A Reminder For Those of You Buying This FUD Trying to Convince You That Your Shares are Safe in a Broker

  1. That “close your account” quote conveniently leaves out the part where they will not sell your assets unless your total account value is less than $100. They will allow you to transfer or DRS them out if they were to close your account.

  2. 100% for everyone DRSing shares but I hate people pushing bullshit to fear monger them into doing it. Not saying your broker can't/won't screw you but the truth of the matter is, we don't know WHAT is going to happen. The whole market might get shut down... imagine how many people will be putting in sell orders for literally every other stock to get in on the action...

  3. Didnt fidelitt invent hundreds of thousands of shortable shares out of thin air several months back? Fudelity likely has zero actual shares. Just internalized IOUs. Drs if you can! If you cant, i pray for you.

  4. Serious question here and I would appreciate a real response. Almost all brokers seem to have those clauses in their TOS so if most have them how would CS go about being able to send sell orders for phone number digits to broker if almost all have these rules. I mean CS is a transfer agent not a broker. They need brokers to execute and buy/sell orders

  5. Merrill Lynch isn't just a broker that's the difference. It's also a really important one within the market plumbing itself. They are more a node that connects CS to the exchanges rather then providing clearing and security services.

  6. In this case its as simple as an order from cs gives them an actual something to sell so no fuckery and just some fees. Brokers will close your account if they have a reason ie if they say you have shares but dont and may be on the hook themselves. If the shares are there they wont.

  7. CS could just find the broker/institution who is surviving the MOASS and sell over it. I dont see any danger for Computershare.

  8. I feel that the differentiation can be seen in the basis for why these ToS are in place. These are here so that the broker doesn't lose a massive amount of money. Let's say, for example, if your broker is caught with their pants down without shares in the event of GME withdrawing from the DTC, or some other massive moment. Your broker can just say "fuck this" and cash you out for the price of their IOU on the books instead of dealing with the issue.

  9. Retweet. No one is buying any of this. Drs is the way. People stuck in brokers have my sympathy. I hope they try to drs. Brokers have no shares, or at least very few. Piles of internalized ious.

  10. If this is true then there is no MOASS. Moass can not happen without the float locked in DRS and MILLIONS of shares left in brokers needing to be bought back. You guys and your SCARE TACTICS are not going to help you get to MOASS. What your going to do is to scare people in brokers into SELLING, Either now or at very low prices at the start of MOASS. You people are HURTING MOASS with all this bullshit about every broker deleting your shares bullshit. But then maybe that is the INTENT

  11. I think that the point. It’s shilltastic up in this bitch. I ain’t scurred and no way I’m selling for less then a dickload.

  12. It's like they never read a single one of the DDs in all these years. Broker held shares need to be safe for there to be a MOASS. Brokers start deleting or selling your shares? No MOASS, for anyone. It won't matter if you had DRS or not, no one gets a single piece of the moon in any way, shape or form. Hedge funds need to buy the broker held shares...that's literally the entire point of the MOASS theory. Again, no broker held shares? No MOASS.

  13. I'd argue there are multiple routes to MOASS including ones where synthetics not existing. I feel a lot of Apes are Forgetting to get to 100% DRS we need to get through institutional and ETF holders first.

  14. Well if we sell through computershare, don’t they route through a broker? So depending on what broker they route through, couldn’t they do the same thing to computershare?

  15. Brokers get money for executing trades. If someone „refuses“ to sell this trade from CS, someone of course will take that money.

  16. I think CS will find the broker that is able to do the trade? IMO, DRS = CS handles all the shit, Non-DRS = you deal with all the shit.

  17. Think of it this way. If you are an apple farmer (Computershare) and bring in all your and your friends' apples to the apple market (broker) when you are ready and say hey, sell these apples for us, there's no reason for the apple market to not facilitate those sales. It's what apple markets do. If for some reason the apple market was fucking around, you can just take your apples to another market.

  18. I suppose you could be referring to a small number of people getting fucked, but if everyone gets fucked then it concerns my DRS shares too, since they derive their true extraordinary value from the obligations of sellers that created the synthetics. Synths erased equals no MOASS!

  19. Serious question here. Has anyone proof read Computershares customer agreement? Does it not have anything sus at all?

  20. The thing people seem to forget when discussing GME, is that it is not just any stock. It’s the idiosyncratic risk stock. The stock that had the buy button turned off by multiple brokers. There was not really any precedent of this happening previously, and the brokers came together and collectively turned it off.

  21. They did something unprecedented by turning off the button. They will do something unprecedented again and again.

  22. So obvious. Thank you. Drs is the way. Always has been. Has anyone actually forgotten "cone poo chair?" Dfv has been on this for 18 months.

  23. Good lord that couldn’t be more clear in what they’re telling you. You’re fucking nothing and we can do whatever we want, when we want, regardless of what YOU want!

  24. Most brokers will have to reinvent themselves after this is over. There will widespread changes and nothing will ever be the same. They are hanging on to make as much as they can with borrow fees for now, but when the wealth is redistributed where do you think they will shift their business model? Hadn’t fidelity already started dabbling in NFTs? They know what’s coming.

  25. That is the only reason I am keeping a couple shares in my Schwab account - I don't want it closed lol.

  26. Maybe I'm reading your comment wrong, but if you are implying this post is anti-DRS, then you are trippin' - this is a pro-DRS post.

  27. They know they can’t attack DRS; it is the way. The only thing they can attack is broker-held shares. Try to make us believe they’re vulnerable. They may be a bit more vulnerable but they are also very necessary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may have missed