What is going on what is going on hello, hello, hello, folks, folks, folks, i hope everyone had a okay midday session amc bouncing off of 29.81, we're now heading back up to 31 jimmy bouncing off of 145.69. It's currently making a run back to 148 spy kind of sideways. I could zoom in a little bit more on that. Actually, let's switch over to iwm.

It does seem as if the russell 2000 is a bit more impactful. You can see a lot of similarities. Robin hood somehow magically saving itself off of 58 and it's right now, at 72, 72 on hod, all right, hello, hello, hello people are starting to come in. I appreciate you.

I appreciate all you, hello, hello, we um, so i have a couple things. I want to go over uh i'll quickly, give you the ortex numbers, and we can look at some of that other stuff uh, but there's two uh. I guess important things. I really want to go over before we get into power hour that i think are going to be important from the discord.

There's some requests to basically explain the options chain calls puts and what it means and how to interpret the options chain. Uh so we'll be doing that and then i also want to dive a bit more into the. I guess, let's call it the math surrounding this say: technologies vote right here, uh, so i think there's some important things we can go over and uh. I appreciate all of you for sending me early this morning, uh there i was doing my my own math and studying last night and then early this morning i heard some people just saying something along the lines of hey.

You need to check out this dd and some people sent me that reddit uh, just i am a little hesitant to like just accept reddit at its face value, but i have to admit - and we're going to be giving into it. So i'm going to be giving this person all the praise that they deserve um with d riles, i believe uh it's on reddit, but we're going to be going over that some very, very accurate and hardcore math so across the board. Uh excited to give you that information to go over to it. What does it mean? What does it not mean explain some of my own math and like where a lot of it we align on? There is a little bit of a differentiation and that's okay.

It's a healthy debate um, but i i think we're going to be getting into some interesting things so really, overall, what this information is starting to get to is to the point that market makers, prime brokers, someone out there has a lot of explaining to do - is The best way for me to summon up where did my pen go? I need my pen where's my lucky pen. Oh here it is, i dropped my hoop drop my pen again all right. So, let's rock into this session session session session, all right all right. I guess uh very quickly as we let some people come into this uh.

I think the best opportunity. Let's kick off this one a little bit. I want to hop into options and the best way to read in options chains and what it does and doesn't mean just clear up any questions, especially for people who are newer to the world of options, and i will be using amc as an example. So this platform is weeble and in the bottom right you just click on options and you you're going to get this thing.

You're going to see this on various platforms, various brokerages and you're going to see something like this. That is, it's referred to as an options chain a couple things to go over. I just want everyone to feel much more comfortable. What this is, what this isn't on the left side, you have the calls on the right side.

You have the puts in the world of trading a call option. It's an option contract that is your legal right to buy a hundred shares per contract at the strike price on a certain date. So what does that mean? If you're buying a call, that's saying by the time you get to before all the way up to and including that expiration date, you have the legal right to buy a hundred shares per contract for the strike price, which is in the middle here up to and Including that strike price, the put is kind of the opposite. Instead of the legal right to buy a hundred shares, you have the legal right to sell 100 shares and right now, the way i'm explaining all this.

That's through the concept and the lens, as if you're buying a call or buying a put, you can always create a position by selling a call and selling a put and that's how you would invert it. And i think that might kind of cause a bit more confusion for this particular talk. So, let's just keep it to the concept of buying a call buying a put if you buy a call on the left side over here, calls that is a bullish bet. You're.

Looking for the stock to go up, if you buy a put, that is a bearish bet, you're looking for the stock to go down and you're kind of basing it on two separate things here up top, you see the expiration date. That is the date all the way up to that the contract would be valid, and then the other aspect is - and when i say valid, is after that date, the date of expiration. It disappears into the ether and you have to make your decision to close the contract and do whatever you want to do before then and we'll dive into that in just a second. The other important aspect is your strike.

Do you think that amc will be over 35 by august 6th? That's one way to interpret it. It's the value of the stock. That's the strike price that you want to make the bet on, so you might notice that there's two different colorations here. We have kind of this like light br bluish, whatever you're going to call it, and then you have the gray and they're kind of category caddy corner of each other.

Why do we have that? Well, a call is a bullish bet and a put if you're buying them. A call is a bullish bet and a put is a bearish bet. So these two at the top left and the bottom right are referred to as being in the money. Why are they in the money? Well, the stock is currently trading at 30, 43.

So anything below that in terms of a call, is it in the money because it calls a bullish bet and anything above that is in the money for a put, because that's in the money, because that's a bearish bet so basically they're already covered you're you're in The money, the opposite of that the top right and the bottom left would be referred to as out of the money, because in a call you're looking for the stock to trend upward and then if it gets above 31 31's, then in the money 32 is in The money as the stock goes up up up more things, go from out of the money to in the money, and then the opposite is true for the put as if the stock is trending downward. You're gon na have more of these strike. Prices that go in the money so basically top left bottom right in the money top right bottom left out of the money on the right side. You have the puts on the left side, you have the calls in the middle, you have the strike price.

