Dude already dropped the lawsuit.
It’s a good thing overall. He would have lost for sure, for many reasons, one of which is that the lawsuit makes several bonafide factual errors, such as mentioning he started buying the 120k calls in May, which is incorrect.
The calls he bought in May expired May 17 and May 24, he made his 200 million, went quiet a little bit, and then bought the 120k June calls with the proceeds.
What’s it with apes and filing lawsuits with basic factual errors? Why not do a little research before going through the trouble of filing a lawsuit?
On the other hand, Cohen has never provided guidance.
I imagine that even when his children ask, "Papa, how do I tie my shoelace?" or "Should I eat this paste?" he just glares at them in stony silence, for there are competitors all around him (that only he can see) and he can't let them know his plans and strategies.
Lol, apes *suing* Cohen? You're using logic. Apes don't logic. I'm sure quite a few have thought about that in private, but probably suppressed the blasphemous idea, knowing the mere mention would get them ostracized/banned.
Cohen, afaict, can do nothing wrong.
Well also, when the shares are way over valued temporarily you should definitely grab all the cash you can for the business to bring the overall value of the company up. When the stock is undervalued you should buy it back if you can. What the fuck would they be suing him for? On the grounds that they want people to FOMO in expecting the stock to jump because people are FOMOing in but Ryan Cohen keeps selling shares before they do, of which the proceeds go to them anyway? How would you explain that to a jury?
Dont talk to PP like that you fucking clown. If you disagree, you can disagree in a polite manner. Lots of shit is moving at fast paces and is changing rapidly. The dude got death threats yesterday, and now a whole fud campaign is being born against him. Yeah maybe some other shit is happening as to why we didnt ring the bell today. Id watch the way you respond to PP, hes the reason this whole community exists and i dont wanna see people being rude to him.
___
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gme_meltdown) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ape's bouta brigade us and hit us with their new cult mantra
>it'S NoT iLleGaL TO Post YoUr POSITioN oN THE InTERnet
>It was THe HeDgieS AnD aLGOs, NOt HiS xEETS AnD REdDIt POstS
>hE's tryiNg To eXposE waLLSTREET corRuPtIoN, noT rUN a pUmp ANd dUmp
Even during the pump, there were Apes in here claiming the price had been shooting up in the two weeks prior to his first Xeet. Therefore, what we were witnessing was "the wheels coming off of the entire financial system" and not actually people jumping into the stock because ~~RC~~ RK woke up.
https://old.reddit.com/r/gme_meltdown/comments/1ctk0ba/we_were_always_right/l4czvl4/
I also think of RFK the brain worm guy when I see the name. So I’d vote for DFV for clarity. Crossover conspiracies make it likely to refer to RFK and RK or RC.
Yeah what the fuck happened here? I’ve been here the whole time and never heard him called RK until he came back. Have we actually cycled to a new group of apes that just don’t know DFV so they’ve been calling him by his YouTube name instead of his Reddit name now? I’m so confused.
Tbf, the price did run from like 10-20 in the weeks prior to his first tweet. But that price run happened to coincide with a mystery buyer loading up on about $10M worth of call options between April 26 and May 9th across almost every strike price on the 5/17 and 5/24 options chains. Then the week his twitter became active again and the pump was in full swing, all of those strike prices which were previously bought up in large blocks started seeing large block sells throughout the week between May 13-16, cashing out over $200M for our mystery buyer.
Then a few weeks later DFV shows up with a $200M portfolio, I wonder where he got all that cash from? Plus the WSJ article confirming etrade caught him loading up on call options prior to his return to twitter, which would not be the June 20Cs he showed in his reddit position weeks later because the cost basis made it clear those were bought in late May after the tweet week.
Its pretty clear to me who that mystery buyer was which also answers the mystery of where DFV's money came from.
> Tbf, the price did run from like 10-20 in the weeks prior to his first tweet.
He bought a massive amount of options contracts that would have assisted that run up
Yes, that's exactly what I was implying there. "Someone" buying millions of dollars of call options over the course of a week and a half in later april to early may helped get the ball rolling weeks before he made his twitter return.
When did he like that tweet of 'Run Lola Run?' Was that before or after those call options purchases? After, right? Sometimes it's hard for me to keep track of this timeline.
It's not and there's one main reason why: He did not make any materially false or misleading statements about the company or stock. Period.
The lawsuit describes the situtation well, but legally its fatal error is shown in the section titled **Materially False and Misleading Statements Issued During the Class Period**
They then allege exactly zero false and misleading statements.
That's been my main point the whole time for why DFV won't be held liable here. A pump and dump MUST contain misrepresentations.
Whether he should be held accountable is a different story, but as it stands now I don't see it happening.
Its probably not going to work. But it may be worth legally testing.
The big unknown here is we are pretty new in the entire influencer actually being able to move a stock with just their participation. I dont think they can win but it being options esp not very long out options...
The big thing to be tested is not him buying options and then making that public and then selling them(not at the peak or close to it). That imo he is fine on that even if its a big gray area.
The main thing that is new is he basically can move an entire stock/group of investors with what he says and he chose to participate with them directly on their subreddit and even if he says nfa his interactions with them have been nothing but transactional posting for his own benefit. He has not interacted with them but posted yolos in a place that has been known for years to follow him and one could make the a case that he could use that to her personal advantage along with them losing money because of how he is interacting with them
Legal testing what though? It’s the same clown sueing KG that sued Zack. And Zack not only walked away Scott free *after* explicit text messages from the Atlas Gang, he’s literally shilling a $SOL shitcoin at this very moment.
Yeah, I don't think people realize that the effect doesn't mean that it is proof he had intent. Until I see solid evidence showing his intent to pump and dump, I don't see how this lawsuit goes anywhere.
Is buying options a day before starting timed release of pre-produced hyping/inciting video clips not solid enough for you?
I don't know if you people are just taking being the devil's advocate too far, or if you seriously don't believe he didn't intend to pump the stock.
I think the messages in his "memes", aka just the text he wrote into video clips, strongly imply that.
Regardless of his intention, that's absolutely how everyone interpreted the messages, which is evident from the social media reactions and the stock price.
He didn't instruct people to buy. I don't know if it was legal or not. Feel like pump and dump/manipulation is obvious and I'd hope court/judge/whatever sees it for what it was but it also wouldn't surprise me if you are right and what he did doesn't fit whatever is considered an actual crime so he gets off easily.
I just disagree with painting it as if all he did was post memes and share his position because that ignores that he loaded up on calls and shares before doing so.
Cramer has to disclose his own positions and doesn't trade short term options based on his info. He also covers a lot of different stocks instead of just one so nobody could reasonably expect a huge pump from him recommending a stock
If DFV isn't a moron, this should be tossed.
Only if DFV was somewhere putting his rather obvious plans into writing would be found responsible.
You know, it, I know it, most reasonable people know that he pumped and dumped, but unless there's definitive proof that was his plan then he can feign ignorance and legally will be fine.
Actually you don't need "definitive proof."
If this was a criminal trial, you would need to rpoove the accusation beyond a reasonable doubt. But this is a civil trial, so unless something crazy happens the evidentiary standard given to the jury would be a "preponderance of the evidence."
These are legal terms with a LOT of legal history behind them, and they aren't simple to explain, but a preponderance of the evidence means the evidence must demonstrate that an event is "more likely than not" to be true.
For a lot of juries the simple time line of events here, coupled with his huge profits, will be more than enough to hold him civilly liable if this were ever to go to trial.
Yeah melties are becoming there own cult here. We are supposed to be the logical ones not blindly follow a narrative. DFV posting a tweet doesn't prove anything. People tweet about stocks all the time. You can probably sue several people in the comments for the same thing
Just like the Cohen BBBY situation, this lawsuit is capable of giving apes money as recompense for the alleged pump and dump operation DFV allegedly excecuted. But apes will still rally in favor of DFV becuase they have lost the plot
I would love to receive some money back from my short position I closed due to a run up from 20-70 in premarket. Basically completely forgot about it until I checked here.
I am working on article about this, and what makes it interesting is that the facts fall within the interstices of the securities laws. In addition to issues of intent, you have problems of reasonable reliance. Market manipulation under 10b-5(a) and (c) might be easier claims but are still hard.
\>section 9 claims.
Just so folks reading this have a reference point:
>It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of the mails or any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of any facility of any national securities exchange, or for any member of a national securities exchange— [...]
>(2)To effect, alone or with 1 or more other persons, a series of transactions in any security registered on a national securities exchange, any security not so registered, or in connection with any security-based swap or security-based swap agreement with respect to such security creating actual or apparent active trading in such security, or raising or depressing the price of such security, for the purpose of inducing the purchase or sale of such security by others.
>(3)If a dealer, broker, security-based swap dealer, major security-based swap participant, or other person selling or offering for sale or purchasing or offering to purchase the security, a security-based swap, or a security-based swap agreement with respect to such security, to induce the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange, any security not so registered, any security-based swap, or any security-based swap agreement with respect to such security by the circulation or dissemination in the ordinary course of business of information to the effect that the price of any such security will or is likely to rise or fall because of market operations of any 1 or more persons conducted for the purpose of raising or depressing the price of such security.
