is 522M, and the average 20-day volume is 165M. How is a 3× average volume possible on no news, and yesterday was 5×, unless institutions were involved?
+
+3.  Funds are getting margin called and need to cover or provide more cash
+
+4.  Shorts would let AMC go in order have ammo to suppress the price for GME, which is far more detrimental to the shorts
+
+5.  MSM needs a piece to talk about how much AMC came down, to "encourage" GME hodlers to paper-hand and sell, if not now, then build it into the psyche for the MoASS
+
+Crypto Crash
+
+The market is a zero-sum game. Due to the amount of losses in crypto, to the tune billions, it is not possible that it was all retail. Institutional investors were the whales that cashed out. The money had to go somewhere. It is likely a good portion went to the manipulation of GME and AMC, as well as the possible covering of margin calls. At the very least, it is still held as cash. This is why the general market hasn't tanked, because shorts haven't had to sell any of their beloved shares in the S&P 500 to cover for GME/AMC.
+
+Conclusion
+
+Jacked to the tits!
+
+__________
+
+Edit: *modus operandi* not *operus modi -* thanks [u/Mufragnosky](https://www.reddit.com/u/Mufragnosky/)

DD/2021-07-02-GameStop-Crypto-Dividend-will-NOT-be-an-NFT.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+A GameStop crypto dividend will NOT be an NFT. Misinformation and incorrect terminology is running rampant, let's clear it up.
+==============================================================================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/GooseG17](https://www.reddit.com/user/GooseG17/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ocnofw/a_gamestop_crypto_dividend_will_not_be_an_nft/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Education 👨‍🏫 | Data 🔢](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Education%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%8F%AB%20%7C%20Data%20%F0%9F%94%A2%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+I'm sorry for the condescending title. I promise I'm friendly, just stupid af.
+
+Edit: This post assumes at least basic understanding of these technologies. Please read my linked post if you do not have that understanding yet.
+
+I made a [post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/oc7ji4/clarifying_nfts_what_they_are_good_for_and_what/) yesterday explaining blockchain, tokens and NFT's, but there are still posts hitting the front page that refer to "NFT dividends" surprised Pikachu, so let's make this nice and simple.
+
+1.  Overstock was the first to issue a crypto dividend. Their dividend token is *not* an NFT.
+
+2.  Dividends are usually cash or a security. Both are fungible, so a *non-fungible* token may not be considered a valid dividend (IANAL), while Overstock has shown that a *fungible* token will hold up in court.\
+    Edit: Dividends can also be other forms of property, which likely invalidates my thoughts on validity. This point is flawed, but I'll leave it here for my deserved criticisms.
+
+3.  Giving shareholders, who all hold *identical shares* crypto rewards that are *not* identical would be unfair to shareholders. How would it be determined who gets the first token? Or 69, 420 or any other fun number? I think avoiding the issue entirely is the best course of action.
+
+4.  Transactions involving NFT's are *many times* more expensive than standard tokens due to their significantly greater complexity. Using them unnecessarily is wasteful at best, downright stupid at worst.
+
+5.  Using *non-fungible* tokens would mean that they can only be traded in whole increments, which is a limitation that makes no sense for this use case. For example, Overstock issued 0.1 tokens per share, which would not be possible with an NFT.
+
+6.  Trading NFT's isn't as simple as trading a standard token. We're already struggling with blockchain concepts, we don't need added complexity. It makes more sense to use a token that works exactly as you would expect a currency to work.
+
+7.  A fungible dividend could have more functional use, such as being directly usable as currency when shopping at GameStop. Indivisible tokens (NFT's) wouldn't work for this. What if all prices were multiples of $10? A more flexible option is necessary.
+
+    1.  Imagine a GameStop cryptocurrency that can be used in an NFT marketplace (in-game items, etc.) or in-store. A dividend issuing that currency could give a massive boost in adoption.
+
+8.  The initial issuing of NFT's is *much* more expensive. I'm talking orders of magnitude. Each individual token will incur a large transaction fee, while a normal token can be one small transaction fee *per shareholder*. Sending three NFT's looks like this:\
+    Send token 1 to x address\
+    Send token 2 to x address\
+    Send token 3 to x address
+
+A normal token is always one transaction, no matter how many tokens are sent:\
+Send 3 tokens to x address
+
+Making NFT minting more efficient is possible, but is not a native feature at this time. I don't think GameStop will waste money on unnecessary fees.
+
+* * * * *
+
+Seeing this sub, which is a bastion of truth in a world of lies, ignite with misinformation on a topic simpler than the complexities of the behind-the-scenes of the financial systems we are used to is a bit surprising. Let's make an effort to gain some wrinkles on blockchain and related topics, since it seems to be a major part of GameStop's plans for the future.
+
+Smooth-brain summary:\
+There are many use cases for NFT's that GameStop can capitalize on, but I argue that a dividend is not one of them. A crypto dividend would make the most sense as an old-school, fungible token.
+
+Edit: Added mention of securities as dividends. Thanks [u/fubar95](https://www.reddit.com/u/fubar95/)!
+
+Edit 2: Property dividends were brought to my attention. My statements about legality are probably invalid. Thanks [/u/chickeni3oo](https://www.reddit.com/u/chickeni3oo/)!
+
+Edit 3: To be perfectly clear, I am arguing that a dividend would not be an NFT, not that there will or will not be a dividend. Dividend talks are entirely speculation, and I am merely trying to clear up misunderstandings on what NFT's are good for.
+
+Edit 4: Expanded point 3
+
+Edit 5: Added point 7
+
+Edit 6: Added point 7.1
+
+Edit 7: Added point 8

