Ap3
925 posts

Ap3
@InfiniteSqueeze
HODL $GME $BBBY - Fight against greed and corruption - MGGA MAGA















I would like to renew the conversation about $GME and the "new class" shares that appeared the day before earnings on 9 September. I feel as though it was a hot topic for a moment and then was completely forgotten. a lot of folks had been asking why there would be a change, but did anyone ask how? Let's look into it a little more. I can only quote one post, but here's another that everyone should see: x.com/TheBronxViking… The Bronx Viking had called their broker and the response they received was stunning, in my opinion. "They acknowledged the name change to “GME class New” but did not see any reason for the change on their end(filings, news, disclosure, etc.) The name change gets fed to them and other brokerage from a vendor that supplies them with the quotes" emphasis mine. naturally, my first question would be HOW is it possible that a vendor supplying quotes has a change in classification of the #GME shares? I am going to go on a limb here and assume that the vendor did not suddenly choose to reclassify the shares on their own. so, what could have happened? I began looking into some of the "plumbing"—ugh, Gary—of how market data comes to brokerages. Schwab gave Bronx Viking a crumb by stating that they receive their quotes from a vendor. this explains why some brokerages around the world had the change and why others did not. perhaps, they are licensing with different vendors or maybe, some brokerage systems populate from feeds differently because they have their own computer systems—who knows, doesn't matter. the point being, if the vendor was supplying the "new class" of shares information, where did it come from so that their systems would have made the change? where did they get it from? this is why I started the post by saying, why is no one asking about the "how"..— because it certainly appears that the market data feeds and aggregators can only receive this change from only three sources: • the NYSE (exchange); • FINRA; or • the issuer now we're getting somewhere. let's look back at GameStop and their S-3 filed in May: I had mentioned it before and again, this is very strange. let me make the distinction: it is complete normal for their to be a legal opinion on a S-3 filing. it is completely not normal for the legal opinion to state "as to the legality of securities being registered." go check, this distinction is not present on other legal opinions for S-3 filings. I mean it makes sense, think about it—how could the securities not be legal? this is not an IPO, shares of GameStop already trade.. of course they are legal. so the only reasonable presumption for the addition of the legal language could be.. you guessed it. what if GameStop is preparing for a new class of equity securities? ones that are tokenized, backed by the blockchain, or otherwise considered a "digital asset"—this quoted from the agreement between GME and Jefferies, after all. of course they are going to do it, why else would it be in the share offering agreement between them? I believe that this explains the additional legal language found in the S-3 legal opinion header. so, what does that tell us? well, there are a lot of regulatory checks you have to satisfy to offer a new class of shares, a dividend, etc if you are a publicly-traded Company like GameStop. so of the three sources that the vendor could have received the "new class" moniker that was passed down to brokerages, I believe that we can eliminate the issuer as the source and the simplest reason is that they need regulatory approval first. — suddenly, a lot of things fall into place. Since GameStop told us that they plan on doing this, we know that they would have to file these "new class" with the regulators and NYSE. in order for the regulator and/or exchange to have pushed this new nomenclature to the vendor, which later supplied Schwab, it would suggest that the regulator approved it. we don't know this but really, it is just common sense. I want to circle back and remind everyone that we are speaking about blockchain-based, tokenized securities. this is what GameStop and Jefferies has outlined in their agreement which was made at the time the offerings began. we do not know if it is a conversion of old GME shares, a new kind of share, a dividend—but, we can reasonably speculate. because after all, it was the legacy GME shares in Schwab and other brokerages that had the change from "Class A" to "New Class". — speaking of exchanges, I would like to make sure everyone knows that GameStop trades on the NYSE. this is very important because the NYSE is owned by a parent company, called ICE (intercontinental exchange). well, guess what? the NYSE is ready for blockchain-based, tokenized shares. they've been ready since 2022, having made an investment in the outlier blockchain market tech that has the most regulatory approval by far and combined with the NYSE, well.. ..what if they just integrate tZero into the already existing NYSE system? this would be incredible, because the blockchain technology could leverage all of the existing exchange "plumbing"—settlement, delivery, transfer, etc. on the customer side, anyone would log into their existing brokerage account and own blockchain and non-blockchain securities side-by-side. no private keys, no learning about wallets and seed phrases. it would just.. work. the security would participate on the blockchain and the end-user would not have to. now, how is that for seamless integration? — "worry less, trust @ryancohen more." n.b. thank you @TheBronxViking and @DominosJack for your posts!
















