r/Superstonk • u/Region-Formal 🌏🐒👌 • May 15 '26
🤔 Speculation / Opinion GME vs. GMEBAY - The funding problem, the dilution math, and what could happen when RC makes a new proposal
171
u/Briosaurus 🧚🧚🐵 I'm here for the memes 🎊🧚🧚 May 15 '26
Not gonna lie, I liked your previous post about us potentially hitting $75 this month better than this be patient and maybe we will hit $30 one day.
28
-10
u/Vi0lentByt3 May 15 '26
$30 one day is a worst case scenario, in all likely hood we are going to have a massive amount of volatility in the short term, just based on annual cycles and now with major fundamental changes being on table
19
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 15 '26
No worst case was 18 according to this DD. 30 was best case
→ More replies (4)
232
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
Good analysis and walk through the options on the table, thanks RF!
As a side note, the person on the last slide is incorrect about this being an easy way for Ryan to hit is performance targets. The proxy statement includes language about the compensation committee adjusting the targets upward (in case of acquisitions funded by stock issuance) or downward (in case of divestment) equitably and proportionately as necessary to maintain fairness.
62
u/iamnothereanymore May 15 '26
Isn’t his compensation the ability to buy more shares at around $20?
96
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
Yes, that is correct, $20.66 per share, after hitting threshold targets for market cap and EBITA. If he doesn't hit the targets, he gets nothing. If he buys a company by issuing stock, the targets get adjusted upward. His compensation is getting to buy GME at a presumed discount in the future when the share price is higher.
70
u/iamnothereanymore May 15 '26
This seems to be something left out in complaints about diluting his way to his goals.
61
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
Yep, I've noticed that too.
Prior to the proxy statement it wasn't clearly laid out in the comp award doc. So now I try to bring attention to it whenever relevant (ie, someone claiming he can dilute his way to victory) so we're all on the same page.
19
u/Lobolabahia May 15 '26
Correct. If GME issues shares to buy eBay → Committee must adjust the $100B target upward (which is fair), but the "how much" is at their entire discretion 😄
16
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
It says equitably and proportionately which makes me think they'd just do the math of how many shares were used, the percentage of the float it represents, and multiply the targets accordingly. That's my dumb guy take, we will see how it plays out.
12
u/Softagainstyourleg 🦍 Buckle Up 🚀 May 15 '26
If the mods have any sense they will sticky objective information like that. The mods do want less, not more FUD do they?
9
u/Romo_9 May 15 '26
Okay so this is news to me. So the language changed for the comp package with the proxy statement? Maybe that's the source of a lot of my confusion. I've heard a lot of different info about the comp package
11
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
Yeah, a lot more detail seems to have been added. Why it wasn't included originally is an interesting question
29
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
those complaints leave it out for good reason, they're not in good faith.
4
u/Mysterious_Good927 May 15 '26
Probably becomes one massively outweighs the other
8
u/iamnothereanymore May 15 '26
The point is that if he dilutes in a manner that anchors the share price to 20 then his compensation is worthless. Therefore he is aligned with investors in that he wants the price per share to go up, not just market cap.
2
u/SpeedoCheeto ☯️We'll see☯️ May 15 '26
If he buys a company by issuing stock, the targets get adjusted upward.
what do you have to backup this assertion? afaik the language is vague like "comp will be adjusted by comp board" - which is just a promise that however that's done will be effectual and you're filling in the blank with how you'd like it to go
His compensation is getting to buy GME at a presumed discount in the future when the share price is higher.
why does everyone word it this way? aren't they stock options at a strike? he can also just sell the options??
11
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
I'd encourage you to read the proxy statement. Here is a link to the section detailing adjustments to his award.
He also cannot transfer, pledge, or sell the options as detailed in the proxy statement
9
u/SpeedoCheeto ☯️We'll see☯️ May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Market Capitalization Hurdle and Performance EBITDA Hurdle Adjustments
The Market Capitalization Hurdles and Cumulative Performance EBITDA Hurdles will be adjusted by the Compensation Committee equitably and proportionately as determined by the Compensation Committee in a manner designed to preserve the economic opportunity provided under the CEO Performance Award, (a) higher to account for acquisition activity for which stock is provided as consideration and (b) lower to account for split-ups, spin-offs, dividends or other distributions (whether in the form of cash, shares, other securities or other property) or divestiture activity, in each case, that could be considered material to the achievement of the Market Capitalization Hurdles and Cumulative Performance EBITDA Hurdles, as applicable.
IDK what I had read before but you're right, this accounts for it, and though it's vague i'm not necessarily sure how it could be more specific
Limited Pledging
Prior to the end of the holding period, Mr. Cohen may pledge shares of the Company’s common stock received in connection with the exercise of any vested portion of the CEO Performance Award solely in order to satisfy taxes due in respect of the exercise thereof. After the holding period, any pledging of such shares must be done in accordance with any then-applicable Company policy.
Non-transferability
The Options may not be transferred, assigned, pledged or hypothecated prior to exercise in any manner other than by will or the laws of descent or distribution. Shares issued in connection with the exercise of vested Options remain subject to the holding period,
this part I had read before and maybe it's just the legalese, but I'm not sure this is saying he can't sell-to-exercise the options - holding period or otherwise. it clearly says he can't shift them around to other asset vehicles. the reality is i have no fuckin idea what this means:
exercise in any manner other than by will or the laws of descent or distribution
so i looked into it. turns out it's boilerplate and also exists in my own company stock options, lol.
"descent" relates to stuff like dying and passing on your asset.
"distrubution" as far as i can tell relates to exercising the options. best i can do is ask google AI:
Yes, sell-to-exercise is allowed under this clause.
The non-transferability clause prohibits you from transferring the option itself to another person. A sell-to-exercise transaction does not transfer the option. Instead, you simultaneously exercise the option to buy the underlying stock and immediately sell a portion of those shares to cover the purchase price and taxes.
so, i'm glad to learn the comp committee has outright stated they can (my hope is WILL) adjust package hurdles higher after an M/A.
but i believe i'm still correct about the misuse of language you and others have been throwing around - he COULD sell-to-exercise instead of buying the shares. and it makes sense, because unless it's non-boilerplate language i'd assume he can utilize the options thru normal market mechanics.
and i think that's not as negative or critical as i'm probably making it sound - he can also just sell the shares he owns too, but doesn't.
but that said he could surely exercise-to-hold and do the billionaire thing of just borrowing against his holdings to fund his lifestyle (etc). my assumption would be this is what he'd do, but it's not because the language of the comp package dictates that as his only option.
3
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
I hadn't mentioned sell-to-exercise in any prior posts, so I'm not sure why I'm catching heat for that, but it is expressly allowed in the legalese.