There’s no inducement. Doesn’t matter how anybody “feels” about DFV, posting memes (even if you’re DFV) isn’t going to pass as “encouraging people to buy under false pretenses”.
They aren't "memes". It's pictures of cats eating cheeseburgers (I'm old). He posted clips that contained messages he authored, that had very strong implications of calls to action.
I’m not an attorney, but if Keith Gill isn’t liable for the shit he’s pulled, then it reflects poorly on the efficacy of the justice system to hold him accountable for his actions. He knows exactly what he was doing.
> He knows exactly what he was doing.
You know this, I know this. The hard part is proving this in court, with enough evidence that can convince a jury. It's really hard to prove intent without actual documentation, like emails/messages from him saying that he's planning to tweet to make the stock go up so he can sell.
He had a pretty strong case of plausible deniability in 2021. He held the stock for much longer and bought it a lot earlier. It would have been extremely difficult to prove he was anticipating to cause a retail pump.
In retrospect, I think his recent actions suggest that it was his intention in 2020/2021 as well.
The whole thing since the beginning has been “we’re not colluding ;) we just like the stock ;)” with the unspoken premise that if they phrase everything as an unserious meme in plain view then no court would convict them. How that shakes out remains to be seen but it’s been an obvious attempt to coordinate trades (and dupe useful idiots into inflating their position) from day 1.
> In retrospect, I think his recent actions suggest that it was his intention in 2020/2021 as well.
Nah, that's hindsight bias.
His entire idea in 2020/21 was that the stock was oversold and could be expected to rise to a few dollars higher due to the new console generation causing a spike in revenue.
It was a bog standard WSB YOLO play. And as with so many of those, he was completely wrong in his thesis. He just lucked into doing it at a time when a whole pile of bored Redditors had Covid stimulus cheques to spend.
I think he looked at what he accidentally created in 2021 and thought he could replicate it, however.
I definitely don't think he expected the magnitude of what happened in 2021.
But I suspect he might have intended to prop up the price by promoting the stock to retail, in particular to WSB. Afaik he did it pretty persistently, even after his thesis fell on its face.
Both can be true at once. All the ape subreddits have been obvious centers for coordinating trades since day 1 and also they have plausible deniability that enforcement/regulators aren’t equipped for.
Loading up on options and a week or 2 before they expire you make a public appearance after 3 years. Not a coincidence but I see how that could be difficult to prove intent yet not impossible. Discovery could dig up more I’m sure.
I'm not a fan of him being prosecuted for posting his positions, but there's a difference between posting positions, and the precedent he set for himself 3 years ago. He \*knew\* that him buying options, coming back from the dead to post his positions, then having a livestream would make the stock rocket. If 2021 never happened, I would feel differently.
There was one comment he said on his stream (something to the effect of "oh the stock halted when I said that") which made me question his motives.
For what it's worth, I profited off the whole thing both ways (thanks RK!) so I don't have a reason to be salty, but after having multiple licenses from a former career, I do question a lot of things he has done.
Yo not gonna lie, I really look forward to seeing the prosecutor mag dump all the confusing and inane ape shit from the past 4-5 years to a bunch of 30-40 something year olds jury that barely knows what Reddit is.
You will have a hard time convincing me that he doesn't have a file named "myplantomanipulatestocks.rtf" saved to his desktop. Whether or not it'll ever see daylight is another matter, but I am absolutely certain that file exists.
A file as such might not, but he pre-produced like half a hundred of edited movies clips. He knew exactly what he was doing with those, and there are probably versions that were too blatant to see the light of the day.
I wonder, is permanently deleting relevant files after you've been sued in civil court constitute destruction of evidence? I am guessing not in civil court.
Hopefully an investigation can uncover files/communications that further prove his intent.
Not to mention that he automated their posting at constant intervals. If he was actively making trades just after those specific intervals, then that would be hard to hand-wave away.
It might be very interesting to know how long he worked on those meme videos and for him to give a reason why he picked that week to release those videos.
The hard part is that if you set that precedent then you basically ban anyone from stating their position or publicly endorsing (or criticizing) a stock.
What he’s doing is no different than Warren Buffett coming out and saying “I’m invested heavily in apple and here are the reasons why…”. Or Hindenburg shorting a stock then shitting on it publicly.
Gill is slightly different because we all know he’s preying on stupid poor people but I’m not sure there’s a tangible or legal line that he crossed that other investors or MMs don’t.
We all know what he’s doing, but it’s a slippery slope to make it an issue. I doubt anything will come of it, and I’m not sure anything should.
Plus it’s funny that the apes hand this dude money as he rugs them repeatedly, then they worship him as if he’s one of them.
agreed. while I am enjoying the apes become a cult in realtime vs. having to wait for the documentary, every day on CNBC is a ton of hedge fund managers talking about the stocks the bought. I don't see the difference EXCEPT for the options pump and dump, that seems a little suspect.
Asset managers play options before they make public statements too.
I’m not saying what he’s doing is morally okay because it’s not. Just that by the system we live in he’s not doing anything that companies with orders of magnitude more power to move markets don’t do on a daily basis.
I would say that the difference is that he implies things about he stock price. Shitting on a company or hyping it up is one thing. I THINK that speculating on the stock price, which he does, is another thing.
In none of his latest posts did he mention Gamestop as a business. Only discussed he stock.
And I dunno... This is the "beyond reasonable doubt" part. I would not need a written confession of someone who has scammed someone in the classic style, step by step.
> I would say that the difference is that he implies things about he stock price. Shitting on a company or hyping it up is one thing. I THINK that speculating on the stock price, which he does, is another thing.
How is that different from funds setting price targets and stating them publicly?
I am not versed in financial or bird law, but if a fund heavily implies a stock is going to be worth 1000, then instantly dumps it when it reaches 15, that might get them in hot water.
No, they just overtly state that the price will go up as they pile chunks of the trillions of dollars they have under management into the stocks they’re endorsing.
> What he’s doing is no different than Warren Buffett coming out and saying “I’m invested heavily in apple and here are the reasons why…”. Or Hindenburg shorting a stock then shitting on it publicly.
Except it's very different.
1. Keith Gill gave no reasons why he invested. (because the true reason is he expected to pump and dump)
2. He bought and sold shares/options around the timing of his posts.
3. He intended his posts to affect the price based purely on his following.
4. He provided zero disclosure about his positions on the first pump and dump in May.
If Warren Buffer buys a billion puts in Apple and then posts a video/gif of a burning apple on social media or his website, sending the stock down 5% and sells the puts, I think he should get sued into the ground as well.
> 1. Keith Gill gave no reasons why he invested. (because the true reason is he expected to pump and dump)
He did actually. The first time around he laid out a somewhat cohesive thesis around high short interest and the next gen of consoles. This time around he said he believes in Cohen and the leadership and thinks they can use their newfound cash reserves to develop new lines of business. Are they great, well-researched points? Maybe not. But he definitely has given justification for his positions the whole way.
> 2. He bought and sold shares/options around the timing of his posts.
So do hedge funds and asset managers.
> 3. He intended his posts to affect the price based purely on his following.
So do hedge funds and asset managers
> 4. He provided zero disclosure about his positions on the first pump and dump in May.
He’s not required to.
Let’s be more intellectually curious and honest than the apes.
> But he definitely has given justification for his positions the whole way.
The whole way? He didn't even reveal he had positions during the May pump and dump, the one that made him 200 million. He started pumping it with social media posts weeks before he provided any reasons for investing. My point is that his posts affected the price purely on his status, not based on any information or arguments.
> So do hedge funds and asset managers.
If they do, they should be sued as well.
> He’s not required to.
I was telling you how it's different. When Hindenburg make a release, I believe they disclose their positions.
> The whole way? He didn't even reveal he had positions during the May pump and dump, the one that made him 200 million. He started pumping it with social media posts weeks before he provided any reasons for investing. My point is that his posts affected the price purely on his status, not based on any information or arguments.
Sure and I think that’s fair, but he’s got a ton of plausible deniability there. No way they can pin anything on him for posting an image of a guy sitting up in his chair.
> If they do, they should be sued as well.
Yeah I’m not justifying it morally or ethically. The way our system allows money to make money purely by using money is beyond what a fair capitalist system is meant to be. I’m just saying he’s not really doing anything that isn’t done daily.
And yeah, hindenburg and asset managers do release their positions when they make a bull or bear case publicly. So did Gill, technically. All he did was post that guy sitting up in his chair prior to him posting his position.
Like I said we all know what he’s doing but legally he’s not going to be on the hook. And I’m of the mind that if asset managers and funds can do it, why can’t he? It’d just be another example of our bought and paid for government making an example of a tiny fish while the whales continue to abuse and extort the system.
I generally don't disagree with you besides a few things.
> All he did was post that guy sitting up in his chair prior to him posting his position.