That's the price that you're betting against versus the actual value of the stock and then on the top. You have all these different expiration dates. A couple other things to pay attention to here. So when you're in a call when you're in a put, if you own those you don't have to ride it till expiration, you can get out beforehand.

Just so everyone knows and there's a couple ways to get out. You can exercise it. So, for example, let's say that amc decides to rip tomorrow: you buy calls at 31 and the stock rips. You can exercise it and that's basically fulfilling the contract.

You're saying no. I want the 100 shares from whoever sold me this contract for 31. A share. That's what you would end up paying on top of that, the other thing that you have to pay to create the position is referred to as premium and right here: here's the bid and the ask of the premium.

So right now, if you see a dollar fifty and that's what you're trying to get filled at remember that options are leveraged at a rate of 100 to one so you're, paying 100x that it's not a dollar fifty, it's actually a hundred and fifty dollars per contract. Uh this is called the premium, that's what you pay to get into the contract and then once you're in the contract you're now playing it. So if you decide to exercise on it, let's say the stock runs and you bought the contract at 31 and the stock's trading at anything above it. It might behoove you to actually exercise that and you have to have the capital in your account, then to actually get out at 31.

you're buying a hundred shares per contract at 31 a share even if the stock is trading at 32. 33. 34. 35.

That's the point of this contract: it's saying you have the legal right to get filled at 31, regardless of what amc is actually training at. That would be a fee on top of the fact that you did pay 150 to get in per contract, because that's the premium there's a couple ways to interpret this of win-win get out, and i think some of the complexities arise when you're talking about all right Are you writing it out to expiration or not to expiration and, let's say you're like hey i'm in this contract? I want to spend 150, but i don't have the money in my account to buy a hundred shares for 31 dollars per contract. At that point you can't exercise it then, but you can just sell your option. That is completely fine as the stock trends upward, especially in more of a volatile manner.

This premium it'll go from 150. I mean in the time we've been talking. It went from 150 to 155, you can just sell the contract and then collect that profit difference. If you don't have the money in your account to exercise - or maybe you don't even want to exercise for whatever reason, because this applies to not only amc but any other stock out there.

For all of this, the puts are going to be kind of the exact opposite if it starts to go down and you bought a put it'll increase in value and for that one you're looking to sell stock remember calls the legal right to buy stock at a Certain value well puts are the legal rate to sell a stock at a certain value. So in one side you need to have the capital in your account. On the other side, you need to have the stock in your account. The calls and puts are the perfect inverse of each other.

So if you understand calls or if you understand, puts and you're struggling with the opposite, one literally just inverse it and you should theoretically be good to go another thing that we see a lot of okay. What is this break-even price if you're buying it it might like? Your brokerage, might show you the break-even price, your break-even price comes into play when you're holding it all the way until expiration. So, for example, if you were to get this right now with amc at 31 and hold it till august 6, this is the expiration date that we're looking at. You would have to add the dollar 50 to it, because that's your breakeven price, that's what you paid! You added on to the strike price.

That's what you would need amc at to be break even on the position as in to not make money to not lose money. If you held it all the way till expiration you don't have to, though you could get 31 right now, let's say amc gaps up tomorrow. It doesn't even necessarily have to be the current strike price plus a premium, because there are other things that go into pricing. An option you have yes, the value of the underlying stock, the underlying equity other than that you also have the time until expiration the more time the more valuable the contract is, and that's true for calls and puts, and then the final thing is volatility, as volatility Increases so does the value of the premiums once again that goes for calls or puts so you want the way a stock or excuse me, an option has its most value is the most time until expiration.

The stock is trending in your direction and it's trending in your direction in your favor in a high volatility manner, very, very important, and then obviously the opposite is true. If you're selling, if you're selling, you don't want the stock to move, you want it to trend away from what you're doing and you kind of want it to happen in a very low volatility manner, and then in all that, basically theta is benefiting you as long As like those other things are holding true, but once again in this particular talk, we're just talking about buying a call we're talking about buying a put um overall, that's kind of like your main rundown, of to interpret all the things going on cause on the left Side puts on the right side these two, the top left and the bottom right are in the money. The top right and the bottom left are out of the money. We have the expiration dates.

Obviously, as you go further down the expiration like, if i just pick september's you're gon na see a big jump in the value of all these. Let me just show you this comparatively look, how much more valuable these contracts are. It's just because you have so much more time until expiration, as you have more time, till expiration. The value of the premium naturally goes up, and that makes sense because it means you have more time for the stock to actually do something.

So i just want to illustrate how, if you go up you're going to they're going to be more expensive, so that's we're talking about premium volatility is important and right here we have the implied volatility, as you can see the implied volatility if it goes higher, like All of a sudden, if amc were to start ripping at this exact moment, you would see the iv kind of spike up. As volatility goes up, the premiums are more valuable as it goes down, they are less valuable. The implied volatility that's also referred to as iv. Another way you can interpret this, so we have the bid in the ask that tells you what's going on with the premium the last price, that's just like the last trade that went through for that option volume is the volume traded on that particular day.

