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.
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.