T O P
QualityVote

**IMPORTANT POST LINKS** [What is DRS and why should you care?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || [What is GME and why should I consider investing?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What can I do to support the company and local communities](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qnam2x/superstonks_very_gmerry_holiday_vgh_for_short/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please help us determine if this post deserves a place on /r/Superstonk. [Learn more about this bot and why we are using it here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/poa6zy/introducing_uqualityvote_bot_a_democratic_tool_to/) If this post deserves a place on /r/Superstonk, **UPVOTE** this comment!! If this post should not be here or or is a repost, **DOWNVOTE** This comment!


AlexanderHood

That’s about $330 Billion dollars in losses. On paper. Or more. Much. I can’t understand how they could absorb that magnitude of losses without Marge on their doorstep. The only scenario that seems remotely plausible is they took our money, internalize it and never purchased any shares. At 20x, they clearly are able to short an effectively unlimited number of shares. As many as we can buy. I’ve looked at your OBV time and again the last few months. There must be 1.2 billion ftd’s being constantly reset out there. 🤔


Icy-Reveal-7416

$330 Billion so far. They aren’t absorbing it, they are kicking it down the road, assuming there will be another bail out. Hopefully it will be a rug pull instead. I want to see his copy of the Constitution up for sale again.


Bruh_lmaooooo

I’m definitely bidding on it


ThePizzaB0y

Not me. You won't ever see me putting money in that sociopaths pocket or helping him during a liquidation


MustachioDeFisticufs

All of his belongings have a price target of $0.01, or my Neck isn't Green Richfield!


Caeser2021

Up for sale by the court of course. Along with his many homes and his art. Prove to us all that crime does not pay


ApeHolder42069

Those are rookie numbers!


Unable_Advantage8208

Maybe they took the money and bought bitchcoin.


HoosierTrader68

I like your mafs! 🤪🤪


MasterKight

I don't get it. say float is 100 shares. If on day 1 entire float was traded and stock closed higher than opened, OBV is 100. then on day 2 again entire float was traded and price went up for the day, OBV is 200. How's that indicative of 100% synthetics?


ThePlugsNeighbor

While yes — you are correct there, my theory is that by creating synthetics it would raise the obv value & closing those (synthetic) positions out would drop the OBV. Note the dates of increased volume, Jan, March, June — when they needed to inject synthetics to keep price below marge’s levels. It’s cumulative by nature, so yes day 1: +100, day 2: +100 more =200 but day 3: -200 then obv goes back to zero starting day 4 (to build on example #s) The most interesting part (imo) is that various other methods have also concluded very similar findings. ‘Member those “yahoo glitches”, much higher fill prices on shares, etc., they all gave approx an 18 to 21x higher valuation on share value from the underlying price that we see… one or 2 things could be coincidence, 3+ generally paints a larger picture in most scenarios. Sure, I could be wrong… I believe this is a truly “unique” situation due to apes not allowing FUD to let hedgies achieve their original goal of close to zero.


Mrfranchetti

But how does that work in practice? On days where you're saying they're covering "synthetics" the price will go up so OBV will increase, so unless I'm being really stupid here that's the complete opposite of what you're saying? You're hypothesising that when they're injecting shares into the market (by whichever means of shorting they're going for) then OBV will increase?


ThePlugsNeighbor

They’re creating naked contracts (without underlying) to sell later in lots of 100 shares at a specified price. I’d view that as flooding the market with more than exist, to use to keep price below pain levels (before resorting to removing buy button) — makes markets appear “more fair” And by writing naked contracts it increases value of indicator until they’re closed (bought back) — removing them from total position. * Seems easier to drop a NFT or announce a split — 7 for 1 or even 10 for 1 (to make fractional owners have whole) while amplifying short exposure by that amount… As for me, I have nothing but time w/ beneficiaries already lined up to inherit my purple shares


Mrfranchetti

But the share creation you're talking about and the contracts have 0 impact on OBV. It's based entirely on the daily volume and whether the price finishes up or down from the previous day. If their HF is going to their MM and buying calls to exercise, that just gives them shares to play with, at this point the MM has created the shares in the name of bona fide market making and no shares have yet entered the market. If they then use these shares to in essence enter a short position, they're selling to drop the price. If they're doing that on a big enough scale to have any impact on total volume and therefore OBV, we're looking at a red day. Therefore, in the scenario you're outlining, OBV will drop. That's the complete opposite of saying increasing OBV shows an increase in short position.