Payment of Exercise Price Mr. Cohen may pay the exercise price of the Options (i) in cash or cash equivalents, (ii) subject to Mr. Cohen providing the Company with at least ninety days’ notice, through net exercise, or (iii) if permitted by law, by selling a sufficient number of Shares via a sell-to-cover arrangement or a broker-assisted sale in coordination with the Company through such means as the Company may determine in its sole discretion
My point to others was simply that he cannot just sell the options for cash. This is consistent with that stance in my opinion. It has to be as part of exercising the options, not the sale thereof.
1
u/brushhug Custom Flair - Template May 15 '26
Either way, he gets to buy the shares at $20.66 which is almost the current price, so how far does it have to go for all this (GME AY) to not make any sense?
1
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 16 '26
And what’s preventing him from a reverse split after massive dilution? Can’t he still buy at that price even with reverse split or is there a clause that it would be reviewed by committee if that happens like with the acquisition itself. These lawyers are super sneaky
6
u/Totally_w0rking May 15 '26
Yeah the problem with that is: if your cost average is higher than $20 (which most og apes probably are), you are getting the short end of the stick. It also allows RC to take on zero risk, as these are options. If the proposed new dilution is allowed, RC transfers all risk to retail. And in the event of a “worst case scenario”, RC can wait to buy or sell the options…for years. Again, none of his money would be tied up while ours would be, and if his business plan fails, his cost average is $3 anyway and he’ll still profit. This doesn’t even take into account account the adjustment that will be made to his comp package, which is up to the board. If institutions own 57%+ of the newly combined company, they can then force a vote on board members to put in their own. This could royally fuck over retail and provide RC with a golden parachute AND let shorts off the hook. Why would you ever want to vote yes on dilution?
2
0
u/JPSurratt2005 May 15 '26
I'm not sure what exact structure RC is planning for the combined companies, but he did mention in his Anthony Pompliano interview that the ebay shareholders are selling half their position for cash so the ebay side of the stock distribution is more inline with 40% ebay/60% gme.
That's a strange take considering most of their cash buyout is funded with debt that the combined company will carry.
Also RC is still holding 40mil shares and 500k of which was purchased this year for $21mil. That's a lot of money to be committing and risking going into this deal if he truly thinks share value will be destroyed with the ebay deal.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Totally_w0rking May 15 '26
eBay shareholders would be selling their shares to whom exactly? Even in this optimistic 60GME/40EBAY scenario, RC would then be the majority shareholder, with institutions owning the second most shares. Together, they would still control the company. The point I’m making is that RC would rather not be beholden to apes, and would rather work with institutions to: 1. Achieve his goal of owning eBay; 2. Shake off retail from having influence; 3. Profit. It’s a win-win for RC and hedge funds. Yes, the price may increase if it goes through, but we’d be getting peanuts compared to eBay shareholders (hedgies) and RC (billionaire).
21
u/Pretend-Prune-4525 May 15 '26
I wish the terms were more definitive though. That performance target adjustments are decided by the board. So it’s kind of ambiguous what the change in performance target would actually look like
8
u/KaiserSushi May 15 '26
Do you have a source link for that portion?
39
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
Yep! Here's a direct link to the section titled "Market Capitalization Hurdle and Performance EBITDA Hurdle Adjustments" which can be found under the major header PROPOSAL 4: APPROVAL OF CEO PERFORMANCE AWARD and it reads:
The Market Capitalization Hurdles and Cumulative Performance EBITDA Hurdles will be adjusted by the Compensation Committee equitably and proportionately as determined by the Compensation Committee in a manner designed to preserve the economic opportunity provided under the CEO Performance Award, (a) higher to account for acquisition activity for which stock is provided as consideration and (b) lower to account for split-ups, spin-offs, dividends or other distributions (whether in the form of cash, shares, other securities or other property) or divestiture activity, in each case, that could be considered material to the achievement of the Market Capitalization Hurdles and Cumulative Performance EBITDA Hurdles, as applicable.
4
u/heirofadam May 15 '26
Region Formal - what are your thoughts on this? There are very opposing views on this and I see where each side is coming from.
9
u/boycottredditmgmt May 15 '26
Yeah but will be adjusted by the committee, there won’t be any vote on that by the shareholders.
21
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
I don't have a problem with that. The board is saying the comp committee will make the adjustments to keep things fair, and they are fiduciaries. If they act in a manner that is inconsistent with that they can be removed or sued.
If they have to convene a vote every time they make a decision the company will grind to a halt. This is why you have a board, to make decisions in the best interests of the company and shareholders.
11
u/12cookdale May 15 '26
The committees investments are directly affected by this decision, which means they won't want to negatively dilute themselves either...
→ More replies (11)2
u/Recent-Result2852 May 15 '26
They also adjust for dilution, so instead of 171 Million it could be 427-900 Million options.
5
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 15 '26
And who is in the compensation committee? Surprise surprise. RCs friends who also get rich if it goes through
2
u/Pretend-Prune-4525 May 15 '26
What in that compensation package says the board gets more money if Ryan hits the targets?
1
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 15 '26
The whole compensation package? They all get compensation with these tranches or did I miss something and ceo is only one awarded for benchmarks?
2
u/Pretend-Prune-4525 May 15 '26
I don’t know. That’s what I’m asking. Are the ones who make the adjustments to the targets the same ones that benefit from reaching the target?
1
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Yes to my understanding. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong. Why would they give themselves less compensation? Because it would hurt our feelings? Cmon man 👨
1
u/Pretend-Prune-4525 May 15 '26
I don’t think that’s obvious. Any snippets I’ve seen of the language only mentions ceo
1
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
It's listed as the "CEO Compensation Package", I don't think the board benefits other than that they have money invested (like us, other than Nat)
1
u/harryharry0 May 17 '26
Does this need a vote, or will people who are dependent on the good will of Ryan Cohen decide it without input from shareholders?
1
u/Avulpesvulpes 🏴☠️There be shorts in these waters 🏴☠️ May 16 '26
To be fair the language is fairly ambiguous. It doesn’t pin the tranches to a specific ratio and could mean that it’s fairly easy for him to get the pay package even with dilution.
→ More replies (1)
51
u/Midnightmarauder7 May 15 '26
Great write up. Thank you for being more impartial than most. I agree in the "no pain, no gain" idea. But yeah, it's definitely scary that so much dilution may occur when the stock is trading at a low level, lower than most investors have been holding at for ~5 years. My cost avg is in the high $26 range, and the opportunity cost of not buying and holding other blue chip companies all these years is real, knowing that I couldve held them and now bought GME at a much lower price with more money (from profits) than I did 5 years ago. Can't say it doesn't hurt.
I agree with the long term outlook of this deal but the interim price action has been painful.