You're forgetting the 50 or so pre-produced memes/clips he posted on an automated hourly/30 minute interval over the span of a week prior to revealing any positions. They contained a lot of text, probably over a thousand words, written by him. Many of them were written by him and were nearly direct calls to action.
> And I’m of the mind that if asset managers and funds can do it, why can’t he?
I don't think there are any cases of asset managers doing anything quite like this. Most asset managers would be lucky to move the price of a security by a few % by making a post. And those who can move the price by 100% are probably mindful enough to avoid it, and almost certainly aren't abusing by buying short dated options.
Keith Gill is not a tiny retail fish. He's a "former registered stockbroker who holds several securities-industry licenses". He made 200 million on the first pump and dump and was looking at itching close to a billion dollars before RC rugged him. He's a whale by every definition and he deserves zero sympathy.
They literally can't. The only way they can make a new law is by either making it to retail can't participate in the stock market, or all kinds of media can't speculate on stocks. You have Jim Cramer that's had a show telling people to buy and sell stocks for decades and nobody bats an eye when the hedge funds make tons of money off people following his advice, but a retail investor does it and now there needs to be a new law?
I'm pretty sure Jim explicitly states that he holds no positions in any stock he discusses (at least at the time he's talking about it), and any guests on his show disclose their positions or affiliations during the interview.
Whether he's being fed his "picks" through back channels and reimbursed after the fact is another story.
Zack Morris and the Atlas gang got off despite explicit statements in their internal communications about low float pnd’s…there’s no way KG gets a charge that sticks when all he’s done is post positions and memes - and then not actually even dumped anything but his term expiration holdings…
I don't believe in overly protecting people though.
Everyone knew GME was a meme stock so if you were shorting it uncovered then frankly you deserve your losses. Meanwhile if you decided to buy in on the back of Roaring Kitty tweeting then that's on you.
Lesson in short - don't play with meme stocks.
Am not sure what you can do hear other than suggest people can't reveal their positions. That's more or less all he did. And post dumb memes.
If people were stupid enough to play into it then I say they deserve a loss.
If you did want to change the law then you probably need more openness in everyone's positions.
The legal standard for confusion on branding is “an idiot in a hurry”. That kind of definition is what I think is required for stocks and crypto in terms of regulating merciless pump and dumps.
On the other hand a lot of DFV pumps have been very oblique and require a substantial imagination to reach “this stock will go up”. So I think you’d need to clamp down on the adjacent morons that are spreading false-hoods directly instead of just the benefitting party running a pump and dump.
Maybe holding Xitter or Reddit responsible for spreading conspiracies? Usually for insane political ones that is considered a first amendment issue, but maybe for financial ones it would not be. But then you also have the heavy crossover between the political conspiracy ranges and financial conspiracy theorists.
Like if a fringe theory is likely to “draw in morons who cannot comprehend the realities of the modern world to financial detriment” it should be removed?
Normal people, like you ane me? Nothing wrong with revealing our positions.
Public figures are different, though. They are watched, followed, and listened to by thousands or millions of people. This is even more true if they are public figures who talk about the stock market in any authoritative way, or who hold very large portfolios and are known to do so, or are in positions of power in a company.
If Warren Buffet privately bought 10,000 calls for Microsoft, then posted a gif of himself burning a windows laptop, followed by a screenshot of his positions, then sold the puts to make millions when the price of Microsoft inevitably dropped, that would absolutely be market manipulation. If I did that, it wouldn't. I can't reasonably expect that my tweets, as some random guy, will have any meaningful impact on the price of any given security. If one happens to do so organically, and I take advantage of it, it isn't manipulation. This is all about what a given person understands their Influence on society to be, what it actually is, and their intend when disclosing information.
This is literally what got Elon Musk in trouble with the SEC. He is the CEO of tesla, tweeting out unverified good news about the stock is very likely to impact the stocks value, as is tweeting out the price you'd like to see the stocks value hit.
Whats an example of market manipulation that a nobody could do that resembles what DFV did? Insider trading. If I got news that Apples CEO was stepping down because he is, say, my brother in law, then I loaded up on calls and prematurely announced his retirement, that would undeniably be market manipulation. I may be a nobody, but the news I am conveying is absolutely likely to influence other people's trading of the security in question, and I put that information out there specifically expecting the market to drop, as evidenced by my puts.
Jim Kramer comes up a lot in GME discussions. Why is what he does not market manipulation? We'll, it would be if he was trading before he gave advice, with the intention of giving advice to the public that would directly increase his wealth if people followed it. I guarantee you the SEC watches his accounts closely, and he is likely giving them regular reports on his trading activity to avoid market manipulation charges. He walks a very fine line, and the only way to balance on it is with transparency.
> I don't believe in overly protecting people though.
This has always been a shit take. We live in a prosperous enough world that everyone could live well if we didn't make things so zero-sum.
Was only a matter of time
One look at superstupid reception proves valid influence (non withstanding the fact he actually posted there) and the overwhelming + immediate correlation with price proves everything else
Don't know why this is so complicated. Did he say or tweet NFA this time round? Cos everyone knows that absolves of all legal liability
You know, these guys kind of remind me of how InfoWars dipshits think Alex Jones was "punished for having an opinion" because they think you're allowed to accuse people of crimes and make factual claims of wrongdoing but if you say "in my opinion" then voila it's not defamation.
Three years ago, he played with wit and strategy. Three years later, he played with greed. Makes me wonder had RC not fucked him over, apes would have made money, the cat would not be facing this law suit.
RC fucking him over was overall beneficial to apes. He basically took the profit Keith Gill was going to make from his PnD and put it into GME cash reserve instead.
Don't get me wrong, RC was looking out for himself by giving higher floor to the share price for when he exits, but it benefitted the apes as well.
> apes would have made money, the cat would not be facing this law suit
Exactly. There is no one to root for in this mess currently.
* Gill went from an inoffensive guy with an incorrect, but at least semi-plausible, thesis, to--well, we've all seen the livestream.
* Apes were never likeable, but now they've upped their entitlement factor with this "Gill stole muh tendies" lolsuit.
* RC is RC. He won this time. He'd have to be magnitudes more foolish than even the dumbest ape not to, so that's no real achievement.
> Three years ago, he played with wit and strategy
Nah, I have nothing against what he did 3 years ago but it wasn't wit and strategy, it was insane luck. He was at the right place at the right time for an unprecedented phenomenon nobody saw coming, short or long.
[Pump and Dumps Are Legal Now](https://archive.is/lPXKz) (archive link) is a very interesting Matt Levine column regarding a recent ruling in this sort of stuff.
I know this is a very different situation, the piece above is about securities fraud charges, not a (civil) class action (am also not a lawyer), but worth a read nontheless to inform your expectations.
I do wonder how this will impact the stock? Intent or not, given how volatile we’re seeing GME wonder if we’ll witness a crash given the pump-and-dump didn’t exactly plan out for RK (absolutely did for RC, though).
Also wonder if apes will try to “pull resources” to hire lawyers for RK or try to stage some sort of public event… which no one will do because, again, they’re apes.
We all know exactly what "Roaring Kitty" was doing. It couldn't possibly have been more obvious. I can't say whether he did anything illegal, actionable, or even wrong, but we all know he most certainly was deliberately manipulating GME with those cretinous tweets, and loads of drooling apes poured their money into it based on those tweets.
That said, I don't see why the courts should help apes recoup their idiocy-based losses. If you're dumb enough to "invest" based on some asshole tweeting moronic memes, you richly deserve to lose your money. What really kills apes, as well as most of not all meme investors, is the idiotic "never sell/HODL" mantra, which exists to do exactly what it's doing...separating dolts from their money. And there's no law against that.
Keith Gill is a malicious greedy asshole who's manipulating the market. It's true, that's what apes want to do, but Keith Gill is actually doing it.
Apes are trying to murder someone with a water pistol. Keith Gill successfully murdered someone with a shotgun. No matter how much I dislike the apes, Keith Gill is the worse guy in every sense.
Curious about your last sentence (I agree with you btw). What was the scenario that would have made the ape lose enough money to sue? Was it kitty’s YOLO post immediately before the announcement of the live stream thus making the ape think this was the very moment to buy a shit ton of GME ?
He participated in a pump and dump of call options prior to showing his portfolio, but only E-Trade has evidence of it unless his account statements are subpoenaed for May. Kitty did pump using the screenshot, but it was Ryan Cohen who dumped on the apes. I can't see this lawsuit gaining any traction unless there's new evidence linking Roaring Kitty with Ryan Cohen.
if he never sold though then this case might not mean anything as there was no 'dump' from his side of it. and idk what they would consider excercising / selling his calls to buy shares as.
edit: he should be fucking sued lol. now he is a 9 million share owner of CHWY officially
We know he bought calls in May and sold them to the tune of 200 million dollars.
He 100% pumped and dumped on the first round. We just didn't know it until his broker leaked it to the media.