So on this particular day there was 12 000 in trading volume on the 31 for amc and the open interest is the cumulative aggregate total of the live contracts for that strike price on that expiration date. So volume is for that day and then the open interest is the current running total of live contracts, contracts that are still currently active for this particular, whatever your expiration date is, and whatever your strike price is. So i think, with all that, we've kind of gone through all the different columns, all the different rows, what this all means. So i hope that offers a bit more clarity on what an options chain is obviously we're kind of just scraping the surface here in terms of options trading.

This is more of just like a quick run through of what this stuff does and doesn't mean, but it gets much much more in depth, but i hope that this is more of a a good setup for you feeling a little bit more confident when you're looking At and trying to understand what an options chain is all right. I guess with all that being said. Let me know if you have any questions on that and if you don't have any questions on that, that's when i want to hop into this conversation about. What's going on with this say, technologies, vote and voting on timothy b and all that, but i'll give you guys a couple minutes.

Let me know if there's any just options chains, questions in general, i'm more than happy to answer them. Hedgie, trap or not. Food is on a tear today. There's no reason we can't make money on the way up might explain.

Stop losses to the ape a stop loss. Well, it depends on what type of stop loss uh, but whether you're, long or short, it's when the stock or option hits that value that you're going to close the position uh, my guy, what is going on with amc doing so bad i've been down 8k plus For a month, by the way, love you and what you do what's going on with amc is supply is outweighing demand whether true supply true demand, whether manipulated, whatever you want to call it. At its most inherent level, the supply is outweighing the demand, the buyers and sellers remember with every single trade. If you're buying someone is selling.

If you're selling someone is buying every trade, a buyer has a seller. Every seller has a buyer you're not buying from the ether you're, not selling into the ether. What moves the price is: the agreed upon price between the buyer and the seller right now, if the next buyer and the next seller agree upon 36, amc would hop up 236, it's all about the price that they agree upon. If i'm a painter and i'm trying to sell you a painting, you and i agree on a price that it's going to get sold at, i might say, hey.

I want to sell it to you at a thousand dollars and you might be like i'm only willing to buy it for 900 and i might say okay, but if you come to me and you're like hey, i'd, buy it for a thousand and then another person Comes in and says i'll buy it for a thousand one hundred. Well, i'm gon na sell it to the person at thousand and one hundred it's all about. When you come to trading. There's the core axiom that every buyer has a seller and every seller has a buyer and it still is the basic rules of supply and demand.

Yes, we can have a conversation of, can they manipulate supply and demand? That's a different conversation. I'd like to think that the answer is yes, but it still comes down to these core axioms of every buyer. Has a seller. Every seller has a buyer and you it's always just the basic supply and demand right now.

If every hedge fund and retail investor in the world wanted to buy amc, that would be an immense amount of demand. It would override the supply and the price would skyrocket upwards. On the flip side, if everyone in the world who owned amc, all retail, all hedge funds, such as blackrock or money, managers such as vanguard, if everyone wanted to sell, that would be an immense amount of supply. That would outweigh the demand and we would drop so right now.

What we're seeing today is the supply is outweighing the demand. Another way to word, that is, the selling pressure is outweighing the buying pressure of what we're seeing on an intraday basis. Like i said yes, there are various ways to manipulate supply and demand, but i'm just trying to illustrate the core concepts of what we're actually dealing with. Please explain how to confirm shares i have on weibo.

You have to create an account on apex clearing and then connect your weeble account on apex, clearing uh, i 100 trust plaid and all that information. The fact that say technologies is a link tweeted out by adam aaron. I trust that, if you don't trust it. Okay, if you don't want to deal with it, don't deal with it.

I think you could do it uh. You should always have two factor authentication. If you want to afterwards, you should change your password honestly, that's just a good cyber security tip in general. You should always be kind of updating your passwords at a regular cadence, but this i saw a little bit during the break today that there are people who are just saying that this is set up by citadel, that that's fun, there's no proof of that whatsoever.

This is people that are trying to. I guess, damage the community in my opinion, uh, hey mark, could you walk us through what things to look for when timing, an entry into options play uh speculative calls, not financial advice. So for me, i think it's a good thing to follow the flow. Follow the big money.

Look at the open interest. Look at the volume see where the big money bets are. Another thing is: maybe you see that the volatility is coming down and then all of a sudden it bottoms out - and the volatility is starting to pick back up. That's another good sign.

You want to buy at a low volatility environment and then have the volatility and the price action explode in your favor. Those are some things i can look at um i like to pay attention to following the flow following the big money that can lead to some awesome trades, because a lot of the times big money might know something that we don't know. So that's one way to capitalize on it um, but alexander. Those are some just top-tier generic general commentary options are very complex, but i don't want that to scare anyone trust me if i can learn options.

So can you it just takes the time, the dedication and the curiosity on your part to get to that level where you're feeling comfortable with options. I know it might seem like greek or just a completely foreign alien language to you, but i'm telling you, if you put in the time you will learn it uh matt, give me some hope. Inspire me feeling down clutching pearls very hard james. I mean this is all of our individual trades.

