DTC

Bornagainghostbuster

FLWS is the best current play right now, whether it squeezes or not is anyones guess. Most potential though by far. Can't believe this sub isn't all over 100% shorted and 5 DTC.

LCGfunding

Someone can do it with money of course like DTC drop shipping platform can compete like Temu. High prices will force people to go temu. given opporttemp Temu will cut a share of amzn incrementally. Its the consumer base, prime/speed of shipping that made the difference with loyal customers.

Difficult_Winner_777

Tiny float doesn’t mean squeeze by itself. SI is ~4% with 0.10 DTC, and CMCT is actively issuing common for preferred redemptions per recent 8-Ks. Pops are possible, but this isn’t a trapped-short setup or “next SMX.”

Scquwer

Overall good week $VIPZ, looks like the legacy seller is out, they were pushing hard since the beginning of the month. Looks like the last trench, maybe went in early this week but now it’s stable and now nicely starting to climb back up. DTC hasn’t changed for a long time no shenanigans. Float pretty locked, just basic OTC market maker Algo’s doing their thing on lower volume, but once there’s pressure should be nice. Looking forward to what Les and team can accomplish in 2026!

_hiddenscout

Company basically has had declining revenue every quarter since May 2023.  Also negative EPS growth.  Seems like a lot of the investment and how heavy they went into DTC and cutting back on innovation really hurt them. 

Pretty_Apartment3511

0.1 days to cover. Good short interest and low float, however due to the high trading volume and the fact their DTC are so low makes it difficult. Still possible, just difficult.

OutlandishnessUsed24

Thats not true, the long term thesis is just to help elevate people from bankruptcy risk. Again, for 10000000 time, this company is already priced at bankruptcy so unless it DOES go bankrupt its only up from here. My DD is evolving all day as I get deeper. I have been following this stock all week but next week is my timing theory on shorts covering with no ammo for supply of share (all shares are held internally or by family, no convertable debt, no risk to share issuance, and nore more shares to short) Besides my 5 points below, the real critical piece is section 3 on this DD. You dont have to listen to me, if I am wrong we will see this week on the 1st half of my thesis. Come back here on Thursday/Friday :) 1.    94.82% of Float is Short — Near-total saturation of available shares 2.    TRUE Days to Cover: 53.7 days — The reported 4.14 DTC is misleading (see Section 2) 3.    Borrow inventory collapsed 84% — From 3.1M to 500K and has NOT recovered 4.    FINRA Exempt shorting spiked 26x on Dec 10 — 7.4-sigma event, statistically significant MM intervention 5.    Shorts ADDED 200K shares during Dec 9-12 — They're digging deeper, not covering Section 3 on my 13 page DD on my local drive is particularly interesting to me. Do what you want with my advice, it makes no difference to me https://preview.redd.it/cpwi8c2p547g1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=f940c8f250cacd7b098c0d817f8d66fb35f52c2c #

OutlandishnessUsed24

This is the right call. FLWS has a much cleaner setup than SGBX. Here's the data as of this weekend: **Borrow availability:** * Started last week at 3.2M * Thursday morning: dropped to 600K after shorts borrowed 2.6M to attack * Saturday overnight: dropped again to **500K** * Someone borrowed 100K shares on a weekend ahead of Monday **The imbalance:** * 9.4M shares short (FINRA) * 500K available to borrow * That's **18.8x imbalance** **What happened Thursday:** Shorts threw 2.5M shares at it in a concentrated attack and only got a 9% drop. Price held $3.90 support. They used 84% of their ammo and barely moved it. **What's different from SGBX:** * SGBX float expanded (dilution), FLWS hasn't diluted * SGBX insiders selling, FLWS insiders just got granted 133K shares (accumulating) * SGBX DTC < 1 day, FLWS has almost no shares available to cover with * SGBX no catalyst, FLWS just hired AI-focused CIO Dec 8 (stock popped 30%) **The part people are missing:** Even without the squeeze, FLWS is a $1.7B revenue company trading at $285M market cap (0.17x sales). That's priced for bankruptcy - but they're not going bankrupt. $93M EBITDA last year, new leadership team (first non-family CEO ever), and the McCann family owns \~42% and isn't selling. So the way I see it: * Squeeze works → big win * Squeeze doesn't work → I own a $2B revenue company at all-time lows SGBX doesn't have that floor. Sources: [Fintel](https://fintel.io/ss/us/flws) | [iBorrowDesk](https://iborrowdesk.com/report/FLWS)

ryzetard

if it has some strong earnings this year... volume keeps dropping, short interest stays high so DTC increases, insiders still keep the shares so i dont think they are very afraid of being deficient at the moment and low float.