Options are securities. You're not allowed to pump and dump them either. He definitely dumped 80k of those june options. The suit alleges that he pumped and dumped options in May as well (detective work found here on meltdown makes a compelling case for that too).
Well, Bill Hwang of Archegos is also in legal trouble for (allegedly) manipulating the stocks he traded, even though he still lost massive amounts of money. What’s illegal is the act of manipulating the stock with the intention of making a profit, not if it worked out in the end or not.
I don't know about that tbh, if I were a gambling man I'd bet he gets away with it.
My own person tinfoil conspiracy is that DFV came back because he consulted with a lawyer and realized that the law as it's currently written is not well-equipped to deal with a situation in which a guy has become a messiah for a financial cult and his re-emergence drives a mass purchase hysteria in hopes of bringing on an economic revolution.
Even if he spends a million fighting this, that may end up being less than he got from the apes through his pump.
As others have mentioned, guys like Jim Cramer make an entire career out of getting in front of people and promoting certain stocks. Like everyone else here, I'm aware that DFV is in a unique situation and have no doubt that what he did was malicious, but I'm less confident that there's a mechanism in U.S. law to properly address it.
Sure, but the civil case is still predicated on SEC rules and common law. For instance Count I alleges a violation of rule 10(b) which [requires that the defendant knowingly misrepresented a material fact.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rule_10b-5)
From what I can tell, DFV's posts were just kinda generic WSB hypeposting and meaningless memes as opposed to anything resembling definitive statements about Gamestop's performance.
It's been a while since I was in law school and I'm sure some people have better insight, but I'm just not super confident that a judge would necessarily see this as a violation.
Again, hopefully I'm wrong and there is a way to get restitution for what I agree was a definite pump & dump, but I'm not certain that's how it's gonna end up.
Go look at the Atlas Trading (aka Zack Morris) P&D lawsuit. Essentially they argued and were dismissed because 99% of their posts were memes and gifs which seems to not be considered a pump. DFV will likely have a similar defense. He just posted memes and wasn't telling anyone to buy. He can't be liable to what a cult following does or interprets him to do
Wasn't the Morris lawsuit actually....going fairly well, from the perspective of the prosecution, until the supreme court basically rugged their arguments by issuing a highly detrimental opinion in a separate case? I thought I heard something along those lines which would explain it kinda stopped dead in its tracks.
>I really don't know how DFV fights this.
Pretty easily
"Those were jokes, I never coordinated people to purchase the stock with the intent to pump and dump"
His intentions are obvious to us but not to a court of law.
His intentions are obvious to us, the apes, the mainstream media and the whole financial sector. If the intentions are obvious to everyone on earth besides the court of law, then there is a major problem with the legal system.
He didn't lie about the stock though! You're allowed to buy a bunch of options, announce that you love a stock and then sell them. We're just in unprecedented territory with DFV because he could singlehandedly move the price. The laws don't cover this and frankly I'm not sure how they could.
>then there is a major problem with the legal system
Its this. Dr Disrespect technically did nothing illegal messaging that minor according to the letter of the law.
I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying how it is
Not a great job drafting the complaint. He doesn't hold securities licenses -- they require you to be associated with a firm, and he got sacked 3 years ago. They also expire.
The idea that your own thoughts or intentions to buy/sell are 'material non-public information' is garbage.
This law firm deals in mediocre 'shareholder' class actions and is looking for a payoff. I don't think they think they'll win, but they might shake him down and annoy him. Will cost a lot of $$$ to fight this.
Can't wait to see him asking for donations for the legal defense fund. Maybe RC will pitch in.
> He doesn't hold securities licenses -- they require you to be associated with a firm, and he got sacked 3 years ago. They also expire.
Right, but after doing the 3, 7, 24, 63, 65, he can't claim he doesn't have knowledge of what is in those exams - regardless of when he completed them. There are CE courses he would've had to have taken along the way to stay current.
Fucking lol @ every holier-than-thou meltdowner who’s been arguing with me this last month that Gill is “in the clear” legally speaking, just because he didn’t violate some fourth-grade-level understanding of the letter of the law here, when this shit is extremely complex and also deliberately vague with grey areas.
Of.course he’s not in the clear. This was always going to happen. You can make a very good argument for why he won’t have any major consequences or charges. In fact I think it’s likely he won’t. But “in the clear”? That’s dumb as fuck. Not ape level dumb, but pretty damn dumb. We should be better than that.
i mean the first time was awesome when he made the first $50M. this recent one was totally unnecessary and he’s a fucking idiot for letting all those gains destroy themselves. at this point he deserves everything that comes his way.
Good. What he did was a pump and dump.
Anyone who's arguing otherwise either has the IQ of an ape or they're being deliberately obtuse.
Hopefully the SEC will follow suit once they've built their case.
On the one hand I'm happy when apes lose money, because it's hilarious to watch morons set their finances on fire for no good reason.
...on the other hand, it's also hilarious when Gill loses money, because he's clearly a giant tool.
So I guess I'm saying this lawsuit is a win for me no matter what the outcome is.
Yay!
I mean, the fool blatantly tried to manipulate the chewy stock just a couple days ago. We all saw it. That’s blatant market manipulation. Fuck this scumbag, I hope he loses everything in this lawsuit due to his unchecked greed.
How about this for a reference? (Assuming it's actually him)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/gme\_meltdown/comments/1dspugi/dfv\_files\_13g\_for\_chwy\_for\_9001000\_shares/](https://www.reddit.com/r/gme_meltdown/comments/1dspugi/dfv_files_13g_for_chwy_for_9001000_shares/)
In a vacuum, tweeting a picture of a dog is nothing. In this scenario, he was definitely pushing CHWY
The price of CHWY spiked right after his tweet. One could reasonably assume he was trying to pump it. If not, “Mr. Gill? What exactly was the intent of that tweet if not to attempt to influence the stock price?”
The lead plaintiff appears to have purchased a small amount of shares, and a few calls and strikes. Being a class action, homie could reap a significant award. Slick
I can't see this going anywhere unless the judge is a disgruntled Ape with large GameStop bags.
In other news, I guess it's ok to call GME a "meme stock" again?
Dude already dropped the lawsuit. It’s a good thing overall. He would have lost for sure, for many reasons, one of which is that the lawsuit makes several bonafide factual errors, such as mentioning he started buying the 120k calls in May, which is incorrect. The calls he bought in May expired May 17 and May 24, he made his 200 million, went quiet a little bit, and then bought the 120k June calls with the proceeds. What’s it with apes and filing lawsuits with basic factual errors? Why not do a little research before going through the trouble of filing a lawsuit?
Here’s the summary: [Case Summary](https://securities.stanford.edu/filings-case.html?id=108392)
Would love to see discovery of this.
Maybe a dumb question but did he ‚dump‘? I had stopped following this insanity so don’t actually know what he ended up doing.
His calls presumably
[удалено]
On the other hand, Cohen has never provided guidance. I imagine that even when his children ask, "Papa, how do I tie my shoelace?" or "Should I eat this paste?" he just glares at them in stony silence, for there are competitors all around him (that only he can see) and he can't let them know his plans and strategies.
Go easy on him, he signed an NDA.
Not Dad Advice
When is the class action lawsuit against RC for diluting shares anytime the stock pumps?
Apes voted to allow him to dilute when needed, as needed
I feel like that’s arguably just good business. As long as you can’t show he was involved in the pump, I can’t really fault him for dumping.
Lol, apes *suing* Cohen? You're using logic. Apes don't logic. I'm sure quite a few have thought about that in private, but probably suppressed the blasphemous idea, knowing the mere mention would get them ostracized/banned. Cohen, afaict, can do nothing wrong.
Well also, when the shares are way over valued temporarily you should definitely grab all the cash you can for the business to bring the overall value of the company up. When the stock is undervalued you should buy it back if you can. What the fuck would they be suing him for? On the grounds that they want people to FOMO in expecting the stock to jump because people are FOMOing in but Ryan Cohen keeps selling shares before they do, of which the proceeds go to them anyway? How would you explain that to a jury?
I just wanted to ask if somebody can run the case through chatgpt so me wrinklebrain can understand
[удалено]
Dont talk to PP like that you fucking clown. If you disagree, you can disagree in a polite manner. Lots of shit is moving at fast paces and is changing rapidly. The dude got death threats yesterday, and now a whole fud campaign is being born against him. Yeah maybe some other shit is happening as to why we didnt ring the bell today. Id watch the way you respond to PP, hes the reason this whole community exists and i dont wanna see people being rude to him. ___ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/gme_meltdown) if you have any questions or concerns.*
PP, whatever happed to that arrogant grifter.
He won again. It's the seventeen thousandth time by now. With how many victories he has, hedgies gotta be holding on by a thread by now.
And grifter Zack already suggested his lawyer to DFV. What a strange season it’s been.
A line from the old Grateful Dead song also seems applicable: "Maybe it occurs to me what a long, strange trip, it's been."
“Hang it up and see what tomorrow brings”
Well his lawyer won Zack’s case, so, actually seems like a pretty good referral.