Data/2021-07-02-Institutional-Ownership-Numbers-from-2021-03-31-13Fs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+Actual insitutional ownership numbers from 2021-03-31 13Fs in order to dispel some false information
+
+====================================================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/Yowski](https://www.reddit.com/user/Yowski/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Yowski/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Education 👨‍🏫 | Data 🔢](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Education%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%8F%AB%20%7C%20Data%20%F0%9F%94%A2%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+This post currently has 2800 upvotes and counting, but it's mostly false information/numbers <https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/oceujq/sorry_if_this_has_already_been_posted_finra_is/>
+
+EDIT: The original poster I linked saw my post and deleted his.
+
+So I thought I'd go through the actual 13F forms filed with the SEC to confirm the real numbers as of march 31st. Not trying to unjack tits, but false information is false information. And i'm 99% certain that these correct numbers have been shared previously on this sub sometime in may or june.
+
+This isn't even all of the institutional ownership, there are a lot more smaller holders in the low 100,000s or sub 100k range. And those definitely add up. As well, there are (or was, before russel rebalancing) over 12 million shares in mutual funds as of march 31st. These numbers should start being updated via 13Fs in august from June quarter end.
+
+Regardless of the false data and actual numbers below, it's quite clear that retail investors world wide own much more than the available float.
+
+<https://preview.redd.it/l7fp2fijwu871.png?width=1859&format=png&auto=webp&s=445a9358f1f92c114e619ea54ccc4ea33662bc63>
+
+Blackrock 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001086364-21-000038/form13fInfoTable.html>
+
+FMR LLC 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000315066-21-001551/20210517_FMRLLC.html>
+
+vanguard 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001104659-21-066511/>
+
+dimensional 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000354204-21-000701/13F_Q1_Final.html>
+
+state street 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000093751-21-000556/InfoTable_100_v1.html>
+
+charles schwab investment management 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001085146-21-001720/>
+
+geode capital 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001214717-21-000010/GCMLLCQ1202113F.html>
+
+northern trust 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001256484-21-000018/ntc-13f-comb-2021-03.html>
+
+Jane street 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001595888-21-000015/13F-InfoTable.20210517.html>
+
+invesco 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000914208-21-000429/form13fInfoTable.html>
+
+morgan stanley 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000895421-21-000363/>
+
+ameriprise 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000950123-21-006837/0000950123-21-006837-4273.html>
+
+nuveen 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0000950123-21-006875/0000950123-21-006875-4537.html>
+
+arrowstreet 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001164508-21-000003/13f20211.html>
+
+bank of new york 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001390777-21-000051/>
+
+swiss national bank 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001582202-21-000002/>
+
+rhumbline 13F data: <https://sec.report/Document/0001115418-21-000004/Q1_2021_13F.html>

