Okay folks, so we've got a lot to talk about. First of all, I want to talk about one specific play: a short squeeze candidate from Sunday Exella who is just starting to detonate upsizably yesterday and almost up another 20 at highs today including the after hours And a lot of people are looking at this chart and saying hey, this is starting to mimic the previous rallies, So I want to talk about what I see here, what the data is suggesting, and how much farther this is going to run. Lastly, I want to talk about Amc. It's going to be a little bit different than usual, but I think you're going to appreciate my perspective anyways before we get into it.

The only thing I ask in return is that you hit that ravishing like button and also don't forget to subscribe either. Okay, let's go ahead and start with Exella. so if you didn't watch on Sunday, my take was that due to Excel is excessive short interest. The fact that it's had five plus retail rallies while to this day maintaining high search volume.

While that combined with the red directional Sma bounce as well as the previous pattern convinced me that this was likely to bounce from the twos, and so far that has been true. But anyways, now we're in the situation where we've had two green days and I would not be surprised at all if we got a slow burn to the upside and then start seeing days where it just shoots up out of nowhere and then dramatically drops and then shoots up some more. That's very, very, characteristic of short squeeze plays. Remember, Excel is a low cap stock that has a very, very high short interest.

So every single day where you have a little green push turns up the heat on those short sellers. Those nasty little short sellers, and eventually one short seller's gonna say i don't like this heat I'm getting boiled here. And once they keep, other short sellers are going to be forced to cave too. And that's where you start getting those really big breakouts.

But remember, with most short squeeze rallies, there's really two components you have. First, retail traders actually going in and buying in and rounding it up. and then you have the actual short squeeze. Far too often, you just see the first and you don't see the second.

and largely because people just move on from squeeze to squeeze. You have to keep in mind that the biggest breakouts always start with some small breakouts that lead up and get higher and higher. Sounds pretty obvious, but the reason is because short-term Momentum traders are more likely to buy in when you get a breakout and less likely to buy in, and more likely to pull out when it starts breaking past previous lows or support levels. If that sounds foreign, Think about it.

this way: you look at that first major July rally, it started slowly easing up, and then once you got a breakout past a previous high, it really skyrockets. As momentum traders pour in, thinking it's a new breakout. Momentum Plan: Momentum with the short squeeze, rallies is often the highest at a breakout, but after a massive massive crash from a previous breakout, you have a lot farther to go to get a new breakout. and so on the way up there, you're going to get a lot more choppiness.

But once you finally break out and Momentum Traders are like, okay, yep, it's breaking out. That's when they start pouring in. especially because they know that other Momentum traders are going to pour in and if everything goes according to plan, they could even get that squeeze. Which is, of course, you know, guaranteed buyers.

I think that in order for this to actually be a very successful play, it does need to break past that five five-ish region in order to get those momentum traders to pour in. It's looking pretty damn good. I just think the question is when this may be the first momentum phase and then the second one is much bigger. Or there could be three more, right? We don't really know, but we do know there's massive short interest.

Retail is aware of it and it's starting to trend a lot around social media, so I don't know. We'll keep you posted. Okay, next update on Amc. So Amc has continued to trade within that 30 to 45 dollar range that it's been in since mid-july It's making an attempt at bouncing off that support level in the 30s now.

What's really going on behind the scenes is anybody's best guess considering that a majority of Amc's trades are really done through the dark Pools. The latest news, albeit a few days old, is that Ceo Adam Aaron is talking about the existence of fake or synthetic shares, to which she said that we are unaware of any information validating these theories. Now, as you know, as a publicly traded company representative, there's only so much that you can say: can't really speculate on something without having extreme and substantial legal evidence behind them. If he does, he can be sued by shareholders, regulators, or even funds that are short.