For me, i look at things like the share count going on. I look at the fact that the shorts haven't covered and that's what's up for me, but james. It's up to you. You have to have confidence in your own dd in the situation.

I don't know if it's healthy necessarily for people to be exclusively looking at so people on social media for the trade, because i'm not your financial advisor. It's your money, i'm playing with my money, you're playing with your money, i'm more than happy to explain what certain things do mean, what they don't mean and maybe that'll give you like the aha moment of understanding something. But in terms of hope i mean what gives me hope is my own dd in this play. So with that, i would say that, what's going, to give, you hope is confidence in your trade like in this? Is your trade as much as it's my trade? So if you don't have hope or if you're lacking hope, maybe dive a bit more into the dd and feel confident in what it does and doesn't mean because that's what's going to give me hope.

And yes, i could explain my dd and of course, like that. The fact that the shorts haven't covered they're paying this fee, they can't pay it forever like there's not they don't have an infinite amount of money, but still when it comes down to it, it's your trade. So you have to have confidence in your own trade. Uh.

Hey matthew, mark coors, can you do an ortex check for arct? I can and honestly i should do that anyway for um, amc and gme, but let me just arct, let me give you this one. Really quick, arct uh, a therapeutics holding company right away tells me it's a stock. I would not trade, but the short interest is 24 and it's a low float. So that's kind of interesting, but i see that it was running.

Is this yesterday they might have ended up covering yesterday and then we'll see the report of that tomorrow. Remember you cannot get the report of shorts covering in real time it's operating on a two-day delay, but really no other aspect beyond that is, i guess, delayed on ortex matt. Did you see the reddit screenshot sent to you on twitter, about schwab? Partial fill on 200 shares. I did not i'm an irrational and superstitious greek man.

Perhaps we should move amc back to the right uh i like to follow it more of like with the alphabetical i mean people. A lot of the people are here specifically for amc. I'm still long on amc, i'm so long on gme, but i like just more of the alphabetical setup, hey matt, i couldn't take any more while i loved holding 420 shares. I had to buy more.

This is literally the best summer sale ever. What is going on cat facts all right, um, i'm not seeing really any questions coming in about the uh options chain. So maybe i should what's the best way for me to do it. Do you trust, ith, who's, ith, you're, uh, sorry, mtpa! I'm not really sure what this question is.

Do your do you trust it? I don't know who ith is. What is this? Uh are typical meme stocks, upsurge caused by delta, gamma, hedging, more or less effective? If said, call options are bought at sooner or later, expiration. Uh, it doesn't really have to do with the length of the expiration has to do with how many contracts are going into the money um. So it's just an immense amount of contracts that go out of the money to in the money and they force the hedging from the people who sold them uh.

Why are banks and pension funds inventing investing in amc? I mean, i think, it's as simple as they believe they can make money off of it. No one invests into position really that thinks it's going to go down, they're, investing because they're like hey, i see value here and i think it could go up. Okay, so lit: let's talk about hang on, let me get set up for you folks, and i want to talk about this, and i want to talk about this and let me zoom in uh. You guys know me, i'm not the biggest person to bring up reddit, because i think some reddit is awesome.

I think some reddit doesn't know what they're talking about it's a mixed bag. This is one of those scenarios on reddit that, i think, is an amazingly good. Write-Up, i believe, okay, it's on amc stock and it's posted by with d raleigh's. If you want to check it out, it's called some proper statistical analysis and more realistic estimation of shares.

So before we get into this, let's set a premise: let's set what's going on, so just so, you know amc as of now as as i'm filling. This has reported about 513 million shares it's in in its outstanding shares. That's how many shares can be owned. Obviously that gets a little bit more complicated because whenever you short, that means that someone's loaning it and you buy it.

You are bum, even though you bought it you're lending it out and then from there someone who borrows it sells it so there's a new owner. So you can go above that 513 million shares legally um. I don't want anyone out there to thinking that the max value is 513 million. That's that is not correct.

That is a misunderstanding. Um of rehypothecation, if you own it. If in a system, there's five shares, i own all five shares, i loan it out someone who's shorting, it sells it to someone else. Well now i still own five shares, but there's 10 shares because they sold it to someone else who ended up buying it.

That is rehypothecation and it can daisy chain out literally until infinity and because of that, when we're talking about amc, the 513 million shares that is literally the minimum ownership. I know it's a weird concept to wrap your mind around, but whenever it comes to a stock, the minimum ownership is 100 and as soon as you have any legal or illegal naked shorts, you're going to go above that number and the ownership is going to go Above 100 um, so we just need to set some base. I guess some base concepts for this conversation to make it a little bit more fruitful. So as of now, as i'm saying, this amc has 513 million shares and we know as of june 2nd when they did the share count.

At that point there was 502 million, they added another 13.5 through an additional dilution, and we also know from that point at time. More than 80 percent of amc shares are held by a broad base of retail investors, with an average holding of around 120 shares. The 4.1 million - that's not saying all retail is 4.1 million. That's saying how many unique entities owned - amc, that's including all of retail banks, institutions, hedge funds, 4.1 million.