Data/Fidelity-Top-Orders-by-Customers-Series-by-twittafingahsma/2021-07-02-Fidelity-Top-Orders-by-Customers-Update.md

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Fidelity Top Orders by Customers Update - Friday July 2, 2021. Buys 83% & Sells 17% while stonk is down $1.53 (-0.75%) on 2.5m volume. Hope everyone took advantage of the discount. Enjoy the weekend!
+=======================================================================================================================================================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/twittafingahsma](https://www.reddit.com/user/twittafingahsma/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/oci8fq/fidelity_top_orders_by_customers_update_friday/) | 
+
+---
+
+[𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/search?q=flair_name%3A%22%F0%9D%97%97%F0%9D%97%AE%F0%9D%98%81%F0%9D%97%AE%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+[![r/DDintoGME - Fidelity Top Orders by Customers Update - Friday July 2, 2021. Buys 83% & Sells 17% while stonk is down $1.53 (-0.75%) on 2.5m volume. Hope everyone took advantage of the discount. Enjoy the weekend!](https://i.redd.it/ycy4n3e0wu871.png)](https://i.redd.it/ycy4n3e0wu871.png)

Data/Reverse-Repo-Operations-by-pctracer/2021-05-27-Reverse-Repo-Update.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart - Update for May 27 2021
+=============================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/HODLTheLineMyFriend](https://www.reddit.com/user/HODLTheLineMyFriend/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nmcn1e/reverse_repo_overnight_lending_chart_update_for/) | 
+
+---
+
+[𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/search?q=flair_name%3A%22%F0%9D%97%A6%F0%9D%97%BD%F0%9D%97%B2%F0%9D%97%B0%F0%9D%98%82%F0%9D%97%B9%F0%9D%97%AE%F0%9D%98%81%F0%9D%97%B6%F0%9D%97%BC%F0%9D%97%BB%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+Latest from the NY Fed Desk, $485B in reverse repo treasury lending with 50 counterparties. The update exactly matched the curve from the last few days, with R2 increasing to 0.95 from 0.93. Showing $1T by June 10. See below for what this means and how it *might* relate to GME.
+
+[![r/DDintoGME - Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart - Update for May 27 2021](https://preview.redd.it/7yrdd6mt5p171.png?width=876&format=png&auto=webp&s=e61e95b77a74d17fc138011d611e229e92193a95)](https://preview.redd.it/7yrdd6mt5p171.png?width=876&format=png&auto=webp&s=e61e95b77a74d17fc138011d611e229e92193a95)
+
+Linear for my fellow stats nerds. It seems to be growing above linear and the R value is lower:
+
+[![r/DDintoGME - Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart - Update for May 27 2021](https://preview.redd.it/ltohauch6p171.png?width=877&format=png&auto=webp&s=09b31ca90bd08461f4a03024b7153d8593d00935)](https://preview.redd.it/ltohauch6p171.png?width=877&format=png&auto=webp&s=09b31ca90bd08461f4a03024b7153d8593d00935)
+
+Quick reminder: there is no $500B limit on Reverse Repo treasury lending. There is, however, an $80B limit per participant, so individual banks may start 'running out' of Treasuries to lend onward to their hedgie friends.
+
+Useful links
+
+-   DD into Repo/Reverse Repo for those who are curious: <https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nlbsgy/the_fed_repo_market_and_overleveraged_equities/>
+
+-   Source of Fed Repo/Reverse Repo data: <https://apps.newyorkfed.org/markets/autorates/temp>
+
+-   Some great DD on the true limit of the reverse repo by [u/BlindasBalls](https://www.reddit.com/u/BlindasBalls/): <https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nkmoi9/response_to_the_post_about_the_reverse_repo_limit/>
+
+-   Helpful/hilarious explainer on the Reverse Repo situation: <https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nixxvc/fed_is_in_a_pickle_economy_is_fuk_edition/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf>
+
+If you want to see my charts from the last few days, they're on my post wall: <https://www.reddit.com/user/HODLTheLineMyFriend/posts/>
+
+Keep on HODLin', friends! 🚀🚀🚀
+
+-----
+
+Edit:
+
+Our friend [u/wehadmagnets](https://www.reddit.com/u/wehadmagnets/) was kind enough to get the walled FT article for me "US investors park cash at Fed as market wrestles with negative yields" from here: <https://www.ft.com/content/cdec7f2e-6129-412c-b118-8906a2a0f92f>.
+
+TA;DR:
+
+-   Today's Reverse Repo was the largest ever
+
+-   "Investors" (more than just banks) are seeking places to park cash, as other 'safe' places are drying up and/or having zero or negative rates
+
+-   "It is also not over yet." -- analyst at Oxford Economics
+
+-   Cash reserves ballooning due to "the Fed's purchases of $120bn of Treasuries and agency mortgage-backed securities each month"
+
+-   Money-market funds are getting swamped with people's cash (<speculation>flight from equities?</speculation>)
+
+-   Fed is trying to avoid negative rates in money market
+
+-   No one thinks it's over
+
+-   Fed may have to raise interest rates on RRP or reserve balances in member banks to keep the federal funds rates from going lower (at 0.06 on target of 0.0-0.25)
+
+Edit 2:
+
+One more tweak, [u/leisure_rules](https://www.reddit.com/u/leisure_rules/) noted that the $120B is $120b total, $80b in T-Bonds and $40b in MBS (Mortgage Backed Securities).
+
+Um... could those be the Commercial MBS we've been hearing about that are toxic?