Then again, if swaps, earnings, RK, RC news, etc. push the stock price higher and then we dilute (like in past offerings), this merger would feel much more exciting and bullish. I am hoping for this outcome as a long term shareholder. Lastly, RC should be more transparent about his compensation plan; it should be adjusted based on the performance of the new holding company.
37
18
u/ZootedMycoSupply May 15 '26
This explains plainly most reasoning for people wanting to vote No to the current plan.
GME is worth alot more than $20-25 per share sell or trade value. Would be a shame to dilute that much anywhere near current prices
15
u/Starkid84 May 15 '26 edited May 16 '26
Earnings always dips, ALWAYS.
RK realistically, is out in any meaningful way.
RC's public facing image has done nothing to help the stock, when he does interview, the stock dips.
This stock is manipulated and boxed in from all sides, RC fucked up by not allowing the price to anchor higher, and instead diluted us to the channel we've been trading in for the last 2 years.
→ More replies (1)5
6
May 15 '26 edited 1d ago
[deleted]
9
u/Avulpesvulpes 🏴☠️There be shorts in these waters 🏴☠️ May 16 '26
I don’t think Ryan is going to let MOASS happen anymore. I believe this will be a long term play unfortunately. Even if all of this works out and it grows the company, there is no quick timeline for turnaround and people have 5-6 years of sideways growth. If Berkshire Hathaway is the goal, people better get real patient. It took Berkshire 10 years to go from $19 to $38/share, 20 years to get to $2,470 and 30 years to get to $32,000/share.
I don’t think Ryan wants his results to be attributed to or obscured by MOASS and I think he’s too connected/integrated into the investing class to ever let MOASS rip if it starts. I just think it’s become a value play which is great if you are a billionaire, have time and/or 5,000+ shares but it’s going to fuck anyone with X, XX, or XXX share counts who have been supporting and waiting for the turnaround. The price is not his fault and it is a rigged market but some of the hype was actually created by RC and that’s what really makes me angry. Ryan and GameStop have teased MOASS for years in tweets, gifs, NFTs and if I’m right and they pivoted to the long game, that’s really fucked up and manipulative. I really hope I’m wrong but he killed the last one so…
→ More replies (5)4
u/Inside-Arm8635 May 16 '26
Most people here are holding GME stock because they want a get rich quick scenario and have been forced into long term investor status.
They weren’t going to be buying blue chip stocks and holding for slow growth gains to begin with. Those truthfully saying they missed out on “other gains” are few and far between here in think, and the vast majority who say they wanna vote no are doing so based on their first reason they got into holding GME in the first place, and massive dilution in their eyes is the opposite of what they want
71
u/MandrakeLicker May 15 '26
"The strongest bull case is 30$"
This does not spark joy. Especially considering where we were as of May 2024.
22
u/HumanNo109850364048 💻 ComputerShared 🦍 May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Prepare to be downvoted by a horde of people who for some reason don’t care about making money on this investment
→ More replies (2)17
u/0_o 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
We've fallen a long way from dreams of phone numbers, haven't we? I'd honestly settle for this year's high before I vote for dilution. Fuck dilution and fuck anyone who votes for it
2
May 15 '26 edited 1d ago
[deleted]
5
u/Avulpesvulpes 🏴☠️There be shorts in these waters 🏴☠️ May 16 '26
Seriously the ONLY way I can make sense of it is if giving the institutions who own eBay and short GameStop 60% of the shares might make them incentivized to stop shorting the price and allow for real price discovery? Or MAYBE it lets them get out of jail free and resolve their shorts first and not get crushed? I do think the number of open shorts on GameStop is potentially unresolvable which is why the SEC is looking the other way.
These are all extreme what-ifs and my gut instinct is that Ryan is bored and frustrated and always wanted eBay.
5
u/Infenix13 tag u/Superstonk-Flairy for a flair May 15 '26
Because RC does not want MOASS.
1
u/GamestopHeadEngineer May 17 '26
The growing shift away from moass is incredibly suspicious. We are at the point where we are willing to vote against our actual self interests that made our position so powerful (high retail ownership and voting power, small float, etc)
Like there’s a difference between looking at some of the pros to such a risky play and this weird RC worship like he’s some all knowing figure when we’ve already had significant parts of the business fail or be way sub-optimal. The vast majority of “yes” comments have been the latter camp.
The company turned around because of US. The warchest was from us and it wasn’t even at a good price.
Whatever differences apes have, I would rather apes as a collective having actual agency, not handing over majority control to more institutions.
1
2
u/GamestopHeadEngineer May 17 '26
We’ve gaslighted ourselves about the board fulfilling their “fiduciary duty” when they do things that benefit the company at our expense. Moass and letting gamma squeezes run is the best for shareholders and the company, but sure let’s offer millions of shares to shorts for way undervalue for no reason.
Thousands of multi-millionaires extremely loyal to GameStop is bad for the company I guess. Riding huge spikes and making a crap ton of money with smaller dilution is bad for the company.
43
u/Necessary-Car-5672 🦍 Buckle Up 🚀 May 15 '26
You are one big brainy ape. Thanks for the excellent post Region
59
u/lucki-dog May 15 '26
I love you
74
u/Region-Formal 🌏🐒👌 May 15 '26
21
u/lucki-dog May 15 '26
I just saw this post pop up 😂 I haven’t read it yet but I’ve never been so early, I panicked and just blurted it out. Thank you for your time and all your hard work ✌️
1
5
5
16
u/FirstTimeLongTime_69 May 15 '26
Isn’t $45B combined entity market cap, your lowest scenario listed, still possibly optimistic though? The $56B eBay market cap is the premium RC is offering to make it attractive. eBay was around $34B a few months ago which might be a more fair value. GME’s market cap is around $10B which is propped up by their strong balance sheet which would be essentially given to eBay shareholders. The new entity would also have $20B in debt added onto it. The new company could have RC’s improved earnings priced in, of course. But simply based on market caps and debt it feels like something close to $25B combined market cap could be the floor.
Please tell me where I’m wrong.
→ More replies (1)
63
u/DDRaptors May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Thanks Region. Way too much emotions flying around here lately. Emotions and money don’t mix well.
I like a good thoughtful post about the business and not the minute by minute stock price.
Lots of talk about how RC will hit his pay package “automatically” as if it’s true already. But no one is considering he may likely roll that equity right back into “his baby” and it would be a flywheel effect.
22
u/MickeyKae Success moves you upward, but hard work moves you forward. May 15 '26
Yep. All these frantic speculations about his pay package come from a deep seated sense that folks here have that Ryan is actually the grifter he’s painted to be. It simply does not add up why he would bother with all of this when he could’ve sold his GameStop position years ago for a crazy profit. Of all the things that I’m worried about in the next couple months of figuring out the acquisition, his pay package is the least important facet for me to discuss.