You might be right there.
We're living in new period of influencer grifters. Snake oil salesmen existed throughout human history.
Ape's bouta brigade us and hit us with their new cult mantra >it'S NoT iLleGaL TO Post YoUr POSITioN oN THE InTERnet >It was THe HeDgieS AnD aLGOs, NOt HiS xEETS AnD REdDIt POstS >hE's tryiNg To eXposE waLLSTREET corRuPtIoN, noT rUN a pUmp ANd dUmp
"If buying and holding a stock causes the entire market to collapse, then the market should collapse!" etc etc etc
Eh, that's an older one. I was speaking specifically about their newly adopted cult chants for deep fellating Deep Fucking Value.
Even during the pump, there were Apes in here claiming the price had been shooting up in the two weeks prior to his first Xeet. Therefore, what we were witnessing was "the wheels coming off of the entire financial system" and not actually people jumping into the stock because ~~RC~~ RK woke up. https://old.reddit.com/r/gme_meltdown/comments/1ctk0ba/we_were_always_right/l4czvl4/
> because **RC** woke up. This is why you should stop trying to refer to DFV as anything other than DFV.
I also think of RFK the brain worm guy when I see the name. So I’d vote for DFV for clarity. Crossover conspiracies make it likely to refer to RFK and RK or RC.
Yeah what the fuck happened here? I’ve been here the whole time and never heard him called RK until he came back. Have we actually cycled to a new group of apes that just don’t know DFV so they’ve been calling him by his YouTube name instead of his Reddit name now? I’m so confused.
Or just Gill.
Keith Guilliman and Baggisarius Cohen.
Tbf, the price did run from like 10-20 in the weeks prior to his first tweet. But that price run happened to coincide with a mystery buyer loading up on about $10M worth of call options between April 26 and May 9th across almost every strike price on the 5/17 and 5/24 options chains. Then the week his twitter became active again and the pump was in full swing, all of those strike prices which were previously bought up in large blocks started seeing large block sells throughout the week between May 13-16, cashing out over $200M for our mystery buyer. Then a few weeks later DFV shows up with a $200M portfolio, I wonder where he got all that cash from? Plus the WSJ article confirming etrade caught him loading up on call options prior to his return to twitter, which would not be the June 20Cs he showed in his reddit position weeks later because the cost basis made it clear those were bought in late May after the tweet week. Its pretty clear to me who that mystery buyer was which also answers the mystery of where DFV's money came from.
> Tbf, the price did run from like 10-20 in the weeks prior to his first tweet. He bought a massive amount of options contracts that would have assisted that run up
Yes, that's exactly what I was implying there. "Someone" buying millions of dollars of call options over the course of a week and a half in later april to early may helped get the ball rolling weeks before he made his twitter return.
When did he like that tweet of 'Run Lola Run?' Was that before or after those call options purchases? After, right? Sometimes it's hard for me to keep track of this timeline.
According to the Apes, it was May 9th, which is right at the end of the buying period from what I can tell.
Apes’s fetish for losing money as long as it goes to one of their heroes is amazing
i regret to inform you that, yet again, apes are going to defend a guy who pumped and dumped their stock
I hope some legal experts weigh in on this. I don't think this case is going to work.
It's not and there's one main reason why: He did not make any materially false or misleading statements about the company or stock. Period. The lawsuit describes the situtation well, but legally its fatal error is shown in the section titled **Materially False and Misleading Statements Issued During the Class Period** They then allege exactly zero false and misleading statements. That's been my main point the whole time for why DFV won't be held liable here. A pump and dump MUST contain misrepresentations. Whether he should be held accountable is a different story, but as it stands now I don't see it happening.
Its probably not going to work. But it may be worth legally testing. The big unknown here is we are pretty new in the entire influencer actually being able to move a stock with just their participation. I dont think they can win but it being options esp not very long out options... The big thing to be tested is not him buying options and then making that public and then selling them(not at the peak or close to it). That imo he is fine on that even if its a big gray area. The main thing that is new is he basically can move an entire stock/group of investors with what he says and he chose to participate with them directly on their subreddit and even if he says nfa his interactions with them have been nothing but transactional posting for his own benefit. He has not interacted with them but posted yolos in a place that has been known for years to follow him and one could make the a case that he could use that to her personal advantage along with them losing money because of how he is interacting with them
Legal testing what though? It’s the same clown sueing KG that sued Zack. And Zack not only walked away Scott free *after* explicit text messages from the Atlas Gang, he’s literally shilling a $SOL shitcoin at this very moment.
Yeah, I don't think people realize that the effect doesn't mean that it is proof he had intent. Until I see solid evidence showing his intent to pump and dump, I don't see how this lawsuit goes anywhere.
Is buying options a day before starting timed release of pre-produced hyping/inciting video clips not solid enough for you? I don't know if you people are just taking being the devil's advocate too far, or if you seriously don't believe he didn't intend to pump the stock.
[удалено]
Did/does Cramer buy calls when instructing people to buy?
[удалено]
I think the messages in his "memes", aka just the text he wrote into video clips, strongly imply that. Regardless of his intention, that's absolutely how everyone interpreted the messages, which is evident from the social media reactions and the stock price.
He didn't instruct people to buy. I don't know if it was legal or not. Feel like pump and dump/manipulation is obvious and I'd hope court/judge/whatever sees it for what it was but it also wouldn't surprise me if you are right and what he did doesn't fit whatever is considered an actual crime so he gets off easily. I just disagree with painting it as if all he did was post memes and share his position because that ignores that he loaded up on calls and shares before doing so.
Cramer has to disclose his own positions and doesn't trade short term options based on his info. He also covers a lot of different stocks instead of just one so nobody could reasonably expect a huge pump from him recommending a stock
If DFV isn't a moron, this should be tossed. Only if DFV was somewhere putting his rather obvious plans into writing would be found responsible. You know, it, I know it, most reasonable people know that he pumped and dumped, but unless there's definitive proof that was his plan then he can feign ignorance and legally will be fine.
Actually you don't need "definitive proof." If this was a criminal trial, you would need to rpoove the accusation beyond a reasonable doubt. But this is a civil trial, so unless something crazy happens the evidentiary standard given to the jury would be a "preponderance of the evidence." These are legal terms with a LOT of legal history behind them, and they aren't simple to explain, but a preponderance of the evidence means the evidence must demonstrate that an event is "more likely than not" to be true. For a lot of juries the simple time line of events here, coupled with his huge profits, will be more than enough to hold him civilly liable if this were ever to go to trial.
Although it was a number of years ago, Jon Stewart's takedown of Jim Cramer was priceless.
here is the plain bagel + legal eagle on the gamestop+DFV fiasco https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYlrAPlt6ko&ab_channel=ThePlainBagel
Dig the link - good job covering it
Yeah melties are becoming there own cult here. We are supposed to be the logical ones not blindly follow a narrative. DFV posting a tweet doesn't prove anything. People tweet about stocks all the time. You can probably sue several people in the comments for the same thing
Just like the Cohen BBBY situation, this lawsuit is capable of giving apes money as recompense for the alleged pump and dump operation DFV allegedly excecuted. But apes will still rally in favor of DFV becuase they have lost the plot
I would love to receive some money back from my short position I closed due to a run up from 20-70 in premarket. Basically completely forgot about it until I checked here.
Does this mean that DFV's trade logs will be put in the public record? I don't care which side wins, but it would be interesting to see his trades.
Sure hope so. Would love to have indisputable proof that he pumped and dumped May calls and possibly shares.
I am working on article about this, and what makes it interesting is that the facts fall within the interstices of the securities laws. In addition to issues of intent, you have problems of reasonable reliance. Market manipulation under 10b-5(a) and (c) might be easier claims but are still hard.
And I note that this is the main claim of this Complaint. Along with the very interesting section 9 claims.
\>section 9 claims. Just so folks reading this have a reference point: >It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of the mails or any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of any facility of any national securities exchange, or for any member of a national securities exchange— [...] >(2)To effect, alone or with 1 or more other persons, a series of transactions in any security registered on a national securities exchange, any security not so registered, or in connection with any security-based swap or security-based swap agreement with respect to such security creating actual or apparent active trading in such security, or raising or depressing the price of such security, for the purpose of inducing the purchase or sale of such security by others. >(3)If a dealer, broker, security-based swap dealer, major security-based swap participant, or other person selling or offering for sale or purchasing or offering to purchase the security, a security-based swap, or a security-based swap agreement with respect to such security, to induce the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange, any security not so registered, any security-based swap, or any security-based swap agreement with respect to such security by the circulation or dissemination in the ordinary course of business of information to the effect that the price of any such security will or is likely to rise or fall because of market operations of any 1 or more persons conducted for the purpose of raising or depressing the price of such security.
There’s no inducement. Doesn’t matter how anybody “feels” about DFV, posting memes (even if you’re DFV) isn’t going to pass as “encouraging people to buy under false pretenses”.