So for this it's probably going to be easy, and this is an underestimation which is good to be conservative. But let's say it's about four million four million retail, because i don't think that there's a hundred thousand banks institutions insiders hedge funds, so we're going to be using four million for this once again, that's an underestimation because we want to show the point of this is To show that, even with the most conservative floor estimates we are somehow just violating the laws of numbers and math and that it's not adding up, if you can do that with the most conservative floor estimates when you come to like a reasonable average estimate, it gets Even worse, so that is why we're taking the conservative floor estimates. So we know 400 million retail 4.1 million unique owners, including everyone as of early june, there's 120 shares per retail owner, and on top of that, we there was 5.502 million. But now there's about 513 million shares outstanding uh and at minimum 100 ownership.

So this was where it comes in and gets interesting um for the august, 9th earnings call. They have put out this system, app.say technologies and you're allowed to vote, to vote and to post a question or do any of that stuff. You have to register your account and when you register your account this, it allows you to see how many shares you have um. So it's a verified really running total of what all these votes have.

So, for example, the big thing going on right now across social media is looking at this timothy b questions. Do you have any plans to offer a dividend again? This is not me at all, but some big wrinkly brain out there realized that if we get everyone to vote on this 31.6 000 people as of like 20 minutes ago, i haven't reloaded the page, because i want to keep my numbers consistent, unique individuals voted and In the aggregate that represented 38 million shares, people realize that on an individual question, as we get more and more people to vote, that could give us an interesting insight into how many shares are truly out there and if it can get to a certain degree of Like kind of saying hey, this is not possible and honestly, as i'm about to show you not only from my own math but from this very impressive piece of dd done on reddit, that, yes, these numbers do not add up and in fact we have more shares Than can possibly be explained so right now. This is where it gets interesting. If you look at these shares the 37.9 million and you divide it by the 31.6 000 unique individuals who voted that comes out to 1 200 shares, and just so you know, i have the math here - the 31.6 000 divided by the 4.1 million unique individual entities That own it, that is about seven seven percent, so we're very close to one full percent and that might sound a bit weird to you of like hang on.

If we don't even have a percent. How is that statistically significant, and this is going to get? I guess i don't want to get into the weeds of a deep statistical conversation, but with the magnitude of this many votes. Yes, it is statistically significant, but maybe not statistically significant in the way that you think on this morning stream, honestly before, like i was reading this reddit and everything, i saw a lot of people doing some sort of average value they're like hang on. If we look at this and then multiply the 1200 shares by the 4 million, the 4.1 million - that that's a multi-billion number, but that is not good math.

That is not accurate, because i do not believe that the average retail owner owns 1 200 shares. I mean that is that's a 35 000 investment based on the current price of amc uh, especially given this past year. I don't think that the average person out there, the average retail trader, has that kind of money laying around that they could invest into this stock. So what i think it is is you can't use that in any form of a normal distribution, or anything like that? I think we're in a scenario where it's in this is exactly what i was saying in the morning stream of it's referred to as a bimodal distribution, which basically is a fancy way to say that you have two different humps.

You have some people who probably and the people who are going out of their way to vote, have thousands of shares on average over 1000 shares and then you're gon na have most of your people, who don't have that many and that's perfectly okay. This is not fun. Let me just stick with me for a second while i explain this math and actually graphically, let's go through um raleigh's. First, and just i mean this is a very good explanation right here, where you have less of a spike around a couple thousand, but then you also have this gigantic spike, that of people representing that they own a smaller amount of shares.

Once again, this is a bimodal distribution and it's way better than just averaging it and multiplying it by the 4 million. This is more accurate and it's a more reasonable. Like honestly, you could say that when people are just averaging it and multiplying it by the 4 million, that's not mathematically, accurate by any means. If you see someone doing that, it doesn't really tell you anything: it's not valid data.

So, first of all, let me set this up for you and then kind of explain their math, where i agree where i disagree and really their explanation and my explanation, even though we disagree sometimes in the middle. The conclusion is still the same. That mathematically. We cannot explain in excess of hundreds of millions of shares so anyway, let's hop into the key point of this as a phd holder in a hard science, it was really grinding my gears to see bad uninformed statistics just taking the average from voting and multiplying by 4.1 million 100 agree with that.

That is bad statistics. You should not be doing this. What i thought was unique about this. The big thing is: when you have the bimodal distribution, the big question is: what weighting do you give the two spikes, for example uh in real life, where you see a bimodal distribution, it was taught to me in restaurants in restaurants.

You see a spike in the morning and then maybe a spike at night for breakfast and dinner, while in the midday it might not be there. You see this a lot. Another example is speeding. Tickets, i believe, is another example.