Data/Reverse-Repo-Operations-by-pctracer/2021-05-28-Reverse-Repo-Update.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart - May 28 2021 update
+========================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/HODLTheLineMyFriend](https://www.reddit.com/user/HODLTheLineMyFriend/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nn2yfa/reverse_repo_overnight_lending_chart_may_28_2021/) | 
+
+---
+
+[𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻](https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/search?q=flair_name%3A%22%F0%9D%97%A6%F0%9D%97%BD%F0%9D%97%B2%F0%9D%97%B0%F0%9D%98%82%F0%9D%97%B9%F0%9D%97%AE%F0%9D%98%81%F0%9D%97%B6%F0%9D%97%BC%F0%9D%97%BB%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+Latest from the NY Fed Desk, $479.5B in reverse repo treasury lending with 50 counterparties ([link](https://apps.newyorkfed.org/markets/autorates/temp)). Down by only 1%, counterparties unchanged. R2 value still at 0.95 on the curve. See below for what this means and how it *might* relate to GME.
+
+I think, given recent DD (including [today's](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nmxmri/clearing_up_the_fed_reverse_repos_and_what_it/) from [u/c-digs](https://www.reddit.com/u/c-digs/)), that this is either a) banks getting handed too much cash and trying to get it off their books overnight by turning from a liability (customer cash) to an asset (Treasury), or b) banks lending these Treasuries to hedge funds to improve their collateral and avoid margin calls. Or maybe a combination of both.
+
+[![r/DDintoGME - Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart - May 28 2021 update](https://preview.redd.it/4v9sr4gmaw171.png?width=876&format=png&auto=webp&s=d32e1c1d75c0d3285320b36eaadf7ae3b2063f80)](https://preview.redd.it/4v9sr4gmaw171.png?width=876&format=png&auto=webp&s=d32e1c1d75c0d3285320b36eaadf7ae3b2063f80)
+
+Linear match improved, with R2 of 0.927:
+
+[![r/DDintoGME - Reverse Repo Overnight Lending Chart - May 28 2021 update](https://preview.redd.it/axwx1sj1bw171.png?width=877&format=png&auto=webp&s=edfca046fe0c418826727e8009f7fdd00f0483f0)](https://preview.redd.it/axwx1sj1bw171.png?width=877&format=png&auto=webp&s=edfca046fe0c418826727e8009f7fdd00f0483f0)
+
+Quick reminder: there is no $500B cap on Reverse Repo treasury lending. There is, however, an $80B limit per participant, so individual banks may start 'running out' of Treasuries to lend onward to their hedgie friends, if that is what they are doing.
+
+Useful links
+
+-   Yesterday's chart: <https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nmcn1e/reverse_repo_overnight_lending_chart_update_for/>
+
+-   DD into Repo/Reverse Repo for those who are curious: <https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nlbsgy/the_fed_repo_market_and_overleveraged_equities/>
+
+-   Some DD on the true limit of the reverse repo by [u/BlindasBalls](https://www.reddit.com/u/BlindasBalls/): <https://www.reddit.com/r/DDintoGME/comments/nkmoi9/response_to_the_post_about_the_reverse_repo_limit/>
+
+-   Helpful/hilarious explainer on the Reverse Repo situation: <https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nixxvc/fed_is_in_a_pickle_economy_is_fuk_edition/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf>
+
+-   Where's the cash coming from? DD on possibility of many people getting out of equities: <https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nmxmri/clearing_up_the_fed_reverse_repos_and_what_it/>
+
+Keep on HODLin', friends! 🚀🚀🚀