This as much as people like Adam Aaron, and they call him the silver bag at the end of the day, short sellers could sue them. People expect this guy to put his rear end on the line for this eight movement, but why would he do that? He's a movie theater Ceo and his main goal is to run a movie. It's not to get himself involved in mucky investigations and lawsuits and a million different other bad pr stunts for the company. I think that he's gone above and beyond in terms of supporting the ape community as is and without putting himself too much on the line.

Considering that a ton of Amc transactions are again using dark pools and thus a lot of the conspiracies or theories, I should say about Amc are based around that. There's not a lot of concrete evidence that he could give without getting sued here. The system that we have in place does not recognize any of the evidence for naked short selling as legally legally true symptoms of naked short selling in malpractice, including dark pool transactions making up a majority of daily transactions and failures to deliver amongst a million other things. Well, that hasn't met the liable standard in terms of legally enforceable.

So if Adam, Aaron decides to go and say, yep, there's a lot of malpractice here. what happens? Well, he didn't give anything that's legally enforceable and he could be sued as liable for that. Think about it this way: if he tweeted yes h there's massive shorts, what would happen? Well, that would be seen as saying hey, there's a ton of guaranteed buyers. This is going to go up a lot if people buy in and people are going to buy in in mass.

It's reasonable to assume that if he tweeted that a lot of people would go and buy in and what would happen as a result of that. Hey, they would say you're manipulating the stock market. That is market manipulation. Again, I'm not a lawyer, but at the end of the day I've read so many lawsuits or Ceos who even just make the slight indication or inference or implication of a performance claim they get put in very, very very, hot water very quickly.

I saw a recent case where an investment fund owner had put a picture of himself next to a Supercar and a private jet on his Instagram page and Quartz tried to say hey, you're implying that if people invest in your fun, they're going to get one of those private jets. You can't imply that that's a performance claim and it's like in my opinion, hey, that's not a performance claim, that's just you being a douche. But being a douche shouldn't be enough to say hey, you're making an implication in terms of what people can make investing in your fund or your stock and similar. If Adam Aaron went and said, hey, there's a ton of naked short selling going on here.

Well, that could be seen as a performance guarantee, or at least a implication of performance. doesn't matter how ridiculous that sounds. I've seen so many publicly traded companies go and get hammered because of small little claims that have nothing to do with the performance and then they're trying to argue that that's a performance and then the minute the stock goes down if someone's like, oh, you know I bought Amc because he said that there's a lot of naked shorts but then it went down after the squeeze lawsuit ambulance chasing. I want everything from this man.

He told me that this was going to go up and in my opinion I thought that it could just keep going forever based on what he said. So I need to sue him. The last thing Adam Aaron wants is for a ton of investigations into his company, specifically around his communications regarding massive naked short selling. So probably what happened if I had a guess is he talked to a lawyer.

The lawyer said, okay, this is what you can and can't say and he went right to the edge of what he could say. He's been careful this entire time. If he decides to not be careful, the minute that it does rally in, the minute that it does dump afterwards is the minute that they start getting them from market manipulation. He'll have lawsuits from short sellers who'll have lawsuits from shareholders who bought in, got pump and dumped, and I'll probably have lawsuits from the company itself in terms of malpractice.

He also said that they are unable to make any comment on the considerable trading of puts and call derivatives. It's worth mentioning that you can interloop and hide bearish sentiment in derivatives, and the high level of derivative trading combined with the massive amount of dark pull transactions does indicate that there's probably very, very little truth to what's happening on the chart. Okay folks, now it is time for the talk. So I was looking at my comments the other day and I saw two major criticisms.

The two criticisms were charlie you don't cover Amc enough and then the other criticism was Charlie you cover Amc too much. Please stop talking about Amc. Most were very respectful and I appreciate the feedback, but it is very interesting to see how polarizing the situation has become. My take with Amc is what it's always been.

Hey, Amc is a very interesting bet. It's a concentrated example of the market manipulation and unfair practices that we've seen pretty much everywhere else in the market. And it's an area where retail has consistently demonstrated resilience in. and because of that, I think it's certainly worth talking about, but from an individual perspective.