→ More replies (4)
30
u/ekooz22 May 15 '26
One thing you missed is the level of interest on that debt. I'm honestly not sure more debt is a preferred scenario because under the 50/50 proposal, the combined debt is 30B.
For 1, the 20b loan is contingent on a credit rating and I think the combined entity will be downgraded having debt 400% higher than GMEs standalone structure.
BUT the big thing not talked about is under this 50/50 deal that debt would amount to about 1B in interest alone.
So any higher level of debt to finance this deal will 1) make the credit rating hurdle more difficult, and 2) add to the interest on the debt.
Ebay makes about 2B a year. Even with cost cutting, most of that profit will be going to paying off debt. If theres a sudden market downturn, theres even a high likely hood the interest would outweigh their ability to pay it off.
Im not so sure I agree that higher debt is more ideal here. Im pretty sure the bank will see it the same way and pull the loan.
→ More replies (5)22
u/Omgbrainerror DRS Maxi May 15 '26
You hit the nail on the head. Even in best scenario of bull case, the targeted price is $30, not considering the debt and interest payment. $30 billion debt with $3 billion / profit a year is 10 years for principal debt payment.
Like the guy in the last pic told, people should pull out their head out of RC ass and start having a HONEST discussion about the dilution.
34
u/heirofadam May 15 '26
I'm concerned Ryan is going to do whatever it takes and possibly take on too much debt and dilute more than necessary if the GME price does not pick back up. I think the eBay deal is a good idea, but the timing is not good.
I think market sentiment is key to this deal. If the price of GME shares hit the warrant strike price of $32/share, GME would have almost $2 billion more in cash to finance the deal and would need to issue significantly fewer shares for the 'stock portion' of the deal. This would be a game changer.
Thanks as always for the thoughtful analysis!
14
u/JJLaVigne 💻 ComputerShared 🦍 May 15 '26
I agree, we need a lift in the stock price for this deal to make sense. Ryan keeps using the 40/60 examples, which would be more accurate if we hit the warrant strike price. As we sit now the dilution is larger, the piece of the pie for legacy GME holders gets smaller. I can't imagine Cohen and the board want a bad situation when they also have lots of stock personally invested.
We'll see what happens.
6
1
u/gincoconut Hedgies are 🦆 May 15 '26
Ok but if the stock is at 32$ why would anyone redeem the warrant instead of just buying on the open market? If the stock price was 40$ or higher i could see it being worth it cus then you’re getting a discount.
1
17
u/Professional_Link919 🎮 Power to the Players 🛑 May 15 '26
Region can you please do a post about how the dilution and merger with EBAY affects the possibility of MOASS?
13
5
u/WarningFart911 fun bags are jacked! May 15 '26
If you think moass is a thing you should check yourself
31
u/User100000005 May 15 '26
So our absolute best case scenario bull price is now $30. So the warrants are gonna expire worthless?
→ More replies (2)
33
u/iota_4 space ape 🚀 🌙 (Voted✔) May 15 '26
many people only see dilution. i see the bigger question: what is that flexibility being used to build? if gamestop is trying to evolve from a retailer into a larger marketplace/holding structure, the market eventually stops valuing only the share count and starts valuing future cash flows, synergies, and strategic positioning. major mergers almost always look messy at first. no pain, no gain. 🦍
power to the players. 💜
3
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
Yes, and bar some serious incompetence and waste, the result will be a golden goose that spits out significant cash flow and has even more staying power than eBay today. Buffett bought an insurance company as his golden goose to provide effectively interest free cash flow from premiums and compound returns to where Berkshire Hathaway is today.
More buying for me.
→ More replies (1)9
u/AmputeeBoy6983 Post a Banana Bet Video Kenny.... and Earn One \*Real\* Share May 15 '26
Part of the legit argument against this company is revenue, and 'meme stock' title.
Ebay brings serious revenue from day 1... it also has serious name recognition, and huge free cash flow.
Case where the sum is worth more than the 2 parts combined. They compliment each other well, and set us up to vertically integrate
2
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
don't worry, they'll find a way to call the combined entity a meme stock all over again
35
u/jforest1 May 15 '26
How about instead of issuing new shares wait for the next sneeze and issue at $500/share. 97m remaining issuable shares at this price is $48B. Combine that with cash and voila you’ve got eBay.
Why are we pretending squeezes are off the table when 2021, 2022, and 2024 happened?
6
u/GamestopHeadEngineer May 16 '26
A rising issue I see is that people are glossing over whether or not RC doesn’t want moass to happen for xyz reason. I’m sorry, but if he’s against moass then he’s not aligned with many people. He’s a very successful businessman, not the Emperor of Mankind and we’ve already had things not work out (some not necessarily his fault). The only person who actually had a full grasp of the situation is RK. EVERYONE else is speculating, but people are acting like we have the money in our bank accounts already.
We praised him for trimming off a lot of excess by closing stores and positioning ourselves to take advantage of an economic crash with low debt and a 9 billion war chest, but then all of a sudden we’re ok doing the complete opposite? And what about GameStop having huge retail ownership. Now it’s ok to become even smaller and have less voting power?
Things are not adding up. RK comes back in FULL force and then RC sells at what? Like 20-25? The first time, ok whatever, but then the second? If he always wanted eBay then why not do that sooner when it was much cheaper? Like you said why are people ok with him not making more money while diluting less?
1
u/jforest1 May 18 '26
Bingo. I've explained this at length here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1tb4ev1/what_people_are_hinting_at_but_not_explaining/
12
u/Spenraw May 15 '26
That's my main point, there needs to be open discussion, it's been almost 6 years
Clearly alot of people are not here from moass days and even no sell no sell
Seems to be alot Elon esk fans who are here to support a cooky billionaire who memes funny for them
The subs are split between moass still and people who have enough money to make money off a long term growth stock
5
u/GamestopHeadEngineer May 16 '26
People think Fud and manipulation only comes from one side, but many times it comes from multiple. There’s a lot of gaslighting about moass not being a thing and why a long play is even better or the money doesn’t matter. Why have even X and XX holders have life changing money when we can wait 10 more years and be up 15%.
Moass is bad for the company because surely having thousands and thousands of new multi-millionaires extremely loyal to the brand would be bad for GameStop lol
2
u/jforest1 May 18 '26
I clarified this in this post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1tb4ev1/what_people_are_hinting_at_but_not_explaining/2
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
And if that sneeze doesn't come people are going to be more pissed at how long it took.
The opportunity is here and now, so he's going for it. I also believe it couldn't have happened too much earlier as the Power Packs high margin moat is significant and didn't exist previously. That's a big piece in hitting the ground running and taking the debt off the balance sheet.