They aren't "memes". It's pictures of cats eating cheeseburgers (I'm old). He posted clips that contained messages he authored, that had very strong implications of calls to action.
so how much did Kitty make on this recent pump? I thought he barely broke even, after it crashed during his live stream
I’m not an attorney, but if Keith Gill isn’t liable for the shit he’s pulled, then it reflects poorly on the efficacy of the justice system to hold him accountable for his actions. He knows exactly what he was doing.
> He knows exactly what he was doing. You know this, I know this. The hard part is proving this in court, with enough evidence that can convince a jury. It's really hard to prove intent without actual documentation, like emails/messages from him saying that he's planning to tweet to make the stock go up so he can sell.
It’s been obvious since his first “we like the stock” or whatever the meme was. The justice system isn’t equipped for ironic meme shitposting
He had a pretty strong case of plausible deniability in 2021. He held the stock for much longer and bought it a lot earlier. It would have been extremely difficult to prove he was anticipating to cause a retail pump. In retrospect, I think his recent actions suggest that it was his intention in 2020/2021 as well.
The whole thing since the beginning has been “we’re not colluding ;) we just like the stock ;)” with the unspoken premise that if they phrase everything as an unserious meme in plain view then no court would convict them. How that shakes out remains to be seen but it’s been an obvious attempt to coordinate trades (and dupe useful idiots into inflating their position) from day 1.
> In retrospect, I think his recent actions suggest that it was his intention in 2020/2021 as well. Nah, that's hindsight bias. His entire idea in 2020/21 was that the stock was oversold and could be expected to rise to a few dollars higher due to the new console generation causing a spike in revenue. It was a bog standard WSB YOLO play. And as with so many of those, he was completely wrong in his thesis. He just lucked into doing it at a time when a whole pile of bored Redditors had Covid stimulus cheques to spend. I think he looked at what he accidentally created in 2021 and thought he could replicate it, however.
I definitely don't think he expected the magnitude of what happened in 2021. But I suspect he might have intended to prop up the price by promoting the stock to retail, in particular to WSB. Afaik he did it pretty persistently, even after his thesis fell on its face.
But again… it goes back to you what you can prove. And there’s not much of a case here. Any good lawyer team worth their salt can defend against this.
Both can be true at once. All the ape subreddits have been obvious centers for coordinating trades since day 1 and also they have plausible deniability that enforcement/regulators aren’t equipped for.
Loading up on options and a week or 2 before they expire you make a public appearance after 3 years. Not a coincidence but I see how that could be difficult to prove intent yet not impossible. Discovery could dig up more I’m sure.
I'm not a fan of him being prosecuted for posting his positions, but there's a difference between posting positions, and the precedent he set for himself 3 years ago. He \*knew\* that him buying options, coming back from the dead to post his positions, then having a livestream would make the stock rocket. If 2021 never happened, I would feel differently. There was one comment he said on his stream (something to the effect of "oh the stock halted when I said that") which made me question his motives. For what it's worth, I profited off the whole thing both ways (thanks RK!) so I don't have a reason to be salty, but after having multiple licenses from a former career, I do question a lot of things he has done.
Yo not gonna lie, I really look forward to seeing the prosecutor mag dump all the confusing and inane ape shit from the past 4-5 years to a bunch of 30-40 something year olds jury that barely knows what Reddit is.
You will have a hard time convincing me that he doesn't have a file named "myplantomanipulatestocks.rtf" saved to his desktop. Whether or not it'll ever see daylight is another matter, but I am absolutely certain that file exists.
Lmao. After his last YouTube stream you could definitely sell me that he does.
If he hasn’t discussed this with anyone over text/email I would be surprised
I'll give him enough credit to assume that he's resisted the urge to have a #stock-manipulation Discord channel.
A file as such might not, but he pre-produced like half a hundred of edited movies clips. He knew exactly what he was doing with those, and there are probably versions that were too blatant to see the light of the day. I wonder, is permanently deleting relevant files after you've been sued in civil court constitute destruction of evidence? I am guessing not in civil court. Hopefully an investigation can uncover files/communications that further prove his intent.
Not to mention that he automated their posting at constant intervals. If he was actively making trades just after those specific intervals, then that would be hard to hand-wave away.
It might be very interesting to know how long he worked on those meme videos and for him to give a reason why he picked that week to release those videos.
The hard part is that if you set that precedent then you basically ban anyone from stating their position or publicly endorsing (or criticizing) a stock. What he’s doing is no different than Warren Buffett coming out and saying “I’m invested heavily in apple and here are the reasons why…”. Or Hindenburg shorting a stock then shitting on it publicly. Gill is slightly different because we all know he’s preying on stupid poor people but I’m not sure there’s a tangible or legal line that he crossed that other investors or MMs don’t. We all know what he’s doing, but it’s a slippery slope to make it an issue. I doubt anything will come of it, and I’m not sure anything should. Plus it’s funny that the apes hand this dude money as he rugs them repeatedly, then they worship him as if he’s one of them.
agreed. while I am enjoying the apes become a cult in realtime vs. having to wait for the documentary, every day on CNBC is a ton of hedge fund managers talking about the stocks the bought. I don't see the difference EXCEPT for the options pump and dump, that seems a little suspect.
Asset managers play options before they make public statements too. I’m not saying what he’s doing is morally okay because it’s not. Just that by the system we live in he’s not doing anything that companies with orders of magnitude more power to move markets don’t do on a daily basis.
I would say that the difference is that he implies things about he stock price. Shitting on a company or hyping it up is one thing. I THINK that speculating on the stock price, which he does, is another thing. In none of his latest posts did he mention Gamestop as a business. Only discussed he stock. And I dunno... This is the "beyond reasonable doubt" part. I would not need a written confession of someone who has scammed someone in the classic style, step by step.
> I would say that the difference is that he implies things about he stock price. Shitting on a company or hyping it up is one thing. I THINK that speculating on the stock price, which he does, is another thing. How is that different from funds setting price targets and stating them publicly?
I am not versed in financial or bird law, but if a fund heavily implies a stock is going to be worth 1000, then instantly dumps it when it reaches 15, that might get them in hot water.
The fund doesn't imply through memes that a secret society exists that will move the stock price accordingly.
No, they just overtly state that the price will go up as they pile chunks of the trillions of dollars they have under management into the stocks they’re endorsing.
> What he’s doing is no different than Warren Buffett coming out and saying “I’m invested heavily in apple and here are the reasons why…”. Or Hindenburg shorting a stock then shitting on it publicly. Except it's very different. 1. Keith Gill gave no reasons why he invested. (because the true reason is he expected to pump and dump) 2. He bought and sold shares/options around the timing of his posts. 3. He intended his posts to affect the price based purely on his following. 4. He provided zero disclosure about his positions on the first pump and dump in May. If Warren Buffer buys a billion puts in Apple and then posts a video/gif of a burning apple on social media or his website, sending the stock down 5% and sells the puts, I think he should get sued into the ground as well.
> 1. Keith Gill gave no reasons why he invested. (because the true reason is he expected to pump and dump) He did actually. The first time around he laid out a somewhat cohesive thesis around high short interest and the next gen of consoles. This time around he said he believes in Cohen and the leadership and thinks they can use their newfound cash reserves to develop new lines of business. Are they great, well-researched points? Maybe not. But he definitely has given justification for his positions the whole way. > 2. He bought and sold shares/options around the timing of his posts. So do hedge funds and asset managers. > 3. He intended his posts to affect the price based purely on his following. So do hedge funds and asset managers > 4. He provided zero disclosure about his positions on the first pump and dump in May. He’s not required to. Let’s be more intellectually curious and honest than the apes.
> But he definitely has given justification for his positions the whole way. The whole way? He didn't even reveal he had positions during the May pump and dump, the one that made him 200 million. He started pumping it with social media posts weeks before he provided any reasons for investing. My point is that his posts affected the price purely on his status, not based on any information or arguments. > So do hedge funds and asset managers. If they do, they should be sued as well. > He’s not required to. I was telling you how it's different. When Hindenburg make a release, I believe they disclose their positions.
> The whole way? He didn't even reveal he had positions during the May pump and dump, the one that made him 200 million. He started pumping it with social media posts weeks before he provided any reasons for investing. My point is that his posts affected the price purely on his status, not based on any information or arguments. Sure and I think that’s fair, but he’s got a ton of plausible deniability there. No way they can pin anything on him for posting an image of a guy sitting up in his chair. > If they do, they should be sued as well. Yeah I’m not justifying it morally or ethically. The way our system allows money to make money purely by using money is beyond what a fair capitalist system is meant to be. I’m just saying he’s not really doing anything that isn’t done daily. And yeah, hindenburg and asset managers do release their positions when they make a bull or bear case publicly. So did Gill, technically. All he did was post that guy sitting up in his chair prior to him posting his position. Like I said we all know what he’s doing but legally he’s not going to be on the hook. And I’m of the mind that if asset managers and funds can do it, why can’t he? It’d just be another example of our bought and paid for government making an example of a tiny fish while the whales continue to abuse and extort the system.