Institutions/Brokers/Avanza/2021-05-27-Swedish-Broker-will-Finally-do-a-Non-Vote-Broker.md

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+Breaking: the Swedish broker AVANZA will finally do a non-vote broker! I'm proud of all the Swedes that fought the good fight!
+==============================================================================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/Jmeshareholder](https://www.reddit.com/user/Jmeshareholder/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/nm39ni/breaking_the_swedish_broker_avanza_will_finally/) | 
+
+---
+
+[News 📰 | Media 📱](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22News%20%F0%9F%93%B0%20%7C%20Media%20%F0%9F%93%B1%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+[![r/Superstonk - Breaking: the Swedish broker AVANZA will finally do a non-vote broker! I'm proud of all the Swedes that fought the good fight!](https://i.redd.it/dkq9z6hrom171.jpg)](https://i.redd.it/dkq9z6hrom171.jpg)

Monkey-Business/2021-06-24-Monkey-Business.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+# Monkey Business
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [Superstonk](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCI4EET9NJPWxUuXGlG6fxPA) | [YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52JbzEuYb8A&list=PLDwg9A7JEnq-GpLCtPxcrmKfIF-MzRuTo&index=2) | 
+
+---

NFT/2021-07-02-Clarifying-NFTs.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+Clarifying NFT's: What they are good for, and what they are not
+===============================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/GooseG17](https://www.reddit.com/user/GooseG17/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/oc7ji4/clarifying_nfts_what_they_are_good_for_and_what/) | 
+
+---
+
+[Education 👨‍🏫 | Data 🔢](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Education%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%8F%AB%20%7C%20Data%20%F0%9F%94%A2%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+Note\
+Etherium is an incorrect spelling. The correct spelling is filtered by automod. Since it is related to GameStop, blocking it is, in my opinion, absurd. Especially since it isn't even the correct name of the currency. For a sub that values open discourse and informed discussion, this is pretty disappointing.
+
+Intro
+
+NFT's have been getting a lot of attention lately due to the GameStop NFT, with a lot of the discussion demonstrating a lack of understanding on what exactly an NFT is and what it can be used for, so I thought I'd help explain some of the technical wizardry that is blockchain and its latest buzzword-craze.
+
+Blockchain
+
+A blockchain is a transactional database (ledger) that is stored and validated by many different computers. Imagine a bank statement that is verified and saved by thousands of different computers. This makes it virtually impossible to fraudulently alter if sufficiently decentralized. There are multiple methods blockchains can use to ensure that the network is decentralized to maintain security. Understanding them is beyond the scope of this post, but the major methods are proof of work and proof of stake. The main one relevant to GameStop is proof of stake, since the network they are using, Etherium, is upgrading to proof of stake in the near future.
+
+Etherium
+
+Etherium differs from the original blockchain design by implementing smart contracts. Smart contracts are computer programs that run on the blockchain, allowing developers to leverage security and reliability of blockchain technology for limitless possibilities. One these use cases are custom assets that do not require their own blockchain, vastly simplifying secure deployment. These are called tokens.
+
+Token
+
+A token is a a term used for user-created coins on the Etherium network, essentially anything that isn't the core currency. Etherium transactions are not free. The cost depends on the relative processing power required to complete the transaction, so keeping programs as simple as possible is important. Which is why there are multiple types of tokens instead of a single all-purpose type. There are two major types:
+
+1.  ERC20\
+    The typical token of the Etherium network. They are *fungible*, meaning every token is entirely identical. Because token ownership is basic to keep track of, only needing the owner address and quantity, usage is simple and each transaction is inexpensive.
+
+2.  ERC721\
+    An alternative to ERC20 tokens that provide greater utility. They are *non-fungible tokens*, so each token has unique identifiers and metadata. An ERC721 token can store many more data fields, making them comparatively expensive to create and transact. They are not a direct replacement for ERC20 tokens, primarily due to the added expense and complexity.
+
+Now that definitions are out of the way, lets get in to what does and does not make sense for GameStop to use an NFT for:
+
+Non-Fungible Token (ERC721) uses:
+
+1.  Collectibles Things like playing cards or in-game items
+
+2.  Licenses/ownership certificates Like video games, for enabling trading of used games
+
+Fungible token (ERC20) uses:
+
+1.  Crypto dividends\
+    Stocks are fungible, so why wouldn't a dividend be too? Not only would an NFT dividend be wasteful, it would also mean that our identical shares wouldn't net us an identical reward, which is completely nonsensical in my opinion.
+
+2.  Stock market shares\
+    If the stock market were to be run on the blockchain, NFT's wouldn't just be wasteful or unfair, they would be completely insane. Storing billions of NFT's (one for every share) instead of thousands of ERC20's (one for each stock) would be vastly more resource intensive for no benefit.
+
+Please let me know if you find a mistake. Criticisms welcome. Thanks for reading!
+
+Smooth-brain simplification edit:
+
+All the pros of a crypto dividend (like GameStop having sole distribution capability) remain with a *fungible* (ERC20) token. A *Non-Fungible Token* (ERC721, NFT) has cons that wouldn't make sense for this purpose.