So throughout the us you're going to see a lot, a lot of speeding tickets right above 30 and 35, because there's so many, i guess highly policed areas that the speed limit is 25 and then another one is highways around 60 65. 70. Something like that. So if you were look to look at where speeding tickets are given in terms of how fast they're going you're gon na see spikes at certain values and that's exactly where we're i'm hypothesizing that we're going to see an ownership of amc, a huge spike around 100 120 shares we got that information from adam aaron and then a smaller spike around the multi thousand dollar or multi thousand share ownership and that's kind of what we're seeing here very, very important stuff.

And the question is: how much do you weight those two different spikes? So what i think is big brain and very cool about this particular hypothesis and thesis is they're using the pareto principle of the 80 20 rule. If you've never heard of the pareto principle, it's basically saying that there's a natural phenomena that really you're going to see this split a lot. So, for example, if you own a business, there's a very good chance that 20 of your employees are doing 80 of your work, there's um! You could use it so much of there's a good chance that, on a basketball team, 20 of the players are scoring 80 percent of the points you you see this phenomena throughout many many things in life and that's why i think it's pretty unique to say that They're, applying this pareto principle also the 80 20 rule um to this particular situation. I don't know if it's the most accurate mathematical way to approach this, but it is close enough.

I think the the deviation of how it could be wrong is so minuscule that we might as well ride forward with this. So what it's saying - and you could read this - i will here i'm going to post it in chat right now. Just so you guys can read it yourself right here: okay, so i posted it there. What it's saying is that out of this ape community, we can roughly apply 80 or in that big spike.

Around 120 share ownership, while 20 are more of let's call them. Sizable apes, owning around 1 200 plus shares and that's how we're getting this average so 80 in the first chunk 20 percent. In the other chunk, i think it's a big big brain way to apply it. So what this author did of this one is 80 of ips have an average of 120 shares and 20 percent have an average of 1185 if they were to redo the number right.

Now it would be slightly higher, but blah blah blah. This is graphically how it looks if you do that, math out, they laid it out. This is a bimodal distribution and the way you would get the total ownership is adding up all of the area under this. When this author did it, they came up with 1.48 billion shares, so 1.48 billion matt.

What are we possibly going to do with that number? What number do we need to get above, that it violates something and the sec should look into it, i'm so happy! You asked young duckling, let's look at it this way, so amc right here we know - has 513 million shares well before when i was talking about blah blah blah rehypothecation. What is the number like if we're above 513 million? Is that the number that things are bad? No, in fact it's not, we have to go a little bit higher. You have to look at all the shares on loan because that could theoretically be added onto it where, like okay, there is still a reasonable explanation, so, right now, let's call it 100 million. Let's overestimate so we're more conservative, so that brings us up to 613 million.

But it's not done there because we know that there's about 85 percent all market volume covered by ortex. So, let's just overestimate it and let's say that - there's another 15 million, because we know we're underestimating by about 15. So right there for the ease of math. Let's add on another 15 million.

That brings us to 628 million and let's just go out of our way and be insanely insanely conservative and, like honestly, the numbers don't even say this, but let's be as conservative as possible. The golden number really it's 628, but let's just notch it up and, let's just say, 650 million, just in case we're missing for something. That's the golden number right. There, 650 million shares.

If we see anything above 650 million outstanding shares does not account for it, and rehypothecation does not count for it anything above 650 million. If we cannot come up with a reasonable explanation, that means that something is going on that honestly. In my opinion, someone needs to look into anything above 650. That's when the red flag should be popping off and we should be saying what in the world is possibly be going on so right there.

If i'm saying 650, is the number well right there we're? Clearly. I mean we're um we're not three exit but we're 2.5 exit. 100 1.5 billion shares, obviously in xx of 650. That is bad uh, quick note.

This is a lower floor, uh for assuming the wide standard deviations and throwing out shareholders for over a hundred thousand. So basically it's a this number was a lower floor and uh. I think there was some interesting interesting edits right here that we should dive into of interest to note, even if you took away the 80 of the 4.1 million shareholders, as in the 80 percent, who own the 120 shares on average, with the 120 average, you would Still get 980 million shares, so i think this is actually crazy. Um when i did the math out.

If you look at that, the pareto principle of just 20 of the apes who are representing this size - and then you multiply that by the current, just updated math of 1 200 shares - that is, that alone. That alone, not even counting the apes that own the smaller amount. That alone is 960 million shares, which is pretty much in line with the 980 post and this this was posted yesterday. So obviously it's a bit of a dynamic situation so right there, nine sixty nine.

Eighty, let's just take the middle 970.. It doesn't matter 970 that alone. That alone folks is violating our number of 650, but wait, wait, matt, you're still assuming that 20. What if it isn't that? Well boy, oh boy: let's, let's get even more conservative call me conservative cores.

You cut that in half, let's go 10, let's cut our number in half now we're at 480 million, but don't forget we are still not accounting for the other. 120 shares the let's. Not even do 120 shares, let's call it 100 shares. I am bending over backwards.

I feel like a gymnast to do this flexibility i feel like i should be a yoga master. I am chopping off numbers to explain anything. I can possibly let's cut that number in half 480 million okay matt that 480. That sounds like it's below your 650 number.