ryzetard

depending on which source you trust the most: [https://fintel.io/ss/us/sgbx](https://fintel.io/ss/us/sgbx) [https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/sgbx](https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/sgbx) (btw seems they diluted, their previous outstanding shares were 5.6 million approximately as per their latest SEC filing - not a surprise cuz they are doing really bad recently) [https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=SGBX&p=d](https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=SGBX&p=d) [https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SGBX/key-statistics/](https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SGBX/key-statistics/) Float is everywhere more or less in line, short interest is in like 10-20% territory only, volume is high so DTC is less than 1 day on average. no way it can run

ryzetard

ok i worded it very poorly, apologies I didnt want to say that exactly you still promote bynd, i meant that sgbx is becoming bynd 2.0 and i have no clue why sgbx is still even mentioned. most sites confirm the float expanded which is in line with insiders and insitutions selling their holdings, true SI is lower, DTC is like 0.1-1 tops, no catalysts on the horizon to attract more people and fundamentally its just bad, even for penny standards. the only indicator left are borrowing costs but that just might be due to the recent run making lenders lose a lot and insuring themselves from it preemptively

ryzetard

so whats your opinion on it? the gamble is that their earnings may be seeing an upside since the last year due to september news - if they landed some upfront payments from these deals so a catalayst MIGHT happen - or not. The rest is as I described, not that big of a public float, majority locked by insiders/private placements, big SI, only the days to cover could be at least 2 or 3 to make it a very good squeeze candidate (still could happen, it would just be short lived if low DTC).

ryzetard

I think 4.3 is a good support level as well, keeps rebounding there. It will pop with another catalyst i think if this stock retains both high short interest and DTC. They wont go bankrupt any time soon and are undergoing some changes so i intend to keep it for some time, no daytrading or timing the market.

ryzetard

FLWS has just appointed a new veteran CIO, new CEO this year and hopefully there are some good news coming from the shareholder meeting regarding their new strategies and tech integration. Aside from that it has one of the stronger short squeeze setups due to both high SI (at least 30% or even up to 80% depending on the sources) and very high DTC (at least a week) values which are the most important factors , uavs has nothing going for it just like CVU - i dont understand these two tickers getting hyped

Which_Perspective871

You just buy or sell on vibes w/ shorts & DTC? I made a composite indicator on tradingview which is 9 indicators put together. I use it to screen 4hr, 1d, & a custom 3d timeframe. When it signals (meaning all indicators give it a 👍) it has a high win rate.

Which_Perspective871

You just buy or sell on vibes w/ shorts & DTC? I made a composite indicator on tradingview which is 9 indicators put together. I use it to screen 4hr, 1d, & a custom 3d timeframe. When it signals (meaning all indicators give it a 👍) it has a high win rate.

ryzetard

i asked about SGBX and will do so again - what are you basing your float on when institutionals were selling, squeeze already happened, DTC swings between 0.1-0.5 and SI dropped as per nasdaq. what do you even expect there?

Sea_Conversation_440

Sorry did i mention BYND here like to compare DFLI to it? Short squeezes existed long before BYND, and the DD I posted was only about DFLI’s actual data, not a meme comparison..? If the short interest and DTC didn’t change dramatically, I wouldn’t have bothered. Its data im sharing so calm yourself, its called a DD buddy.

Sea_Conversation_440

DFLI Short Squeeze (Heres the current short data) * Short interest: **15.4M shares** * Days to Cover jumped: **3.09** * Off-exchange (dark pool) ratio now: **55%** * Borrow availability staying low * RS deadline approaching → increased volatility * Lower volume + rising DTC = shorts becoming more trapped Not saying it *will* squeeze, but all we need is more volume to get this over a dollar. Dfli may announce news within these 3 days as well. The shorts are basically trapped with this setup.

ryzetard

Question is - do you think a stock shorted at 95% with over a month worth of DTC would not start covering after an over 25% upside with a signifcant volume increase day to day? That free float is kinda sketchy, but it can still run i think.

jarstiffler

I did a DD on FLWS yesterday. New CIO announced yesterday; has experience with Amazon, Bed Bath Beyond, etc.. 95% short float. 35 DTC. Not super expensive to borrow yet, but with volume/pressure from retail, that will change. I like the set up.

jarstiffler

It’s ready. 35 DTC, 95% short.

jarstiffler

35 DTC now...

scarletrose4444

TLDR: I'm in a similar situation in that I want to sell my DTC (South Denver, Co) house, rent an apartment and potentially invest the equity until I either move in with a partner or buy something else without the highest level of work (approx 6 months, could do it for longer if it seems smart). Single mother, 2 kids, approx 50/50 with Dad but I do the heavy lifting when it comes to school costs and extracurriculars. The yard and maintenance is killing me. I have founded a startup and would prefer not to have the cost of maintenance, insurance, property taxes, hoa ($1800p.a.) etc over my head. Thinking about selling and investing the ~$600k take home, while I rent something smaller and more manageable so I can use my spare time developing my business. I've been reading this and other similar posts and most suggest six months is too short a time to be investing, and too risky in this climate. My thoughts are to park the money but I don't want to be foolish and too risk averse if there is an intelligent play out there that I should be considering. I appreciate any advice.