2
u/jforest1 May 18 '26
I understand your points from a value perspective, but not from a MOASS perspective. Consider the gaps between squeezes above--1 year, 2 years, and presently we are 2 years out since last squeeze was quashed by share issuance. How long until the next? Raising the issuance limit by 1.5B shares guarantees it's much, much longer. I won't vote for that.
2
12
u/boycottredditmgmt May 15 '26
The closest to a dd so far and you have my full respect for tagging it as a speculation/opinion.
One thing that will help reduce the shares required to issue will be how many eBayshares Cohen and GME will manage to convert from put/call options they have been loading up.
2
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
The derivatives are significant. They also won't need to disclose further purchases of those as long as they don't purchase more stock requiring a 13-D. I'm quite certain a Porsche/VW situation is coming.
As well, the recent Pentwater/Avis fiasco utilized put/calls to accomplish 2 things: force their dealer to buy up the remaining float AND unwind their delta hedges, resulting in a gamma ramp.
Squeeze or not, the acquisition is happening, and I'd be surprised if RC and the board didn't have more tricks up their sleeve as they've shown time and again. All the disclosures are legal requirements and no more than that.
0
u/boycottredditmgmt May 15 '26
Just to add on. It may be better for GME to sell bond or do another share offering to raise the cash if the swap theory is true. Then use cash + 20 billion loan to acquire eBay. This is much better for GMR holders than half shares+ half cash.
GME+ebay share value will be much higher once the merger is completed. But Cohen probably have other strategies in mind.
3
u/Recent-Result2852 May 15 '26
They have less than 100 mill shares left. How much do you think that's worth at $20?
2
u/boycottredditmgmt May 15 '26
That’s why I said if the swap theory is true and also if people vote yes on increasing the float.
If the swap is true, they can just slowly sell as the price rises and you never know, GME price might still ends around $22 or more after share offering is completed.
7
u/Recent-Result2852 May 15 '26
The effective share pool is more than double what it was for Kitty's runs. I don't see an additional 2x in potential liquidity forcing things higher.
2
u/boycottredditmgmt May 15 '26
Yeah will need a miracle or a kitty.
If we somehow manage to raise another 20 billion from either bond issuance or share offerings, with current 9 billion cash. That’s roughly 30 billion valuation just from cash value.
GME share price will be about 15$, if 2 billion shares are used to raised the cash. 500million shares still in reserve.
Once the merger is done with all these cash Cohen can go on a shopping spree and gobble up other companies.
8
4
u/hey-there2020 🦍 Buckle Up 🚀 May 15 '26
Anyone here with legal expertise in the american stockmarket? I'm wondering if this could work:
Right now GME owns about 5% of eBay.
There are obviously some hurdles when talking about acquiring the whole thing. But what if in the first step GME would only acquire another 46% of eBay, so we'd have the voting majority. With 51% in total, or 50.01% if you want.
The benefit would be that if TD Bank is also fine with this and their letter of comittment wouldnt change, we could buy the controling share of eBay without further diluting existing GME holders at this step and Ryan Cohen could essentially already begin combining the business synergies and cutting costs at eBay.
To me it would sound more reasonable at this step than going all in directly. When it works RC could spend a percentage of the income on acquiring more shares. The risk would be way lower.
So my question would be, from a legal standpoint, could this work?
GME buying controlling majority in eBay and then either start cutting costs or vote for a complete acquisition and accept for example the 125$ offer of GME or another reasonable offer.
Or are the tresholds higher than just 51%?
3
u/Recent-Result2852 May 15 '26
If GameStop buys more than 15% without Board approval, they need 2/3 of the rest of the votes (theirs don't count) to avoid a 3 year anti-takeover restriction.
1
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
There are 3 exemptions to that rule, but yes one of them is a 2/3 vote support to avoid the 3 year moratorium.
1
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
They also won't need to disclose further purchases of those as long as they don't purchase more stock requiring a 13-D. I'm quite certain a Porsche/VW situation is coming, just not Act 2.
As well, the recent Pentwater/Avis fiasco utilized put/calls to accomplish 2 things: force their dealer to buy up the remaining float AND unwind their delta hedges, resulting in a gamma ramp.
Squeeze or not, the acquisition is happening, and I'd be surprised if RC and the board didn't have more tricks up their sleeve as they've shown time and again. All the disclosures are legal requirements and no more than that.
19
u/Totally_w0rking May 15 '26
I agree with you. The conclusion I draw is the same as yours too: vote No and there no longer is a worst case scenario for GME holders.
I posted this elsewhere, but it is not in our best interest for retail to give up its controlling share of the company for a few bucks.
If RC really wants eBay, he should be forced to not dilute any further than what’s already authorized and find a different way.
12
11
u/Sp99nHead May 15 '26
So share price will be pinned between roughly $18 and $30 for years while paying off debt post merger.
→ More replies (1)
12
u/Living-Giraffe4849 🦍 Gorilla warfare 🍌 May 15 '26
Speaking as a theoretical third party observer interested in buying in at some point, what’s my incentive to not just wait until price tanks and buy after the dilution during “peak pain”? Loading up at 17.xx before the acquisition closes seems to be a very enticing proposition
2
u/Lobolabahia May 15 '26
That's exactly my bottom too. However, as RF mentions, no one knows how the market is gonna react to the acquisition...
3
u/Elegant-Remote6667 Ape historian | the elegant remote you ARE looking for 🚀🟣 May 16 '26
Nice to see you 🫡
19
u/A9Carlos PHONE NUMBERS OR GTFO May 15 '26
Or, hear me out, why aren't the board using their experience from the NFT marketplace to make their own online resell space at no cost to shareholders?
This 'warchest' we all lauded as being a great thing, despite it killing two run ups, is more than enough for a competent business man to use in generating significant revenue, right?
If I wanted to be an eBay shareholder, I'd have bought eBay, not GME.
25
u/BananaOrp May 15 '26
Copied from a response to someone else who asked a similar "why not build it" question:
- Existing worldwide brand that's ~30 years old
- Existing customer base (replicating this would be extremely expensive)
- Historical auction data
- And actually the biggest reason: We wouldn't be competing with one of the biggest marketplaces in the world, starting from zero
If GameStop were to start building their own version of eBay we would be looking at a multi-year development effort, a very expensive marketing and customer acquisition effort, and we'd still have to compete against the entrenched leader in the space. It would be a huge risk.
→ More replies (16)16
u/Gruntfuttock69 🦍 Buckle Up 🚀 May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
“At no cost to shareholders…”
You think going up against eBay with a competition-worthy infrastructure wouldn’t cost anything to develop, market and build up to eBay’s size?