README.md

@@ -16,15 +16,8 @@ This repository of GME-related content and relevant information serves two prima
 
 > Please note most if not all of this content is not my own. All authors and sources are linked at the top of each file, and I encourage you to read the content via the source. There are a lot of intelligent apes who spent copious amounts of time doing their research and deserve your upvote!
 
-## Key Features
-### Search by Date 
-![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/82035192/122644367-d7677500-d0e2-11eb-9cd7-a1443b36a33b.png) 
-
-### Search by Title
-![wikAPEdia-search-2](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/82035192/122644436-1e556a80-d0e3-11eb-9cbe-0ecfacc14b09.png)
-
-### Browse by Theme
-![wikAPEdia-themes](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/82035192/122644608-06321b00-d0e4-11eb-80b6-2a90a7019d64.png)
+## How to Help
+Can't find content in wikAPEdia that you think should be archived? Don't hesitate to reach out to me on [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Meticulous-)!
 
 ---
 
@@ -48,6 +41,9 @@ _Check out the [Must-Read](https://github.com/verymeticulous/wikAPEdia/tree/main
 
 ## Some People to Look Out For by [u/zedinstead](https://www.reddit.com/u/zedinstead/)
 
+![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/82035192/124322077-d3107280-db4c-11eb-84c1-6534161b4db7.png)
+*Banner created by [GameStop](https://twitter.com/GameStop?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor)*
+
 Exponential Floor guy -- [u/JTH1](https://www.reddit.com/u/JTH1/)
 
 Elliot Waves guy -- [u/possibly6](https://www.reddit.com/u/possibly6/)
@@ -109,6 +105,7 @@ Quant guy 1 - [u/xpurplexamyx](https://www.reddit.com/u/xpurplexamyx/)
 Quant guy 2 - [u/myplayprofile](https://www.reddit.com/u/myplayprofile/)
 
 ---
+
 ### Buy, Hodl, ~~Vote~~ 💎🙌
 
 ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/82035192/122643702-5c508f80-d0df-11eb-80a8-c1d5eadc56f8.png)

Regulations/2021-07-02-New-OCC-Rule-Passed-to-Fuck-Large-Financial-Institutions-out-Using-Derivatives-to-Pass-their-Tests.md