Well, don't forget! We still have that other 80 trunk and then i'm just through 10 out the window in case i'm completely wrong and instead of 120. Why am i using 120 because we got it right here from adam aaron? You know what i'll cut off 20 from that? Let's do 100 million or a hundred shares for the left over eighty percent. That's another 320 million shares right there. I i threw everything out i possibly could and that still adds up to 700 million.

Where am i getting 700 million the 480 million, where i just cut a number in half and then the 100 shares where i just cut out 20 shares and multiplied it by the leftover 80, completely discounting really 10 of it. That is 480 plus 320, which adds up to 700 million, still we're over by 50 million, and the way i got there was throwing numbers out. I said this doesn't matter this doesn't matter and i still couldn't beat the number down to a realistic explanation and then, if you were to do the other way around, you still like. Let's, just if i cut that number in half the 320, like let's say that the average shareholder didn't have 100 shares, let's say that people lost enthusiasm and really were like.

You know what i'm done with amc. Let's cut it down to 50.. You get 480, where i just chopped off 10 that i couldn't come up with and then i chopped the other number in half that adds up to 640 million and right there. I was saying that the magic number that i overestimated previously was 650, but hang on, you know what isn't counted in this is all of institutions.

We know blackrock has 30 million, we know vanguard, has 30 million. I went out of my way to cut every number in half and disregard other numbers and the worst i could get. It was 640, and even that was not mathematically legitimate in any way, because i just threw too much out and i discounted literally every single hedge fund and the still the lowest i could get. It was 640 and then, by the time you add in what we know of legal ownership from blackrock from vanguard, you're over it.

You cannot explain the numbers going on right now now. Do i think that it's many many billions? No, that's not what my math is. Adding up to it could be that i don't know, but i'm saying if you come in in the most absurd conservative manner possible, you can still not explain the numbers we're seeing on amc. It's literally mathematically impossible to explain what is going on right now.

I went over, i just chopped numbers i threw numbers out. I said. Ah, let's cut this in half, i was underestimating on everything i could and then i just threw numbers out and i still could not come up to a number. That properly explains what we are seeing based on the numbers from this say technology thing: these are people who have legitimate verified votes.

This isn't them just answering a poll on social media. This is them verifying the brokerage. It simply does not add up folks uh. Let's read this last thing: uh before i go off too much for an extreme floor, let's consider the following: currently, there are 26.6 000 amps we're more than that.

Voting on the question of 31.5 million shares between them. This gives an average of 1 185 shares plus or minus 0.6 percent. I'm going to postulate that this represents 10 of people that are active apes and having the higher share average. So this becomes 266 000, which is 6.5 of the total shareholders, meaning 93.5 uh have an average of 120 shares using my above analysis.

That means that we are at a bare minimum of 840 million shares if we double that amount of activates that gives us 1.15 billion shares. So no matter what obviously some of the math in between there's assumptions going on between me and between raleigh's. I still 100 love the tactic that this author approach it with. I recommend everyone read this because it is very, very good.

I went out of my way just for this portion to chop off even more numbers to still illustrate and highlight the point that it's just not explained this to me. I strongly strongly believe these two little numbers right here is the strongest evidence we have seen in the past six months that there are illegal, naked shorts going on creating synthetic shares. Counterfeit shares fandom shares whatever you want to call them. This to me is the strongest evidence we have that there is currently malpractice going on in the stock market as it relates to amc, and i see no other thing that would properly explain it.

I mean you saw my math. You saw this person's math, this author's math and across the board. There is no explanation. Besides illegal nefarious, illegitimate practices going on against amc, there is no other way to put it.

Thank you, i'm here for your questions. Uh, i'm hot folks, i'm not gon na lie. I'm sweating on that. I wish i had a drink, i'm that got me all fired up that got me all fired up.

Oh, oh, wait! This is a very very, very important caveat. Does knowing these numbers does knowing this share count mean that amc is going to explode. Unfortunately, that is not the takeaway. The takeaway of this is that something illegal is going on, but because something illegal is going on doesn't mean that a stock is going to skyrocket.

You should not take that explanation of everything going on and be like, oh like that means it has to squeeze. You know what means it has to squeeze is when a governing body looks into it and be like hey all these people did something highly illegal. We need to fix it. This is indicative to me of the fact that finra sec, someone should actively look into this and who knows, maybe they are already looking into it.

That's very very possible. I'm not saying that they're not generally when there's a lawsuit going on. You don't want to show your cards, but i'm saying the take away from this of the fact that there are so many shares unaccounted for. That means that something illegal is going on, but you can't draw that connection that that means it also is like guaranteeing a squeeze.

A squeeze is not guaranteed to me, especially looking at this. I think that it increases our odds, but what it means to me is that a governing body should look into it and i would not draw that correlation of, like oh it has to squeeze, has to squeeze to this value. I have to squeeze on this date. I would not that's a little bit dangerous of a correlation to like actually jump into.