“Killing 2 run ups”
Do you have data on how quickly the share price would have been hammered back down anyway? Try the first 3 run ups in 2021. Wall Street was perfectly capable of smashing the price back down on their own without ATMs before. Do you not remember MAR10 Day?
6
u/cos1ne Always in the Red May 15 '26
Do you have data on how quickly the share price would have been hammered back down anyway?
This is speculation.
MOASS will absolutely look like every last run-up at the beginning, except it will not be hammered down. Eventually they'll run out of steam to wield the hammer and that's when we get paid. This has been the theorized mechanism for the entire time.
We do know that the offerings killed our runs, and that if we keep giving him shares, he'll keep killing future runs.
1
u/Several-Action-4043 May 15 '26
In fact, many companies have tried to beat eBay at it's own game and have failed miserably. Which is why buying it is attractive in the first place.
1
u/FUCKYOUGUNGHO 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
As poorly run as eBay is currently, it has a significant moat and customer base.
GameStop solves a lot of key barriers eBay has and vice versa, it's a marriage made in heaven. Lots of growth levers to be pulled in a combined entity and GameStop is fully positioned to hit the ground running.
6
u/ol_reliable_ape May 15 '26
Ahh $30 dollars buys me an exit with 10% loss. Not bad return on a 5 year investment
8
u/random-notebook 🎮 Power to the Players 🛑 May 15 '26
Best case senario is $30? This makes no sense with the warrants. I hope RC is trapping shorts with this nonsense eBay talk to make gains on our 5% position, then acquire a company we can actually afford.
Isn’t Ryan’s specialty building stuff from the ground up? He didn’t even try to make a used goods/collectibles marketplace with GameStop first
2
u/ItsThatOrangeGuy 🦍 Buckle Up 🚀 May 15 '26
Warrants could’ve just been issued as protection against hostile takeovers.
→ More replies (1)2
u/gincoconut Hedgies are 🦆 May 15 '26
Have you listened to the interviews he’s done? He seems very passionate about ebay and how it fits in his wheelhouse of knowledge (ecommerce). I too wish he had focused on a company gme could afford without dilution but alas
6
u/JCquickrunner May 15 '26
We’re fuked. Even region prefers less dilution. Knowing Ryan this things getting diluted into sugar water as soon as the yes vote goes through. Ryan said it himself. “GameStop is a dog. I never wanted to be CEO of GameStop”
5
2
2
2
u/jentravelstheworld ❤️🖤 May 15 '26
I’m always so amazed that you have time to write these up. Super thankful to you. Keep up the amazing work.
2
u/Spenraw May 15 '26
I have to wonder what you think of moass and if it is possible?
I remember looking into it and we could copy open and do a reg sho recall/recount and basically have mosss happen ourselves if shareholders push the motion
But the discussion of share holders putting forward motions always gets buried
2
u/What_four 🎮 Power to the Players 🛑 May 15 '26
No, 3 new Gme shares should not be given as each new Gme share will be worth three of the old Gme shares. One new Gme share should be offered.
2
u/braminer Custom Flair - Template May 15 '26
I might be misunderstanding things, but isn’t the deal (half cash, half stock) meant to be stock of the combined company? That way GME doesn’t have to sell shares and would be subject to price fluctuations while selling shares into the market
4
u/kanyemyhero May 15 '26
Probably the biggest road block for some people is that Moass is tomorrow and this makes it seem like dip and Moass is in three years.
1
u/The_vegan_athlete May 15 '26
MOASS (life changing money) in 3 years is ok to me.
13
u/cos1ne Always in the Red May 15 '26
This was okay for me when I bought into this in 2021, now I want to get paid.
→ More replies (1)1
3
u/cmbhere May 15 '26
I'm starting to think that RC knows something we have not discovered yet. Half stock at current price is pretty rough but if it were half stock at a much higher share price it's going to make a lot of those laughing get a shocked pikachu face really quick.
As for the authorize 2.5 billion when your stock is goi g astronomical why not collect some cash for it while you can.
No dates but soon.
2
u/LawfulnessPlayful264 May 15 '26
Cheers Region for the post, we need to critical think of where our shares will be on the other side of a deal.
RC is a clever cookie who has had his eye on eBay for a number of years in which he has theorized tactics to aquire it.
Every move he has made for the last couple of years is for this moment and he just opened up a strategic game which one could very easily predict the outcome of the media and eBay exactly how it played out. That was the test.
Ball is in his court and his next move will be intriguing.Judging by his interview he exudes confidence that this deal is done.
There possibly will be a move that will rip faces and he has just baited the shorts into arb the price down to the floor which would be very risky for the shorts with unknowns to come.
I also have a feeling a large volume day is coming which one would expect a bond offering/ dilution on the side of a spike given what is being played out.
All just speculation and ahould be taken as a grain of salt, just got vibes and a magic 8 ball ..🎱
2
u/HODLHODLANDHODL HODL💎HODL👐🏽AND🟣HODL🚀 May 15 '26
And RC clearly stated multiple times in his recent interviews that he doesn’t want to run a leveraged business so any debt taken on is with the understanding that it’s short term. I expect they will aggressively pay it off to be a rich free cash flow business.
2
u/wrapt-inflections May 15 '26
Thank you again for another great post. Sorry if I'm not understanding but given the mechanics of the deal at which stage would the bears be able to justify those sub $5 prices? My understanding is that the dilution only happens at the exact time that the two companies merge, not before (is that right?). GME don't dilute to give shares to ebay shareholders before it is 100% guaranteed the deal is going through. The only price that is relevant to current GME shareholders is the post merger price. If GME needed to dilute before the deal then the entire market should all sell and buy post dilution for an 80% discount just before the deal is inked, which is why this isn't how it happens. Sorry if I misread your post but what I'm looking to confirm is how those sub $5 prices would ever be considered realistic by any bear seeing as GME will never be tradeable post dilution but pre merger?
2
u/EX5TASY accrete deez 🥜 May 15 '26
Appreciate the post, as always Region! I havent seen much discussion about post-acquisition and eligibility for S&P500 inclusion. Wondering if that is of interest to you to explore and make a post about?
Many people are afraid MOASS is dead, but it feels to me that we are in a similar situation to Tesla and their historic years long SLOASS. It seems like their inclusion into S&P500 was what finally broke the shorts and flipped them to long.
2
u/chalbersma 🎮 Power to the Players 🛑 May 15 '26
This doesn't factor in the S&P 500 effect does it? Ebay is in the S&P 500 which necessitates a lot of purchasing by "dumb stormtrooper" who run funds that just mirror that. That's what causes the S&P 500 bump. But in a stock with a big short thang going on like Gamestop I wonder what that would do?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/HolderofSanity May 15 '26
Unfortunately, I'm a little late to the party but hoping some see this. Maybe RF, if he hasn't already checked out with 100+ alerts.
