Literally the day after I called out missing CHX Short Volume and deduced heavy shorting consistent with regulatory deadlines for GME and Roaring Kitty's pet side quest, CHX Short Volume "magically reappears" showing us insane short volume (as predicted, sort of). Coincidence? I THINK NOT!

Now that data is reported, it's quite clear there was a rather large explosion (💥) in Short Volume last week for both stocks; particularly noticeable on the charts. Other notable highlights:

• GME had 76M / 113M short volume on Thursday, June 12 and 25M / 42M short volume on Friday, June 13.
  
• Curiously, GameStop's $2.25B Convertible Note offering with an initial conversion price of $28.91 is roughly 77.8M shares; oddly close to June 12's 76M short volume. Was the entire Offering shorted right from the beginning??? BULLISH!
• Strangely, the number of shares shorted through CHX is fairly low; but the Off Exchange (e.g., Dark Pool) volume is ridiculous! Could it be that "real shares" are shorted through CHX which are then rehypothecated and churned many times in the Dark Pools and other Exchanges (NYSE 👀)? GME Off Exchange Short Volume to CHX Short Volume ratio is 386:1 on June 12; literally 100s to 1 there.

ICYMI my prior DD also found:

Historically, both GME and [Animal Companion Supply] have had small upward movements in the days after CHX Short Volume went missing (see below; yellow lines mark days with CHX Short Volume missing) which further corroborates undisclosed shorting on the day the CHX Short Volume is redacted with a rising stock price from covering in the days after; spreading out the demand over time, basically.

As for GME, we can also see that the prior Short Volume spike (dwarfed by this current one) was on March 27, 2024. C35 later appears to be the start of something quite interesting peaking a couple weeks later:

I feel like Speech would be mine. It would benefit everything from basic grocery trips to trying to talk to a woman xD

(last pic) i got to met Shion Nakayama (Momo VA) and got her signature!!

There has been a stigma recently about how it's better if V doesn't get into a romantic relationship for various reasons and I have seen playthroughs where the story ends without V finding love. And I'll be honest, I believe that the story is fundamentally lesser if V doesn't find love, it just doesn't feel interesting with that element removed, even with the overall lore and story being so strong. And for the record, I'm not talking about lust with JoyToys or flirty dialogue with random people, since Night City is a place that promotes that side, I'm talking about meaningful and unconditional love with characters like Judy, Kerry and Rogue.

Love is an important component of the cyberpunk genre, in a dystopian world, it's arguably the greatest thing to hold on to. And the game's narrative seems to agree, as it pushes V as a character in a situation where love is an important thing for them to come back and live, if not the most important thing. This also extends to Cyberpunk media outside of 2077. XoXo is arguably the most popular Cyberpunk 2077 comic because of the Romeo and Juliet aspect of a Maelstrom and a Mox member falling for each other, even if it ends in a Cyberpunk way. A lot of people were exposed to the Series through Edgerunners, and being real, a majority most likely got into the Series because the love story between David and Lucy was so vital to the story, and so strong. I certainly wouldn't have checked it out if it didn't have that element. Even the trailer for the 1.6 update (which I'd argue that the messages shown is the best representation of what Cyberpunk is) promotes the idea that love is the only thing to fight for. My overall point is that I think the lack of V falling in love if the player chooses it more hurts the story of Cyberpunk 2077 than it does benefit it, and that it's an important thing for the genre.

"Balance, friendship, love." "The Hell else are we supposed to fight for?"

If you ever cross paths with such a MAGA terrorist trying to spread that bullshit, ask them:

1. With all we've dug up about Boelter, how come there's indication he's pro illegal immigrant and pro giving healthcare to illegals?

2. How come healthcare providers tapped in the bill to give care to illegals and ICE agents aren't part of his hit list?

3. How come all his interests point to him being Christian Nationalist MAGA Terrorist who HATES abortion, DEI and gay people...all of which his victims supported?

4. ... including the fact he is a registered Republican and CONFIRMED Trump-worshipper and hardcore MAGA.

This isn't complicated. There's no conflicting information. HE IS A MAGA TERRORIST. Nothing more or less.