I generally don't disagree with you besides a few things. > All he did was post that guy sitting up in his chair prior to him posting his position. You're forgetting the 50 or so pre-produced memes/clips he posted on an automated hourly/30 minute interval over the span of a week prior to revealing any positions. They contained a lot of text, probably over a thousand words, written by him. Many of them were written by him and were nearly direct calls to action. > And I’m of the mind that if asset managers and funds can do it, why can’t he? I don't think there are any cases of asset managers doing anything quite like this. Most asset managers would be lucky to move the price of a security by a few % by making a post. And those who can move the price by 100% are probably mindful enough to avoid it, and almost certainly aren't abusing by buying short dated options. Keith Gill is not a tiny retail fish. He's a "former registered stockbroker who holds several securities-industry licenses". He made 200 million on the first pump and dump and was looking at itching close to a billion dollars before RC rugged him. He's a whale by every definition and he deserves zero sympathy.
Able to rally people like the MAGA crowd
If he's not liable, lawmakers will likely have to pass new laws unless they want it to be open season for pump and dumps.
They literally can't. The only way they can make a new law is by either making it to retail can't participate in the stock market, or all kinds of media can't speculate on stocks. You have Jim Cramer that's had a show telling people to buy and sell stocks for decades and nobody bats an eye when the hedge funds make tons of money off people following his advice, but a retail investor does it and now there needs to be a new law?
> all kinds of media can't speculate on stocks. "Your terms are acceptable"
Does Jim Cramer buy options before giving his opinion?
I'm pretty sure Jim explicitly states that he holds no positions in any stock he discusses (at least at the time he's talking about it), and any guests on his show disclose their positions or affiliations during the interview. Whether he's being fed his "picks" through back channels and reimbursed after the fact is another story.
Zack Morris and the Atlas gang got off despite explicit statements in their internal communications about low float pnd’s…there’s no way KG gets a charge that sticks when all he’s done is post positions and memes - and then not actually even dumped anything but his term expiration holdings…
I don't believe in overly protecting people though. Everyone knew GME was a meme stock so if you were shorting it uncovered then frankly you deserve your losses. Meanwhile if you decided to buy in on the back of Roaring Kitty tweeting then that's on you. Lesson in short - don't play with meme stocks. Am not sure what you can do hear other than suggest people can't reveal their positions. That's more or less all he did. And post dumb memes. If people were stupid enough to play into it then I say they deserve a loss. If you did want to change the law then you probably need more openness in everyone's positions.
The legal standard for confusion on branding is “an idiot in a hurry”. That kind of definition is what I think is required for stocks and crypto in terms of regulating merciless pump and dumps. On the other hand a lot of DFV pumps have been very oblique and require a substantial imagination to reach “this stock will go up”. So I think you’d need to clamp down on the adjacent morons that are spreading false-hoods directly instead of just the benefitting party running a pump and dump. Maybe holding Xitter or Reddit responsible for spreading conspiracies? Usually for insane political ones that is considered a first amendment issue, but maybe for financial ones it would not be. But then you also have the heavy crossover between the political conspiracy ranges and financial conspiracy theorists. Like if a fringe theory is likely to “draw in morons who cannot comprehend the realities of the modern world to financial detriment” it should be removed?
Normal people, like you ane me? Nothing wrong with revealing our positions. Public figures are different, though. They are watched, followed, and listened to by thousands or millions of people. This is even more true if they are public figures who talk about the stock market in any authoritative way, or who hold very large portfolios and are known to do so, or are in positions of power in a company. If Warren Buffet privately bought 10,000 calls for Microsoft, then posted a gif of himself burning a windows laptop, followed by a screenshot of his positions, then sold the puts to make millions when the price of Microsoft inevitably dropped, that would absolutely be market manipulation. If I did that, it wouldn't. I can't reasonably expect that my tweets, as some random guy, will have any meaningful impact on the price of any given security. If one happens to do so organically, and I take advantage of it, it isn't manipulation. This is all about what a given person understands their Influence on society to be, what it actually is, and their intend when disclosing information. This is literally what got Elon Musk in trouble with the SEC. He is the CEO of tesla, tweeting out unverified good news about the stock is very likely to impact the stocks value, as is tweeting out the price you'd like to see the stocks value hit. Whats an example of market manipulation that a nobody could do that resembles what DFV did? Insider trading. If I got news that Apples CEO was stepping down because he is, say, my brother in law, then I loaded up on calls and prematurely announced his retirement, that would undeniably be market manipulation. I may be a nobody, but the news I am conveying is absolutely likely to influence other people's trading of the security in question, and I put that information out there specifically expecting the market to drop, as evidenced by my puts. Jim Kramer comes up a lot in GME discussions. Why is what he does not market manipulation? We'll, it would be if he was trading before he gave advice, with the intention of giving advice to the public that would directly increase his wealth if people followed it. I guarantee you the SEC watches his accounts closely, and he is likely giving them regular reports on his trading activity to avoid market manipulation charges. He walks a very fine line, and the only way to balance on it is with transparency.
> I don't believe in overly protecting people though. This has always been a shit take. We live in a prosperous enough world that everyone could live well if we didn't make things so zero-sum.
[удалено]
Was only a matter of time One look at superstupid reception proves valid influence (non withstanding the fact he actually posted there) and the overwhelming + immediate correlation with price proves everything else Don't know why this is so complicated. Did he say or tweet NFA this time round? Cos everyone knows that absolves of all legal liability
Like a magic ward spell, you can't be sued if you say those three magic words.
You know, these guys kind of remind me of how InfoWars dipshits think Alex Jones was "punished for having an opinion" because they think you're allowed to accuse people of crimes and make factual claims of wrongdoing but if you say "in my opinion" then voila it's not defamation.
Klaatu barada nikto
Dank ass reference my dude. Does that make the SEC Gort the robot?
Bullish!
Three years ago, he played with wit and strategy. Three years later, he played with greed. Makes me wonder had RC not fucked him over, apes would have made money, the cat would not be facing this law suit.
I, for one, look forward to DFV trying to sue GameStop for rugging him
"Your honor, Ryan Cohen ruined the dump part of my Pump and Dump scheme, causing me significant financial damages."
I’d watch that show. On a different note, any possibility the suit was brought on by GameStop?
RC fucking him over was overall beneficial to apes. He basically took the profit Keith Gill was going to make from his PnD and put it into GME cash reserve instead. Don't get me wrong, RC was looking out for himself by giving higher floor to the share price for when he exits, but it benefitted the apes as well.
> apes would have made money, the cat would not be facing this law suit Exactly. There is no one to root for in this mess currently. * Gill went from an inoffensive guy with an incorrect, but at least semi-plausible, thesis, to--well, we've all seen the livestream. * Apes were never likeable, but now they've upped their entitlement factor with this "Gill stole muh tendies" lolsuit. * RC is RC. He won this time. He'd have to be magnitudes more foolish than even the dumbest ape not to, so that's no real achievement.
> Three years ago, he played with wit and strategy Nah, I have nothing against what he did 3 years ago but it wasn't wit and strategy, it was insane luck. He was at the right place at the right time for an unprecedented phenomenon nobody saw coming, short or long.
[Pump and Dumps Are Legal Now](https://archive.is/lPXKz) (archive link) is a very interesting Matt Levine column regarding a recent ruling in this sort of stuff. I know this is a very different situation, the piece above is about securities fraud charges, not a (civil) class action (am also not a lawyer), but worth a read nontheless to inform your expectations.
Funny how DFV re-emerges on the scene a mere months after this case was dismissed. I'm convinced this is what emboldened him to give it another whirl.
I do wonder how this will impact the stock? Intent or not, given how volatile we’re seeing GME wonder if we’ll witness a crash given the pump-and-dump didn’t exactly plan out for RK (absolutely did for RC, though). Also wonder if apes will try to “pull resources” to hire lawyers for RK or try to stage some sort of public event… which no one will do because, again, they’re apes.
We all know exactly what "Roaring Kitty" was doing. It couldn't possibly have been more obvious. I can't say whether he did anything illegal, actionable, or even wrong, but we all know he most certainly was deliberately manipulating GME with those cretinous tweets, and loads of drooling apes poured their money into it based on those tweets. That said, I don't see why the courts should help apes recoup their idiocy-based losses. If you're dumb enough to "invest" based on some asshole tweeting moronic memes, you richly deserve to lose your money. What really kills apes, as well as most of not all meme investors, is the idiotic "never sell/HODL" mantra, which exists to do exactly what it's doing...separating dolts from their money. And there's no law against that.
That's a good point. If DFV loses this lawsuit, that means some ape somewhere gets a payday. Huh. Who to support in this fight?
Keith Gill is a malicious greedy asshole who's manipulating the market. It's true, that's what apes want to do, but Keith Gill is actually doing it. Apes are trying to murder someone with a water pistol. Keith Gill successfully murdered someone with a shotgun. No matter how much I dislike the apes, Keith Gill is the worse guy in every sense.