@@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+New OCC rule passed to fuck the large financial institutions out of using derivatives to pass their tests.
+==========================================================================================================
+
+| Author       | Source       | 
+| :-------------: |:-------------:|
+|  [u/laflammaster](https://www.reddit.com/user/laflammaster/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ocotk9/new_occ_rule_passed_to_fuck_the_large_financial/) | 
+
+---
+
+[DD 👨‍🔬](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22DD%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%94%AC%22&restrict_sr=1)
+
+[u/leisure_rules](https://www.reddit.com/u/leisure_rules/) has pointed me to the OCC - something that I should have been taking a look at since the beginning of my journey into the workings of the Fed.
+
+So I decided to look deeper. OP: <https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ocfcfi/occ_rule_in_effect_7121_net_stable_funding_ratio/>
+
+TLDR start - and this is not short, as the document is close to 10k pages, with this section of 102 pages alone;
+
+After the recent test, it looks like the Fed shat themselves. A new rule was rushed to be introduced by the self-regulating fucks for the banks and split NFSR into 4 categories of application. Despite the rule having been in plan since 2016 and kind of in play, but has a ton of mentions of '08 crash.
+
+[![r/Superstonk - New OCC rule passed to fuck the large financial institutions out of using derivatives to pass their tests.](https://preview.redd.it/gpshz8d4mw871.png?width=808&format=png&auto=webp&s=5217e1c67fed03fb4076ac08fdc6b6661210b8d3)](https://preview.redd.it/gpshz8d4mw871.png?width=808&format=png&auto=webp&s=5217e1c67fed03fb4076ac08fdc6b6661210b8d3)
+
+the Fed looking back at the '08 crash - I'll fucking do it again!
+
+Only the Category II of the banks have submitted a comment that the fucks in Category II will have a fire sale with such strict requirements. Rule passed for more stringent reporting just after the Fed passed the stress test for the banks, allowing them to buy back shares ($12Bn worth, likely the $12Bn that they got from gouging their customers on overdraft fees - no joke ($11Bn in 2019)).
+
+Because it is instituted on July 1st, 2021 - allowing the banks to have 10 business days to provide a response/plan on how to deal with their shitty NFSR ratio - we are likely looking at a few weeks if the NFSR ration is rated as bad in some of the banks. But we can expect some movement in the market next week - real movement.
+
+Now these agencies are no longer going to count derivatives towards a positive ASF (Available Stable Funding) factor. Further, RSF (Required Stable Funding) factor is set to 100% for the derivatives. This is a double-banana worthy of Rick!
+
+Look at the equation (sauce to [u/leisure_rules](https://www.reddit.com/u/leisure_rules/)) :
+
+[![r/Superstonk - New OCC rule passed to fuck the large financial institutions out of using derivatives to pass their tests.](https://preview.redd.it/06e8x7immw871.png?width=350&format=png&auto=webp&s=02ab003204ff3a22949659661339635e9a41fbdf)](https://preview.redd.it/06e8x7immw871.png?width=350&format=png&auto=webp&s=02ab003204ff3a22949659661339635e9a41fbdf)
+
+NSFR Ratio calculation
+
+What is ASF:
+
+-   Sum of carrying values of the banking organization's liabilities and regulatory capital, each multiplied by a standardized weighting (ASF factor) ranging from 0 to 100%.
+
+Here's the chart of proposed ASF factors: <https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020-26546/p-363>
+
+What is RSF:
+
+-   Sum of the carrying values of its assets, each multiplied by a standardized weighting (RSF factor) ranging from 0 to 100% to reflect the relative need for funding over a 1 year horizon based on liquidity characteristics of the asset
+
+-   PLUS RSF amounts based on the banking organization's committed facilities and derivatives exposure (CRIAND!!!)
+
+Here's the chart of the RSF factors: <https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020-26546/p-481>
+
+TLDR end;
+
+I'd like to put together a summary of what the fuck is going on - its all in plain English, and I suggest to read it yourself to gain more wrinkles:
+
+Introduction
+
+The OCC, the Fed, and OCC (agencies) are looking into a 2016 rule to establish NSFR (net stable funding ratio) for any institution with >=$10Bn of consolidated assets.
+
+Another two proposals that were being looked into are:
+
+-   scope of NSFR
+
+-   Complex Institution Liquidity Monitoring Report (FR 2052a) - to basically get self-regulating information from the banks (Smells like Goldman's F3 to anyone?)
