3 ms·

Is there proof Melvin actually got out? All I saw was a “source” on CNBC. EDIT: This is the story: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/01/27/melvin-capital-sells-o

Is there proof Melvin actually got out? All I saw was a “source” on CNBC. EDIT: This is the story: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/01/27/melvin-capital-sells-out-of-gamestop.html https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/01/27/melvin-capital-sells-o... It's full of plausible deniability phrases like "from what I understand" and it's very much a game of telephone. They could easily say "when I meant we were out of the stock, I meant that we had covered some of our positions" or similar. I can't find a non-hearsay source anywhere, neither written nor in the form of a recorded interview.

epistasis 6y ago
I thought the source was Melvin. Lying about it would be extremely risky, I think? As in jail time risky? Could be wrong.
- alasdair_ 6y ago
  Every article I can find just says “CNBC reported” or similar. And CNBC just mentions a “source”. I’ve yet to find an actual statement from Melvin.
ahepp 6y ago
FT reported it as well. Not bulletproof, but I think they have a bit more reputation than CNBC. Perhaps I'm naïve, but I think to lie about such a thing would pretty clearly fall afoul of the law?
- agar 6y ago
  An official statement would run afoul of the law, yes. A concerted effort to whisper to many people in an effort to manipulate the market would be fairly easy for the SEC to uncover in an investigation. A single false statement or two, said to a reporter as a confidential source, would be much more difficult to prosecute. The reporter might not willingly give up their source, and the company could deny everything, fire the person who "inaccurately represented our position", and claim the party acted of their own volition. Modest fine, at best.
  - ahepp 6y ago
    FT has Citron on the record saying the position is closed. Muddy Waters is on the record saying the position is greatly reduced. Melvin has "people familiar with the matter".
Jkvngt 6y ago
There is no actual proof that Melvin got out. No.
argonaut 6y ago
I am inclined to believe Melvin got out, because market manipulation that the SEC will actually go after is lying about your trades (covering your short) when you haven't made those trades. Most of what WSB is doing is market manipulation but from what I've read it isn't something the SEC will go after in court as fraud is not clearly involved.

epistasis 6y ago

I thought the source was Melvin. Lying about it would be extremely risky, I think? As in jail time risky? Could be wrong.

alasdair_ 6y ago
Every article I can find just says “CNBC reported” or similar. And CNBC just mentions a “source”. I’ve yet to find an actual statement from Melvin.

ahepp 6y ago

FT reported it as well. Not bulletproof, but I think they have a bit more reputation than CNBC. Perhaps I'm naïve, but I think to lie about such a thing would pretty clearly fall afoul of the law?

agar 6y ago
An official statement would run afoul of the law, yes. A concerted effort to whisper to many people in an effort to manipulate the market would be fairly easy for the SEC to uncover in an investigation. A single false statement or two, said to a reporter as a confidential source, would be much more difficult to prosecute. The reporter might not willingly give up their source, and the company could deny everything, fire the person who "inaccurately represented our position", and claim the party acted of their own volition. Modest fine, at best.
- ahepp 6y ago
  FT has Citron on the record saying the position is closed. Muddy Waters is on the record saying the position is greatly reduced. Melvin has "people familiar with the matter".

Jkvngt 6y ago

There is no actual proof that Melvin got out. No.

argonaut 6y ago

I am inclined to believe Melvin got out, because market manipulation that the SEC will actually go after is lying about your trades (covering your short) when you haven't made those trades. Most of what WSB is doing is market manipulation but from what I've read it isn't something the SEC will go after in court as fraud is not clearly involved.