Bojangles315

That is incorrect lmfao. They are recorded in book value, yes. in street name... at the DTCC, not the DTC. that is, in the broker dealers name. they are owned by the brokerage firm with you as a beneficial owner. not even going to explain an Omnibus or full disclosure basis. the company does not have your name, only the firm. the accounts are numbered, and the people are numbered. proxies and such are delivered by the firm on behalf of the corporation SIPC only kicks in for liquidation of a firm. lost/misplaced securities are handled during the count. they don't involve the SIPC whatsoever. once the count is done, which is a FINRA required thing for firms, it is taken against the firms net capital requirements. 25% at 7 days, 50% at 14, 75% at 21, and 100% at 28 days. the number of days is based on buy in/sell out requirements. this is derived from the clearing requirements. t+4 for normal transactions, all the way up to T+35 or even when issued transactions. Fidelity bonds would then come into play in the event of fraud. Fidelty bond requirements are based on net capital requirements. there is no such thing as a series 1. a series 4 is an options principal and does not apply here. a series 3 is a futures/commodities exam and would not apply here, a series 2 was a non registered exam and discontinued and would not apply here. What I have, series 7. general securities registered rep exam. series 99 is an operations professional registered rep exam which deals with this, a series 24 is a registered principals exam which deals with exactly this and net capital requirements for managing a firm, and a series 66 is a registered rep securities states law exam.

serendipitySR

Starlink - trillion dollars market DTC- trillion dollars market (after Echostar acquisition). Space data center - in development. Starship will make it happen. Need anything else? Starshield, Artemis, moon base, space tourism

Alarmed_Sell_1583

The reported float includes insiders, preferred structures, and locked blocks. Once you remove what doesn’t circulate, the tradable supply tightens to roughly 500k to 900k and that is the liquidity the market actually prices. DTC follows that scarcity, not the headline float. I am here to clarify the structure, not to shift your conviction. The market will speak for both of us!

Kooky-Repeat-5402

Although you’re mostly correct, the 1.55M which you state are ‘paralysed’ and this does show a bullish long term signal, the DTC still remain incredibly low for Squeeze and with 14M trading volume, it’s still manageable by shorts 933,339 short shares divided by 14,000,000 daily volume equals a DTC of 0.06 days(0.32 reported) The volume is currently too high to be a 'trap'. A high borrow fee (400%) is pain, but a DTC below 1 is freedom For this to squeeze it needs volume to dry up and DTC rise to tap shorts.

Lollooomm

Would dilute like the grappa in my morning coffee… (DTC is low, float% in short positions is not crazy high and BMNR is apparently a frequent new-share issuer) is not high, sorry brother… I personally believe in a soon to be Ubisoft Entertainment SA short-squeeze once they will provide more information on their model Feb 2026

macromind

Memestock or not, Playboy is a great reminder of how powerful a legacy brand can be if it figures out modern distribution and storytelling. There are so many ways they could lean into content, community and licensing that are way less risky than trying to moon the stock. There is a cool angle in how older brands reinvent their positioning for new channels (social, creator collabs, DTC etc.) that gets talked about here sometimes: https://blog.promarkia.com/

volckerwasright

It was definitely not a dead end this year. Rand Paul the hemp loophole guy? No thanks. A Democrat would be best for the sector but President Trump is by far better than the guy who would keep DTC sales and unlicensed stores open. These MSOs have invested heavily to be compliant with state laws.

whoa1ndo

I’ve been here. I made 30k from the initial squeeze and now see this shit is dead. “The 316M new BYND shares are already free-float since Oct 17. They were issued under Rule 144A (unregistered but QIB-eligible). The contractual lock-up expired on Oct 16 at 5 PM ET, so on the next trading day (Oct 17) the restricted CUSIP flipped to the unrestricted CUSIP via DTC and bondholders could sell freely. You can see it in real time: some funds already dumped (Context Partners went from 5.2 % → 0 %, D.E. Shaw from 8 % → 2.3 %, etc.).bynd site

whoa1ndo

“The 316M new BYND shares are already free-float since Oct 17. They were issued under Rule 144A (unregistered but QIB-eligible). The contractual lock-up expired on Oct 16 at 5 PM ET, so on the next trading day (Oct 17) the restricted CUSIP flipped to the unrestricted CUSIP via DTC and bondholders could sell freely. You can see it in real time: some funds already dumped (Context Partners went from 5.2 % → 0 %, D.E. Shaw from 8 % → 2.3 %, etc.)