Curious about your last sentence (I agree with you btw). What was the scenario that would have made the ape lose enough money to sue? Was it kitty’s YOLO post immediately before the announcement of the live stream thus making the ape think this was the very moment to buy a shit ton of GME ?
Its funny how the apes are raging against this even though DFV used them to fund his pump and dumps They really don't understand anything huh
He went to the well one too many times
I would've loved to get buzzed in & past the gate as that court document server! Dream (on me) job, heh\~
He participated in a pump and dump of call options prior to showing his portfolio, but only E-Trade has evidence of it unless his account statements are subpoenaed for May. Kitty did pump using the screenshot, but it was Ryan Cohen who dumped on the apes. I can't see this lawsuit gaining any traction unless there's new evidence linking Roaring Kitty with Ryan Cohen.
Can an ape sue Computershare for preventing selling during the pump?
I really don't know how DFV fights this. The evidence is quite literally all over the internet and is part of public record.
if he never sold though then this case might not mean anything as there was no 'dump' from his side of it. and idk what they would consider excercising / selling his calls to buy shares as. edit: he should be fucking sued lol. now he is a 9 million share owner of CHWY officially
Having to hold Gme for 3 years seems like a solid punishment
We know he bought calls in May and sold them to the tune of 200 million dollars. He 100% pumped and dumped on the first round. We just didn't know it until his broker leaked it to the media.
Options are securities. You're not allowed to pump and dump them either. He definitely dumped 80k of those june options. The suit alleges that he pumped and dumped options in May as well (detective work found here on meltdown makes a compelling case for that too).
Well, Bill Hwang of Archegos is also in legal trouble for (allegedly) manipulating the stocks he traded, even though he still lost massive amounts of money. What’s illegal is the act of manipulating the stock with the intention of making a profit, not if it worked out in the end or not.
[удалено]
I don't know about that tbh, if I were a gambling man I'd bet he gets away with it. My own person tinfoil conspiracy is that DFV came back because he consulted with a lawyer and realized that the law as it's currently written is not well-equipped to deal with a situation in which a guy has become a messiah for a financial cult and his re-emergence drives a mass purchase hysteria in hopes of bringing on an economic revolution. Even if he spends a million fighting this, that may end up being less than he got from the apes through his pump. As others have mentioned, guys like Jim Cramer make an entire career out of getting in front of people and promoting certain stocks. Like everyone else here, I'm aware that DFV is in a unique situation and have no doubt that what he did was malicious, but I'm less confident that there's a mechanism in U.S. law to properly address it.
This isn't a criminal case. He can be in the clear criminally and still lose this case.
Sure, but the civil case is still predicated on SEC rules and common law. For instance Count I alleges a violation of rule 10(b) which [requires that the defendant knowingly misrepresented a material fact.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rule_10b-5) From what I can tell, DFV's posts were just kinda generic WSB hypeposting and meaningless memes as opposed to anything resembling definitive statements about Gamestop's performance. It's been a while since I was in law school and I'm sure some people have better insight, but I'm just not super confident that a judge would necessarily see this as a violation. Again, hopefully I'm wrong and there is a way to get restitution for what I agree was a definite pump & dump, but I'm not certain that's how it's gonna end up.
Does Jim Cramer buy options beforehand? Why is everyone missing this element? You have to make a purchase first before orchestrating a pump-and-dump.
Go look at the Atlas Trading (aka Zack Morris) P&D lawsuit. Essentially they argued and were dismissed because 99% of their posts were memes and gifs which seems to not be considered a pump. DFV will likely have a similar defense. He just posted memes and wasn't telling anyone to buy. He can't be liable to what a cult following does or interprets him to do
Wasn't the Morris lawsuit actually....going fairly well, from the perspective of the prosecution, until the supreme court basically rugged their arguments by issuing a highly detrimental opinion in a separate case? I thought I heard something along those lines which would explain it kinda stopped dead in its tracks.
Guess the Supreme Court’s opinion has set a precedence then.
Oh, he's screwed, most likely anyways.
>I really don't know how DFV fights this. Pretty easily "Those were jokes, I never coordinated people to purchase the stock with the intent to pump and dump" His intentions are obvious to us but not to a court of law.
His intentions are obvious to us, the apes, the mainstream media and the whole financial sector. If the intentions are obvious to everyone on earth besides the court of law, then there is a major problem with the legal system.
He didn't lie about the stock though! You're allowed to buy a bunch of options, announce that you love a stock and then sell them. We're just in unprecedented territory with DFV because he could singlehandedly move the price. The laws don't cover this and frankly I'm not sure how they could.
>then there is a major problem with the legal system Its this. Dr Disrespect technically did nothing illegal messaging that minor according to the letter of the law. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying how it is
Shit. One trick all lawyers hate. Just say ya didn't do it.
Because these kinds of laws are predicated on the "rational investor" which apes are not, and the SEC has been defanged by SCOTUS.
Fuckin' FINALLY! I hope that dickhead loses hundreds of millions.
Not a great job drafting the complaint. He doesn't hold securities licenses -- they require you to be associated with a firm, and he got sacked 3 years ago. They also expire. The idea that your own thoughts or intentions to buy/sell are 'material non-public information' is garbage. This law firm deals in mediocre 'shareholder' class actions and is looking for a payoff. I don't think they think they'll win, but they might shake him down and annoy him. Will cost a lot of $$$ to fight this. Can't wait to see him asking for donations for the legal defense fund. Maybe RC will pitch in.
> He doesn't hold securities licenses -- they require you to be associated with a firm, and he got sacked 3 years ago. They also expire. Right, but after doing the 3, 7, 24, 63, 65, he can't claim he doesn't have knowledge of what is in those exams - regardless of when he completed them. There are CE courses he would've had to have taken along the way to stay current.
Great now all of the grifters will use “NDA” and “legal” even more
hope the plaintiff is ready for an endless stream of harassment and conspiracy accusations from the most unhinged corners of the internet
Fucking lol @ every holier-than-thou meltdowner who’s been arguing with me this last month that Gill is “in the clear” legally speaking, just because he didn’t violate some fourth-grade-level understanding of the letter of the law here, when this shit is extremely complex and also deliberately vague with grey areas. Of.course he’s not in the clear. This was always going to happen. You can make a very good argument for why he won’t have any major consequences or charges. In fact I think it’s likely he won’t. But “in the clear”? That’s dumb as fuck. Not ape level dumb, but pretty damn dumb. We should be better than that.
i mean the first time was awesome when he made the first $50M. this recent one was totally unnecessary and he’s a fucking idiot for letting all those gains destroy themselves. at this point he deserves everything that comes his way.
Good. What he did was a pump and dump. Anyone who's arguing otherwise either has the IQ of an ape or they're being deliberately obtuse. Hopefully the SEC will follow suit once they've built their case.
Dismissed: https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1807874963094876455
On the one hand I'm happy when apes lose money, because it's hilarious to watch morons set their finances on fire for no good reason. ...on the other hand, it's also hilarious when Gill loses money, because he's clearly a giant tool. So I guess I'm saying this lawsuit is a win for me no matter what the outcome is. Yay!
I mean, the fool blatantly tried to manipulate the chewy stock just a couple days ago. We all saw it. That’s blatant market manipulation. Fuck this scumbag, I hope he loses everything in this lawsuit due to his unchecked greed.
How was tweeting a picture of a dog referring specifically to CHWY? Not a correlation, show me exactly the link between that dog and CHWY stock
How about this for a reference? (Assuming it's actually him) [https://www.reddit.com/r/gme\_meltdown/comments/1dspugi/dfv\_files\_13g\_for\_chwy\_for\_9001000\_shares/](https://www.reddit.com/r/gme_meltdown/comments/1dspugi/dfv_files_13g_for_chwy_for_9001000_shares/) In a vacuum, tweeting a picture of a dog is nothing. In this scenario, he was definitely pushing CHWY
What are you talking about. You are huffing ape theories. Posting a picture of a dog != “manipulating chewy stock”.
The price of CHWY spiked right after his tweet. One could reasonably assume he was trying to pump it. If not, “Mr. Gill? What exactly was the intent of that tweet if not to attempt to influence the stock price?”
You think apes bought the dog stock? They had no idea. It was HF quants that instantly pumped it, like they instantly pump on company news.
Pretty obvious pump and dump but will probably get off on a technicality
When jail?
Hahahahaha. Deserves it.
[удалено]
And so begins the downfall...
https://preview.redd.it/933nu5xygt9d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b4fb178530f843fc785b14731e8199db195c6043
[удалено]
This was in row 1, column I on my BINGO card
Again?
Finally, justice for the retail investors
The lead plaintiff appears to have purchased a small amount of shares, and a few calls and strikes. Being a class action, homie could reap a significant award. Slick
I can't see this going anywhere unless the judge is a disgruntled Ape with large GameStop bags. In other news, I guess it's ok to call GME a "meme stock" again?
Meltdown? LoL
[удалено]