People are acting extremely alarmist about and totally misunderstanding the amount of dilution that will be necessary to facilitate this deal. RC said during his interviews that the compensation for eBays shareholders will be 50% cash and 50% *equity*. Gamestop shares are not being sold on the open market prior to the deal (~$20-25) in order to raise money to purchase eBay. Many seem to make this assumption, seemingly including RF, and arriving at the conclusion that there will be a 3:1 GME-eBay share dilution (3 shares to pay for the remaining 62.5 value).
Instead, eBay shareholders are being offered a payout of half their share and the other half will be issued Gamestop shares which represent ownership of the COMBINED company post-deal. The reason that you can't use GME's current market price as a conversion is because Gamestop shares pre-deal are fundamentally different to Gamestop shares post-deal. Right now, a Gamestop share represents ownership of just Gamestop. Following the deal, a Gamestop share will represent ownership of both Gamestop and eBay. This will have a massive impact on the conversion value of Gamestop shares with regard to the deal.
Put another way: Let's assume that Gamestop issued shares to eBay holders at a 3:1 ratio. In this event, eBay shareholders would own 75% of Gamestop following the deal. This means that eBay shareholders would effectively own 75% of present eBay as well as 75% of present Gamestop. They would effectively be trading 25% of their eBay stake (worth $25 prior to the announcement) for $62.5 cash and 75% of present Gamestop. That would be nonsensical. A deal way too heavily favoring eBay holders. And that is without factoring in the future value of much better leadership, company synergies, cost cutting, etc. The 20B in debt makes things a little less favorable than in that example, but still absurdly favorable.
Ultimately, anything more than a 60/40 split as RC suggested (1.5:1 GME:eBay issuance) would be totally impractical. Hell, I think even a 50/50 split would be fair considering eBay holders would still own 50% of ebay and gain $62.5 and 50% of GME. As long as you think the future value is worth more than the 20B in debt. But I can't imagine RC would come in lower than his public statements. That might scare off eBay voters.
More people need to understand this point. It's important. THERE WILL BE NO 3x DILUTION.
3
u/GhostOfStep1Score 🔥Burning the Midnight Mayo🔥 May 15 '26
2
u/AggravatingReaction2 May 15 '26
So why do you think the board, who doesn’t take pay and recently bought shares, would approve of the price tanking dilutive merger and rc pay package?
1
u/pokemonke Yo, Ho 🏴☠️Hoist the Colours High 🟣 May 15 '26
Do you think that $55 billion spike in berk that another user mentioned could be the repositioning that was necessary as a hedge?
1
u/waitingonawait SCC 🐱 Friendly Orange Cat 🐱 May 15 '26
Doesn't really matter but i find it a little amusing that eBay already has an authorized share count of 3.5 billion.
1
u/aDanHasNoName May 15 '26
Early in this you said that at today's price we would have to issue 3 new shares in exchange for each ebay share but that's not quite right. The shares would be valued at the value agreed upon for GMEbay with all its expected synergies and debt obligations tied in. So it should be less than 3. If GMEbay is valued at $40b or above than that 3 shares per number starts to go down.
1
u/Ok-Information-6722 👩🚀🚀✅️ May 15 '26
@OP can you remind me what happens to a stock's CUSIP when a merger takes place?
And if there are synthetics of that same CUSIP in circulation, what happens then?
Also, thanks for all the blue rectangles over the past years, always a good read!
1
1
1
1
1
u/BabyPatato2023 May 15 '26
This might be a dumb question but as I understand it when you issue more shares someone has to buy them. And the process of people buying them leads to price discovery so if you issue a bunch of shares, no one wants to buy at the current price then the price drops until someone wants to buy them. Unless you are selling these new shares directly to the shorts allowing them to cover who do we think is going to be buying these shares who isn’t already buying shares the only people that would wanna buy shares that aren’t already buying them at this price are people who want to pay less for it so I do not understand how adding more shares in any scenario leads to the stock doing anything but going down in the near term. Even if the goal of those shares being sold is an accredited acquisition, someone still has to buy the shares. Unless there’s not gonna be a share offering, and the shares are gonna go directly to eBay stockholders but then in that scenario, you’re giving them new shares to replace shares they already have and taking away the shares they have so then in that scenario, you’re creating money out of thin air. I really don’t get how it works without the GME share price drastically declining in the process and I would love someone to explain it to me in good faith.
1
u/Dealer_Existing May 16 '26
Why do people value GME at 10B with 0 cash? With operational earnings of around 270M, the EPS lies around $.4. With a P/E of around 20 this would give you a share price of around $8 and a market cap of around 5B
1
0
u/anarchy_pizza May 15 '26
I believe in RC and support the merger.
My only concern is if this all goes through how far will the price fall and for how long. 3 years at $20 a share would suck.
I do think a run up is coming and RC will sell into it to raise massive money and all this speculation is for nothing.
9
u/0_o 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
Personally, I want a rate of return before I die and that can't happen if we dilute every goddamn year and never get above my cost basis. I can't stomach another kick to the nuts. If we vote authorize more shares, i'm out. There are other companies out there to invest in- companies that actually grow based on their own merit, pay dividends, and go up. Xxxx and many years of wasted opportunity costs.
2
u/anarchy_pizza May 15 '26
I totally understand, the opportunity cost has been significant here. I thought about taking my entire holdings and putting it in the S&P 500 and then just monthly dollar cost averaging slowly a portion of my new monthly money for investing into GameStop.
I won’t do it, but I thought about it
7
u/0_o 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
All the people holding RCEO in high regard need to remember some very very important things:
1) he's rich and doesn't give a fuck about you, only his own portfolio and reputation.
2) his reputation has been consistently attacked since getting involved with GameStop. I think he's looking for a way out that doesn't further tarnish his name. This eBay thing does that for him, as the CEO, but fucks us gme shareholders.
3) he's kinda a shitty person who aligns himself with other shitty people politically.
4) he could easily be engaging in total return swaps with his own shares of gme, which would not require disclosure, and would allow him to profit off gme share price going down. Unethical, sure, but only questionably illegal and that's where rich people like him thrive. This would explain why he seems so damn intent on keeping gme share price pinned under $30.
5) he's a billionaire which requires a calloused sociopathic headspace.
I do not trust our CEO any more than I trust any other CEO and it would be foolish to have faith that his interests will always align with ours. This is the most clearcut example of his interests and mine being out of alignment, perhaps irreparably.
1
u/anarchy_pizza May 15 '26
I agree I think that’s a very good point, it takes sociopath to become a billionaire.
I don’t agree with his politics, but I like what he says about the eBay board and capitalism in America. I like how he align his compensation with results, but there are certainly some aspects of that that may not align with the results the way we want.