Hey, a lot of trading is just surviving, and that means you can't put everything on one bet. You could chew gum and walk at the same time. I believe that Amc is a very interesting probability bet, but I also don't think you should put everything on a probability bet. I understand that for some folks covering Amc, it all makes me a meme shill.

and for others covering Amc, not enough. Makes me a hedge fund chill and to be fair, shills get a very, very bad name. Shilling is hard damn work folks. I gotta ask hedge funds what you want me to say today or I gotta ask Wall Street bets what you want to say today and it's all to get this really beautiful hair gel.

Hair gel ain't coming cheap folks. You think this gel comes cheap? That was a joke, but obviously I'm not the center of the universe and when I talk to you on these videos, just think of it as a conversation. I'm giving my opinions. You're welcome to have your own opinions.

I know that there's some people on some Reddit forums that are like I sold my house, my kidney, and my three kids and put it all into Amc stock. And for them, it's worth losing all of that, especially the kids and probably the wife in order to stick it to the hedge funds. But to me, that doesn't make sense to me. It makes sense to take a calculated bet, but it doesn't make sense to take everything you have and put it into one stock.

at the end of the day, folks, I see two separate parts to this Amc situation. Number one, you have Amc, the movement, the movement of retail working together to spread accurate due diligence and to basically unveil a lot of these unfair practices and make sure that people are aware of them. It's an awareness campaign. It's creating a culture where people aren't just sitting back and getting kicked in the rear by these hedge funds.

And then the second part of Amc is really the trade itself, the probability bet based on hedge funds having to cover eventually. But the thing is that these two things need to be separate because Number one: the movement of actually unveiling a lot of these fair practices, makes you think, hey, wait a second. These fair practices aren't just happening with Amc, they're happening all over the market. So you can't just say, oh, me, trying to make money off Amc or trying to make money off Gme is going to fix the system.

You profiting off of manipulation and unfair practices. While good and dandy isn't the same thing as actually fighting those malpractices, I understand there's a lot of people are like, hey, I didn't even know what a hedge fund was a couple months ago. I couldn't give less of a shite about this market manipulation. I just want to make some quick easy dough.

So shut up Charlie doesn't matter. Don't mess with my squeeze and that's all. fine and dandy. Amc is an interesting bet.

Shorts have to cover eventually. I'm not debating that, but what I am debating is this lack of separation between the two parts. The most important part of this movement is making sure that people understand that the market is unfair and fighting for it to be more fair and fighting for awareness. The most important part of the movement isn't you making a ton of money on Emc stock? It's number one.

The second part is completely separate and when you start looping them together, you get all these people that are like putting all their life savings into one bet because they're like I want to stick it to the hedge funds, but the best way to stick it to the hedge funds. is to bring awareness through every stock, not just Amc. What should come out of this movement at the end of the day needs to be that people are working together to identify, bring awareness, and educate each other. And if Amc decides to go to Mars at the same time, hey, nobody's complaining.

It's already done very, very well. Shorts have to cover eventually. There's a lot going on with this play, so I don't know folks. I think that you just have to reframe the situation in order to really see it in the right light here.

I think too many people are thinking oh me me me me, I just want to get in and out. I don't care about all this Bs. I was here for easy money. It's like hey, wait a second.

There was never easy money in the market and anybody that told you there was was lying to you. Anyways, folks that caps off today. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us below or join us on the lovely Ziptrader Circle Facebook group if you'd like to learn how to trade. with our step-by-step lessons, our private chat, and of course our daily morning briefings where we brief on all of our favorite catalysts each and every single market open morning.

Well, we'll go ahead and put a link to Zip Trader you below Fudstopper50. We'll get you 50 off before checkout. and if you're wondering what brokers would trade these stocks on, well we like to send new traders over to Weeble. They have a great free stock promotion, They have a great platform and you can get all of that just by clicking the link below.

Anyways, that caps off the video and I'll see you in the next one.