The S3 is an op then. Chair said they use a different method than normal to calculate, it uses shorted shares(you know the naked ones too) instead of actual shares. Using the math from last week, its still over 120%.
The S3 guy apparently had a twitter thread or something where he tried to explain that 120% was wrong, the real number was 55%, because you have to count each borrowed share as two shares to make sure the number doesn’t go over 100%.
Its all stupid finance bro bullshit. The main takeaway is that every calculation of shares shorted as percent of float uses a different definition of "float," specifically so that their numbers can’t be easily compared.
Is there reason to believe that the hedge funds have covered their shorts?
deleted by creator
The S3 is an op then. Chair said they use a different method than normal to calculate, it uses shorted shares(you know the naked ones too) instead of actual shares. Using the math from last week, its still over 120%.
deleted by creator
The S3 guy apparently had a twitter thread or something where he tried to explain that 120% was wrong, the real number was 55%, because you have to count each borrowed share as two shares to make sure the number doesn’t go over 100%.
Its all stupid finance bro bullshit. The main takeaway is that every calculation of shares shorted as percent of float uses a different definition of "float," specifically so that their numbers can’t be easily compared.