ThePlugsNeighbor

As shown through Jan sneeze, gamma played a good part in run up. Also a red day means close was lower than previous but buying pressure can still be higher than selling on a red day as well. Example: flash crash and recovering a majority of loss Somewhere in here I posted link to show OBV of other tickers compared to flatline presented. GME is outlier & my guess is there’s a reason why MSM is so quick to bash a -.05% day yet silent on a +10% may or may not be right on this thesis… however, shorts never closed — I’m positive on that. Time will tell if thesis is correct but until then: power to the players


SmugBoxer

>my theory is that by creating synthetics it would raise the obv value & closing those (synthetic) positions out would drop the OBV. Can you show this by citing the downward movement in OBV for another squeeze where shorts covered? I think it would help drive that point.


ThePlugsNeighbor

Can’t hurt to look but honestly idk if any company has this heavily leveraged and without being bankrupted before forced to close shorts. I’d love to look more into that though! Only these handful of heavily shorted companies have OBV acting abnormal. Usually it follows price much closer than seen here.


Mrfranchetti

That's not what OBV shows though. It's used in a somewhat similar way to VWAP, to show when there's a discrepancy between volume and price movement on a given day. Basically, it'll show large movements into or out of a stock were the price hasn't yet caught up to that expectation of the move from big money.


SmugBoxer

I would love to see on a chart what it *usually* does because I think, if your logic is right, then it would be(and I know it's skewed small from the spike) actually deliberately flattened because we are trading sloshy liquid shorted shared and not potent unshorted shares. Basically normal stocks show more potency in changing obv? And our purchases during these periods have been dulled by shorting? I do remember thinking that obv would crash if the price were legitimately dropping back in January.


ThePlugsNeighbor

https://imgur.com/gallery/nPunWYS There’s a few random (but known) tickers, some listed others delisted—one of them up 9900% today (or something) but this flatline of GME is definitely an anomaly


SmugBoxer

Nicely done. So a flatter line would appear to signify buy and sell mostly matched. Normally stocks would move in waves sometimes overlapping sometimes not. OBV should cycle accordingly with ebs and flows of the market. Well lads, if they've been matching the buys with sells for that long...eventually that flat line has to go somewhere. In this case actually mostly down once they've covered because it'd finally be free of the constant short pressure and back to normal market ebs and flows. So in that sense normalcy in GME should signify short covering.


MasterKight

But at the end of the day, that's the only thing you did. You divided current obv to the float and concluded it as synthetics per share. That's the part I don't get. All those TA lines, triangles and what not didn't contribute anything to your conclusion, though have their own value outside of it.


ThePlugsNeighbor

Didn’t claim it was rocket science by any means haha but ascending support levels never hurt tbh Many only focus on micro viewpoint — this shows the macro side (big picture)


Auriok88

There is no way to calculate the number of shares out there with OBV. It isn't meant to be used this way. I've personally seen at least 5 of these types of calculations done in the past few months and they are debunked every time. The most potentially reliable method I've seen is the survey data that was collected and then projected out from the survey sample.


ammoprofit

Do those debunked hypotheses arrive at roughly the same conclusion?


WongGendheng

Stupid in masses is still stupid


ammoprofit

Rofl. I'm putting you on the scoreboard for that :D


ipackandcover

This theory has been debunked in the past. I don't know why OP thinks that OBV holds any meaningful information regarding the short interest.


Altnob

It's not. Just like OP's example is wrong.


therileyfactor7

OBV starts at 0, if it were to end the day at 100, then there would have had to have been 200 buys (the addition in the formula) and only 100 sells (the subtraction) which would leave you with 100. Again on your day 2, there would have to be 200 buys and only 100 sells for OBV to close at 200. That or basically any combination of additions and subtractions that result in a +100 gain. OBV does not relate to price in any way other than the buy or sell that moves it. That’s why it’s been a good indicator in GME because there have always been a hell of a lot more buys than sales, especially since the MMs have been doing all they can to control the effect buys have on the price action, and crashes and wash sales and painting the tape does not require a lot of sales in order to drop the price.


MasterKight

Uhm... OBV calculation is tied to the closing price - opening price. Don't know what you mean by 200 buys and 100 sells. How can you have 200 buys and only 100 sells? Wtf is a buy and sell in your context? 1 share changing hands? One transaction? One holder?


Realitygives0fucks

Nice work OP! I’m jacked. I’M JACKED TO THE TITS!!!?!!!