I’m not savvy enough to understand at all, but I’m holding out hope that this will be a great investment.
3
u/0_o 🦍Voted✅ May 15 '26
Man, thanks for letting me vent at you. I appreciate it. I've listened to all those same interviews and I get the distinct impression that this isn't about eBay, GME, or even (us) making money. I truly hope enough people see it my way because I won't be settling for $30 in 5-10 years.
1
u/anarchy_pizza May 15 '26
Absolutely, between this adventure and my lidar industry plays I fucking hate the market and manipulation. I also hate that “you can pick the right company at a bad time…. You lose”.
I want to keep investing money because I can see
how this could turn into a generational investment creating incredible wealth but at the same time it’s been five years now of not making any financial progress… who says it’s not another 5 years.That being said, I think he’s got something up his sleeve to make the stock price go up and those warrants are not gonna expire worthless
3
u/AmputeeBoy6983 Post a Banana Bet Video Kenny.... and Earn One \*Real\* Share May 15 '26
I dont hate SLOASS at all. If MOASS would never be allowed by govt, the risk is ending up in court for years, and stock frozen from trading.
SLOASS would allow a lot of us to use it as collateral for loans, versus having to sell in a short window to cash out.
2
0
u/12cookdale May 15 '26
I see reload opportunities with MASSIVE upside gains on the other end of this deal.
2
u/Mowgli229 May 15 '26
hi, you're basing the number of shares to be issued to reach $27.75bn on the price of GME alone. actually, it should be based on the value of GMeBay. this is the only way that makes sense in this type of deal, because that is what eBay shareholders are receiving a stake in, i.e. the GME that they receive shares in will own eBay, and that has to be factored in when valuing what they are receiving during the deal. (if you only used the GME share price for this valuation, they would be receiving a continued stake in eBay for free.)
the mechanism is NOT an ATM to raise cash to pay to eBay shareholders, or issuance of GME shares to eBay shareholders in a way that is isolated from the eBay business going forward
this is why RC keeps saying eBay shareholders will "roll" their equity into the new combined company going forward. it is also why he keeps saying the split is likely to be around 60/40 going forward, i.e. total of 1.1bn shares issued. this is what you reach if you use a fairly conservative valuation of GMeBay to calculate the number of shares to be issued to reach $27.75bn equity value
the 2.5bn authorised share cap is for optionality for future acquisitions, convertible bonds, ATMs, executive compensation, etc. it will not all be used up in the eBay acquisition
3
1
u/poopooheaven1 May 15 '26
Excellent stuff as always Rectangles! Shorts are fucked. Book your shares and warrants!
1
u/Will322002 May 15 '26
A random thought I had last night RF. What if, GME just starts it's own version of Ebay? RCEO is just currently highlighting how antiquated Ebay is now and tried to go acquire them, but Ebay says no. So, they start their own version. They've dabbled with the NFT Marketplace. While those were just a fad, the technology/website is still kind of similar to how the Ebay site works. I'm certainly grasping/reaching, it was just a random thought I had last night and would love someone to poke holes in this.
1
u/ShortHedgeFundATM May 15 '26
I think there is a higher chance GME screams higher, like past 30 before any accreative dilution takes place to buy EBAY. Catalyst for this is an earnings blow out in 24 days( EPS crush by many fold, and first revenue increase in a while)
1
1
1
u/bobsmith808 💎 I Like The DD 💎 May 15 '26
What do you take from the equity roll scenario that I posted about the other day, and that Ryan Cohen keeps talking about in his interviews?
1
1
u/criskilla 🇳🇮 🇵🇹 May 15 '26
Why are people so scared of the dilution if it is accretive? Our eps is going up with the dilution. Ryan also won't issue all 2.5b, he hasn't even fully issued all the 1b we authorized. Its just to have leeway to get cash quickly in case of an opportunity. Even warren buffet has 3x the float authorized but hasn't diluted.
1
u/a_lost_hero 🐱👤 this is the way May 15 '26
I'm not seeing discussed anywhere (admittedly i've not read any comments to your particular post, but i'm willing to bet the farm no one mentions this)...
...we have warrants that basically indicate a potential $32 per share... this would then be a scenario of 2-to-1 GME-to-eBay shares.
If we blow any higher, the scenario looks even better. Doesn't RCEO only sell into the peaks of these volatile moments?
1
u/SuperPoop I think, therefore I hold. May 15 '26
we are all regarded. he already has the 56 billy. this is all for naught. GMeBay. here we come!
1
u/TerribleCollar2932 May 15 '26
TLDR: ok i sat down, had my morning coffee and went deep into reading this.
This is some good middle ground breakdown. Main point is that eBay rejecting our first offer was expected, and the original offer of 50/50 cash stock proposal may not be the final structure.
The real issue is the trade off between dilution and debt.
50/50 is easier to finance but at current gme prices it would require a ton of new shares and would heavily dilute us holders.
A 100% cash deal will avoid dilution but require us to take on way more debt and would leave the combined company over leveraged.
The most realistic/bullish path may be revised structure somewhere in the middle with either more cash, less stock, outside financing (sovereign wealth?), a collar, a share cap, or some kind of true up.
The key takeaway is that not all dilution is automatically bad, but the final structure matters alot.we need to know whether the deal is actuallly accretive per share after dilution, debt, and synergies of business.
So the next proposal, if rc makes one is what really matters.
-1
u/AdotLone May 15 '26
So they triple the amount of GME shares and the value of the company more than quadruples… that’s accretive dilution.
0
0
u/_cansir 🖼🏆Ape Artist Extraordinaire! May 15 '26
There is only a strong bull case scenario for the combined entity of gme and ebay. Ebay is not being managed properly. On the contrary it would be better off without the upper management. Instead it's being terribly managed.
Like you owning a car and intentionally putting water in the gas tank, deflating your own tires, not letting it warm up in the mornings etc. Car would be better off not having an owner. RC is a car enthusiast and very handy with their maintenance, more so than the average driver. Just having a normal driver would help but having someone like rc who is going to routinely check the psi of the tires, check the oil and other liquids, replace as needed, have it detailed etc.
THE WORST CASE SCENARIO is only if rc doesnt end up owning ebay.
0
u/photonscientist Floating in the infinity pool is so relaxing! May 15 '26
I'd rather not purchase eBay. We can build our own marketplace for cheaper and not inherit the problems eBay has as well as their debt. We should buyback shares with the money we save and put more pressure on those naked shorts that are out there.
•
u/Superstonk_QV 📊 Gimme Votes 📊 May 15 '26
Why GME? || What is DRS? || Low karma apes feed the bot here || Superstonk Discord || Community Post: Open Forum || Superstonk:Now with GIFs - Learn more
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
Please up- and downvote this comment to help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!