This is the way nice eight mathematics, super wrinkly brain you have there uh, i mean, but also like this is what i was doing last night, like my background computer science statistics, but also no don't forget a shout out to raleigh's uh, also great dd uh. You guys know me, i'm not the biggest like person. Reading read it to you, but this is exceptional. I think everyone should read it if you have a a reddit account like upvote it.

This is good good, stuff um. Can you clip that breakdown, so we can share it? Yes, david i'll, clip it and i'll i'll get it out there correlation uh, i'm actually sweating. Folks, i'm gon na. Take my socks off.

You know, you know. Sometimes you get all you get all flustered and your feet get sweaty, or is that just me um? So people are saying like this concept of like but hang on. It goes more because people aren't voting uh. That's not really mathematically how this works because there's a we have already so many votes in that there's a very high probability that this average doesn't change so that 20 block there's a very, very good chance that it doesn't deviate from the 1 200..

So i i don't want people to think that, because of the lack of certain regions and brokerages not being able to vote that, doesn't correlate it to going sky high. Because that's the assumption that everyone, who's not being counted, is drastically higher than the 1 200. And honestly, with 32 000 people voting, we probably have a pretty good sample size. I would like it to see it to get above.

One percent i'd feel a bit more confident, but the fact that some people are barred from voting. I don't think that means we're going to see a dramatic change in the math i explained or the math. That raleigh's explained that's not necessarily how it's going to work out. No sock manipulation.

Oh brother, the socks are off kinky kong is back. I came for the attendees and get cheese buy socks. This is the way uh david i'll, clip that and i'll get that posted hey matt. Can you repeat that one more time what's going on uh there's a lot of people who can't vote, which is a shame in my opinion, i think everyone should vote um, but i don't think that all of a sudden, if we 10x the amount of voting, i Don't think that the average is gon na move that much and that's the key number there is the average um.

I honestly think as more people vote, the average could drop ever so slightly, but i think it's going to be pinned pretty close to just north of 1000. That's how i would estimate it. So. Yes, it's good for people to vote, but don't think that like if we double the vote, all of a sudden.

That means that it doubles because we're dealing with an average not necessarily a magnitude, but even with that, like even in raleigh's anyone above 10 000. He threw that person out so he was going in or she i don't know who it was. Uh was coming in with such a a floor estimate which, to me: that's that's how a statistician, that's, how a mathematician does it people get pissy with me, they're like. Why are you talking about core like conservative floor values, because if what you're looking at violates even a conservative floor value, what do you think that legitimate value will do then um? So i do fully trust in that dd and i strongly believe just my own knowledge of stats that that person knows exactly what they're talking about uh: okay, retail owns 20 80, so institution on 20.

How many shares do all institutions own um, if x, shares equals 20, then 80 well, remember when you're doing the 20 80 split as of now to be conservative? Coming back to this, don't use that number 513. If you want to be conservative use the number 650 because you have to add on all the potential shorts, because that's rehypothecation don't take 513, you take 513, you add on the 100 and then to give it a little bit buffer. You add on another 15 round up even a little bit more. You can see how i'm going through the steps to be so insanely conservative and the number comes out to 650, and i don't see how the number would be any higher than that, because we've just built in so much room for error that anything.

We see that definitively proves a number over 650, not 513 over 650. That to me, is a massive red flag. I can't find my query id and token for interactive brokers. Anyone help, so i can log in and count my shares.

You sound like a car salesman. I'll cut prices but wait there's more. I, like your math, call us fbi uh. Why do you think shorts aren't covering now that the price is so low because they probably think it's going to go lower? They cover when they think that's bottoming out.

My theory is that hedges, let it rise every two weeks up to on payday, so people buy higher than hedges, taper lowered off edwards to scare the apes june 18th july, 2nd july 16th july 30th rise before the fall, the people rising it and lowering it. I think that's more of a market maker issue, not necessarily hedge funds. Remember in the current system, market makers have exponentially more power than hedge funds. Why isn't it payday? Yet it can't be to prevent a future market crash.

I don't think amc and gme alone would be something that like stop or prevent or stop prevent cause. Whatever prompt a future crash, i mean we're still talking about the overall market is around 50 trillion. I mean amc is a 15.64 billion dollar company. Gme is a 10 billion company in terms of the stock market at large.

It is still very much a drop in the bucket any chance on retailers, apes, reconciling with robinhood. I highly doubt it. Where do you track volatility for options uh on the options trade? It tells you the implied volatility, and then there are various tools out there that you could see the trend of volatility. Uh just lost my left air pod, while listening waiting for the squeeze, so i can buy a new one love your fat cash mat keeps it up and power to you, bro uh.

How do we get this message out to even more in the masses? Can you clip the video and make it easy to share yeah, so i will um just so. Everyone knows here. I'll put it hang on hang on, hang on hang on. How do i do this um, i'm gon na put it on the i'm either gon na put it on this channel or the backup channel, no matter where i put it i'll tweet it out, and i i really don't ask you guys to share anything.

But if you thought think that that has utility on like for this community um, i would appreciate it if you could share it and like it and comment it all that stuff helps with the algorithm, so it'll either be on this channel or the the extra mac.