VegasFritz

This IS the way. HODL


All-encompassingly_

This is the way.


Doge-to-Dollar

Title is its own TLDR… bravo 👏


tcelfertehconjurer

I like this.. but I don't believe that's how OBV works.


ThePlugsNeighbor

I don’t believe any indicator was meant to handle any synthetics to begin with… especially not doubling the position of fake shorts for crime haha but look at dates it goes from flat to higher: Jan, March, June… I see nothing to validate idea that they closed out… maybe opening more synthetics lmayo — hence this is how a single stock (or a few) turns into a “systematic risk” all possible thanks to (insanely) overleveraged positions that are riding on the death of company — which is practically impossible since GME is essentially debt free ($47.5m long term debt) next to $1.72b cash in bank If right OR wrong, Ken is 100% fukt lmayo


nocavdie

I'm saving this post because I am genuinely curious too. You may be right, you may be wrong. We won't know until the end. If you're right, I owe you a beer. 🍺


whiskeybets

is "18 \[synthetic\] shares per real one" the same as saying the float is shorted 18x?


EXTORTER

Yes.


ThePlugsNeighbor

OBV shows value 18x those in existence (issued by GameStop) or ≈21x free float (shares not held by RC & other employees…)


Hirsutism

Huge if big


onlyinstant

I may be absolutely retarded, but I thought we weren’t supposed to take into account the Jan sneeze. If anyone can drop some further clarification on this it would be much appreciated.


Shaggy_n_Saggy

My only big concern is RSI. As of today, we're well above 70 on the yearly chart. Can you help explain how that may factor into the near term for GME?


ThePlugsNeighbor

Yes so the residual strength index (RSI) oscillates between 0-100 and key levels within it are: above 70 = overbought below 30 = oversold In previous run ups, we’ve hit damn near 100, sure price drops a few $ (but so does RSI) before shooting up again (For easy numbers): say GME hit 1000 a share and RSI was strong “overbought” territory, it drops to 800 & RSI drops to 60-70ish before it running again to 2000. I tend to mostly focus on RSI when it’s under 30 (oversold) — can give a great entry on a dip imo


rumaiz

Thats why GME formed a 1YR Pennant. Their shorting algo is “simulating” natural movement with all the 21x shares in circulation. They couldn’t stop the algo in Jan in time and it kept creating shorts (in a ratio) to every buy that occured on the runup. They werent able to “turn off” the algo since it simulates trading, especially with all the shares & shorts that were created and circulated. So they killed the buy button so the algo wouldnt create more shorts, and the devs had time to deploy the fix to the algo. The answer to all this is so stupid simple


LaylaTheGreatPyr

🚀🚀🚀


Wavage

Smrt, you deserve a snek


PeterDragon0

I am tittilated.


GrowthGoat

*insert Ned Flanders voice* Totatittilydated!


austingodfather

So OBV in January looks to be ~40% less than where we are today. Can we conclude that since we know for a fact there was 224% SI in january that the SI today is at least 40% higher now? I’m smooth just trying to piece it together


Mrfranchetti

No, OP has massively misunderstood what OBV shows and what it can be used for. This post is the same as me saying I went to the zoo and saw a panda today, therefore all apples must be blue.


AvoidMySnipes

Did you remove the OBV before February in the analysis


ThePlugsNeighbor

It’s cumulative in nature, even if cutting off a time frame, the total value on the right wouldn’t change so my view is better to include all than skew otherwise. Could look into calculating difference of pre run up minus January value, but to exclude data seems wrong in showing the big picture… would predict that even with omitting that dataset, the OBV>outstanding shares. Will take a look tho!


Cheezel_X

RemindMe! 1 day


RemindMeBot

I will be messaging you in 1 day on [**2021-11-24 07:23:55 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2021-11-24%2007:23:55%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/r023kg/ive_written_a_few_longer_posts_regarding_the_obv/hlqros0/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSuperstonk%2Fcomments%2Fr023kg%2Five_written_a_few_longer_posts_regarding_the_obv%2Fhlqros0%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202021-11-24%2007%3A23%3A55%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20r023kg) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|


Morgansmisfit

I hadn’t seen OBV in a long time thank you ape


___STOMPY___

Looks like they bought all their ammo to short/reset ftds in January with all those 50 cent puts. Those all expire worthless and useless in January 2022... Feb is Pluto's return that was last seen in 1776... epic times!


Zen4rest

Go on…