4 ms·

Indeed, there's no meat to the suit detailed. Still, though. The fact that DeepFuckingValue just turns out to have been a licensed broker complicates the narr

Indeed, there's no meat to the suit detailed. Still, though. The fact that DeepFuckingValue just turns out to have been a licensed broker complicates the narrative quite a bit. Needless to say he can be expected to have known that the whole short trading theory of "Hold the Line" was bunk, and did nothing to disabuse the community of it. I say it every time this comes up: this guy's criminal exposure is really significant. I find the idea that he Just Happened to stumble on a tulip bubble and had nothing to do with encouraging it just too much to believe. What we know of his public postings doesn't rise to criminal behavior, but then we don't know what sock puppets he might have been operating or what trades he was making privately. And the incentives all point to this guy being guilty of securities fraud. But no, this suit isn't going anywhere.

emteycz 6y ago
DFV never said a thing about short squeezing. Watch his content, don't trust the media. He bought the stock as a long term investment because he thought it's severely undervalued and it will rise with new leadership.
- newacct583 6y ago
  > DFV never said a think about short squeezing. But did Keith Gill? All the argument here tends to treat "/u/DeepFuckingValue" as the sole authority of what this guy did, and in context that seems outrageously naive. Accounts all over WSB were pushing this stock like crazy, and this guys Just So Happens to have been a huge beneficiary, when he was absolutely expert enough to have understood the bubble (and importantly, how the bubble was driven by the WSB community misunderstanding short trading)? Again, his expertise and the incentives just don't line up here. That's not proof, but it's pretty good justification for suspicion. Occam's favorite explanation has to be that this guy ran a pump and dump.
  - emteycz 6y ago
    Eh, no, please don't try to do this, that's the first step towards a really terrible world. We always assume innocence first, there needs to be proof to claim otherwise. There were many more people who invested at the same time and got big profit just like he did. DFV didn't even sell even a portion of his position anywhere near the top (he sold a small portion near one of the much lower highs, around $100 IIRC). You could make this argument about literally anyone on Youtube or TV talking about stocks. Don't, please.
  - thysultan 6y ago
    DeepFuckingValue(Reddit username), Keith Gill and Roaring Kitty(youtube username) are the same person.
    - sgarman 6y ago
      I think that's clear to OP. What OP is getting at is what else did/could keith be doing, how many other reddit accounts did they have, how many botnets, etc all possibly pumping this. That's for discovery and courts to decide. Maybe Keith is only DFV and none of that other stuff exists, or maybe DFV is just one of many keith's tactics to pump this thing.
sokoloff 6y ago
Is the assertion that DFV, by being a licensed broker, is obligated to speak on a web forum to correct misinformation that they see there?
- newacct583 6y ago
  Of course he wasn't "obligated". But the guy was (1) a legitimate expert on the details of how his trading worked and (2) spoke profusely and at length about all the other details of his investments. He wasn't silent. At all. Yet he was silent as his investment conveniently went through the roof, driven by a huge misunderstanding propagated within the very community where he did almost all his profuse speaking. And that doesn't seem suspicious to you? Look, I'm not the SEC. I can't subpoena his trade history or social media logs. But there is an SEC, and they can, and we have to believe they're looking into this. Basically: sure, he might be totally innocent and just a lucky beneficiary of a crazy bubble. I'm just saying it's more likely that he was executing a pump and dump.
  - Judgmentality 6y ago
    You should really go look at his YouTube, Twitter, and reddit history - because what you're saying is wrong.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    An alternative point of view is that he was a genuine (relatively) long-term believer in Gamestop and he steered clear of all conversations where nonsense was being spouted. I don't think he has any obligation to engage there and I suspect the courts will find the same.
    - newacct583 6y ago
      You're saying that if you were an SEC prosecutor looking at these public facts, you wouldn't be interesting in investigating? Really? Again: I admit that the innocent explanation is possible. I just don't think, given the circumstances, that it seems likely.
throwaway6734 6y ago
> find the idea that he Just Happened to stumble on a tulip bubble and had nothing to do with encouraging it just too much to believe. He was long gamestop and published his reasoning to the internet with explicit disclaimers before each video. When his bet started to pay off, people started to hop into the trade. How is this materially different than any other firm or person that gives price targets or argues in favor of a position?
- compiler-guy 6y ago
  If he had sock puppets and unreported holdings, it is substantially different. Also, he apparently misrepresented his qualifications in such a way that it makes the story that much more attractive to investors who could pump his holdings up.
superfrank 6y ago
I posted an eerily similar comment to this on Reddit. Yeah, the suit is BS, but the fact that he's a licensed broker really shifts the narrative a bit and makes you start to question things. It's no longer "Johnny Everyman finds Picasso painting at yard sale", it's now "Museum curator finds Picasso painting at yard sale". I've been an active member of WSB for more than 5 years now and I've followed this story since the beginning. Based on his YouTube channel and some other things, I still think DFV is just a dude who stuck to his convictions and got insanely lucky, but I'm less certain of that than I was last week. I don't think this suit will go anywhere, but I wouldn't be surprised theres a few twists left in this story.
- chupy 6y ago
  Do you think that he is the only member of WSB that is a licensed broker or works in finance? I don't want to bet but I would say there is a good chance that people that a lot of people that used to post on WSB have either financial background or work in finance/trading.
  - superfrank 6y ago
    Oh, there's literally no way he's the only one. Hell, Martin Shkreli used to be a mod of the sub (or at least a very active member). There are plenty of people on WSB who very clearly know what they are talking about and trade for a living. I just think the narrative became that he was this random guy and finding out that he has a little more experience than people thought changes the story a little bit. Like I said above, I really don't think he did anything wrong and I don't think he was intentionally being misleading. He didn't really even post many comments on Reddit. Half the time he just posted a screenshot of his account and that's it. I think people just interpreted it how they wanted.
jrochkind1 6y ago
Ah, I didn't realize Gill/"Roaring Kitty" was the same person as /u/DeepFuckingValue. He's more known as DFV, no? I guess the media doesn't want to print "fucking"? Thereby leaving out an important bit!