+
+Background
+
+In the '08 crash, the banks had issues with risk management, specifically how the banks managed their liabilities to fund their assets.
+
+Further, there was an overreliance on short-term, less-stable funding - no shit, they were leveraged to shits.
+
+In response, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) created 2 liquidity standards:
+
+1.  Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) - for high net cash outflows in a period of stress
+
+2.  NFSR - for banks to not be taking handies behind Wendy's after using their credit cards to play the casino
+
+Part of the LCR rule was for the banks to hold a specific amount of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets (HQLA) that can be easily converted into cash to meet payments for a 30-day stress period.
+
+Along with the "poorly done" Dodd-Frank Act, the board (Fed) decided to adopt an "enhanced prudential standards rule, which established general risk management, liquidity risk management, and stress testing requirements for certain bank holding companies and foreign banking organizations."
+
+PROBLEM: The framework never addressed the relationship between a banking organization's funding profile and its composition of assets and off-balance commitments. NO SHIT!
+
+ANOTHER PROBLEM: The fucking rule was passed AFTER the recent stress test!
+
+Here's where the margin debt comes in - being 2x that of '00 and '08 crashes. Coupled with [u/Criand](https://www.reddit.com/u/Criand/) DD - means the OCC is realizing how big of a shitshow it has become, and was never dealt with until Retail started making money and exposing their shit.
+
+[![r/Superstonk - New OCC rule passed to fuck the large financial institutions out of using derivatives to pass their tests.](https://preview.redd.it/h6z4tnfdnw871.png?width=1238&format=png&auto=webp&s=2379718666e122b78046c5be4ee487a7df8ec057)](https://preview.redd.it/h6z4tnfdnw871.png?width=1238&format=png&auto=webp&s=2379718666e122b78046c5be4ee487a7df8ec057)
+
+Margin Debt w/ S&P500
+
+Overview of the Proposed Rule and Proposed Scope of Application
+
+-   The Proposed Stable Funding Requirement
+
+1.  In June '16, comments were invited on the rule
+
+2.  Rule was generally consistent with the Basel NSFR, but has some characteristics of U.S. market
+
+3.  Proposed rule: maintaining ratio of ASF equal or greater than the minimum funding needs (RSF) over a 1 year horizon to be minimum 1.0.
+
+The Final Rule
+
+-   The final rule assigns a zero percent RSF factor to unencumbered level 1 liquid asset securities and certain short-term secured lending transactions backed by level 1 liquid asset securities
+
+-   The final rule provides more favorable treatment for certain affiliate sweep deposits and non-deposit retail funding
+
+-   The final rule permits cash variation margin to be eligible to offset a covered company's current exposures under its derivatives transactions even if it does not meet all of the criteria in the agencies' supplementary leverage ratio rule (SLR rule). In addition, variation margin received in the form of rehypothecatable level 1 liquid asset securities also would be eligible to offset a covered company's current exposures
+
+-   The final rule reduces the amount of a covered company's gross derivatives liabilities that will be assigned a 100 percent RSF factor
+
+Application of the final rule.
+
+The agencies have decided to break down the application/companies into 4 categories:
+
+-   Category I: US global systemically important banks (GSIBs) and any of their depository institution subsidiaries with >=$10Bn in consolidated assets
+
+-   Category II: Top-tier banking organizations, other than US GSIBs, with >=$700Bn in consolidated assets of >=$75Bn in average cross-jurisdiction activity, and to their depository institutions with >=$10Bn in consolidated assets.
+
+-   Category III: Top-tier banking organizations that have >=$250Bn in consolidated assets, or that have >$100Bn in consolidated assets and also have >=$75Bn or more in:
+
+    -   Average nonbank assets
+
+    -   Average weighted short-term wholesale funding
+
+    -   Average off-balance sheet exposure (not in Category I or II)
+
+-   Category IV: Top-tier depository institutions holding companies or US intermediate holding companies that in each case have >=$100Bn in consolidated assets and >=$50Bn average weighted short-term wholesale funding (not in Category I, II, or III)
+
+NFSR Requirements by Category
+
+1.  Category I: 100%
+
+2.  Category II: 100%
+
+3.  Category III: 85%
+
+4.  Category IV: 70%
+
+Short Sales - I SUGGEST YOU READ THE WHOLE SECTION (IT IS GOLD) (<https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020-26546/p-810>)