emteycz 6y ago

DFV never said a thing about short squeezing. Watch his content, don't trust the media. He bought the stock as a long term investment because he thought it's severely undervalued and it will rise with new leadership.

newacct583 6y ago
> DFV never said a think about short squeezing. But did Keith Gill? All the argument here tends to treat "/u/DeepFuckingValue" as the sole authority of what this guy did, and in context that seems outrageously naive. Accounts all over WSB were pushing this stock like crazy, and this guys Just So Happens to have been a huge beneficiary, when he was absolutely expert enough to have understood the bubble (and importantly, how the bubble was driven by the WSB community misunderstanding short trading)? Again, his expertise and the incentives just don't line up here. That's not proof, but it's pretty good justification for suspicion. Occam's favorite explanation has to be that this guy ran a pump and dump.
- emteycz 6y ago
  Eh, no, please don't try to do this, that's the first step towards a really terrible world. We always assume innocence first, there needs to be proof to claim otherwise. There were many more people who invested at the same time and got big profit just like he did. DFV didn't even sell even a portion of his position anywhere near the top (he sold a small portion near one of the much lower highs, around $100 IIRC). You could make this argument about literally anyone on Youtube or TV talking about stocks. Don't, please.
- thysultan 6y ago
  DeepFuckingValue(Reddit username), Keith Gill and Roaring Kitty(youtube username) are the same person.
  - sgarman 6y ago
    I think that's clear to OP. What OP is getting at is what else did/could keith be doing, how many other reddit accounts did they have, how many botnets, etc all possibly pumping this. That's for discovery and courts to decide. Maybe Keith is only DFV and none of that other stuff exists, or maybe DFV is just one of many keith's tactics to pump this thing.

sokoloff 6y ago

Is the assertion that DFV, by being a licensed broker, is obligated to speak on a web forum to correct misinformation that they see there?

newacct583 6y ago
Of course he wasn't "obligated". But the guy was (1) a legitimate expert on the details of how his trading worked and (2) spoke profusely and at length about all the other details of his investments. He wasn't silent. At all. Yet he was silent as his investment conveniently went through the roof, driven by a huge misunderstanding propagated within the very community where he did almost all his profuse speaking. And that doesn't seem suspicious to you? Look, I'm not the SEC. I can't subpoena his trade history or social media logs. But there is an SEC, and they can, and we have to believe they're looking into this. Basically: sure, he might be totally innocent and just a lucky beneficiary of a crazy bubble. I'm just saying it's more likely that he was executing a pump and dump.
- Judgmentality 6y ago
  You should really go look at his YouTube, Twitter, and reddit history - because what you're saying is wrong.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  An alternative point of view is that he was a genuine (relatively) long-term believer in Gamestop and he steered clear of all conversations where nonsense was being spouted. I don't think he has any obligation to engage there and I suspect the courts will find the same.
  - newacct583 6y ago
    You're saying that if you were an SEC prosecutor looking at these public facts, you wouldn't be interesting in investigating? Really? Again: I admit that the innocent explanation is possible. I just don't think, given the circumstances, that it seems likely.

throwaway6734 6y ago

> find the idea that he Just Happened to stumble on a tulip bubble and had nothing to do with encouraging it just too much to believe. He was long gamestop and published his reasoning to the internet with explicit disclaimers before each video. When his bet started to pay off, people started to hop into the trade. How is this materially different than any other firm or person that gives price targets or argues in favor of a position?

compiler-guy 6y ago
If he had sock puppets and unreported holdings, it is substantially different. Also, he apparently misrepresented his qualifications in such a way that it makes the story that much more attractive to investors who could pump his holdings up.

superfrank 6y ago

I posted an eerily similar comment to this on Reddit. Yeah, the suit is BS, but the fact that he's a licensed broker really shifts the narrative a bit and makes you start to question things. It's no longer "Johnny Everyman finds Picasso painting at yard sale", it's now "Museum curator finds Picasso painting at yard sale". I've been an active member of WSB for more than 5 years now and I've followed this story since the beginning. Based on his YouTube channel and some other things, I still think DFV is just a dude who stuck to his convictions and got insanely lucky, but I'm less certain of that than I was last week. I don't think this suit will go anywhere, but I wouldn't be surprised theres a few twists left in this story.

chupy 6y ago
Do you think that he is the only member of WSB that is a licensed broker or works in finance? I don't want to bet but I would say there is a good chance that people that a lot of people that used to post on WSB have either financial background or work in finance/trading.
- superfrank 6y ago
  Oh, there's literally no way he's the only one. Hell, Martin Shkreli used to be a mod of the sub (or at least a very active member). There are plenty of people on WSB who very clearly know what they are talking about and trade for a living. I just think the narrative became that he was this random guy and finding out that he has a little more experience than people thought changes the story a little bit. Like I said above, I really don't think he did anything wrong and I don't think he was intentionally being misleading. He didn't really even post many comments on Reddit. Half the time he just posted a screenshot of his account and that's it. I think people just interpreted it how they wanted.

jrochkind1 6y ago

Ah, I didn't realize Gill/"Roaring Kitty" was the same person as /u/DeepFuckingValue. He's more known as DFV, no? I guess the media doesn't want to print "fucking"? Thereby leaving out an important bit!