Difficult_Winner_777

Look at this wacky ass chart. That is microfloat mechanics in action. Everyone is staring at one Fintel update like the float magically teleported into the millions overnight. Relax. NASDAQ just pushed the 11/25 short interest update and they are still using a 0.18M float. That matches the SEC filings. Nothing in the filings changed. No new issuance. No dilution valve. Fintel just swapped data vendors and half the sub had a panic attack. And before anyone forgets, the SEC math already pinned the effective float at roughly 0.40M. This came straight from the 10-Q, the PRE 14A, and the 424B filings. Outstanding count minus locked insider blocks minus restricted shares minus the registration delays on the S-1 leaves a circulating supply that is basically a dinner plate. That is why the chart levitates on buying and falls on air pockets. There is almost nothing actually trading. The drop from 1.4M short to 0.93M short is not shorts “winning.” You do not unwind ~500K short shares in a book this tiny without the chart turning into a blender. Instead the tape barely moved. That usually means shorts shifted exposure off the main tape between reporting channels. HKD did the same thing. The official SI cooled off while daily FINRA short volume stayed on fire. Now look at the actual mechanics: • DTC is at 0.02 • CTB is still in the 400% range • Lender availability keeps slamming to 0 • FINRA short volume stays above 50% every day • The price moves on crumbs of volume because the book is tiny That is microfloat physics. Not fear. Not mass selling. Just a cramped supply trying to absorb synthetic pressure. If shorts were actually done you would see CTB collapse, availability normalize, and FINRA short volume crater. None of that is happening. The tape is still stressed. The liquidity is still thin. The filings still confirm a tiny float. The daily metrics look like a rerun of HKD before its unwind. Nothing fundamental changed. Only the loudest people did.

icehole505

I think they like what AI investment is doing for them in the short term (creating a frothy market), and theyre sniffing their own AGI farts in the long term.. I don’t see where any of it turns into a meaningful ($100b+ annually) revenue line for Google though. Netflix does $50b revenue annually. If the medium term AI marketplace looks like a pile of DTC subscription plans, there’s just not enough money there to justify the expense

HofT

I looked at the filings you sent. None of them actually prove that the October shares are currently in the public float. The April and July filings only show when the warrants and preferred stock were created and when they became Series B preferred, not when those preferred shares were converted into common stock that is free-trading today. A preferred share becoming “Series B” in July does not start a Rule 144 holding period unless that specific security was issued to the holder at that exact time, and the filing does not show the acquisition date for each investor or the delivery date from the transfer agent. The S-1 you linked was withdrawn and never went effective, so it cannot make any shares tradable. Without an effective registration statement, the only path for those converted October shares to become tradable is Rule 144, which still requires a legend removal and a legal opinion issued to the transfer agent. The company has not filed anything showing that a legend was removed or that the transfer agent delivered unrestricted common shares into DTC. Nothing in what you sent shows that the 4.9M October shares were actually converted into unrestricted common stock and deposited into the float. It only shows the existence of the preferred stock and the terms of the offering. That is not the same as proof that the preferred shares were converted into free-trading common shares in October. Finally, market behaviour does not prove a 5M float. A high-volume day can come entirely from internalization, dark-pool routing, and recycling of the same shares over and over. The borrow fee staying above 400 percent, availability stuck at zero, and spreads behaving thin are all signs of constrained borrowable supply, not a wide float. So far, the filings you sent still do not demonstrate that the October shares are currently in the float.

Awkward_Profit_5203

I don't think this is how DTC works man 😭😭😭

thereal_horatio

Can you explain: “once DTC drops under 1–2 days, covering becomes mandatory” ?

AirNovel78350

mate if you followed squeeze stocks you know for sure DTC doesnt matter much on squeeze

Delly2times

Listen man, I’m just expressing my opinion on what I’m seeing as far as sentiment through boards and reddit, I’ve watched NFE for the last month, it’s had potential for a while and has been beaten down continually, I understand why, . You can see where the herd moves, the short interest is extremely high, and the cost to borrow is spiking (~93% CTB, 47% SI, ~6 DTC) I get what you’re saying about “reddit warriors” but at some point, whether you give a shit about the “reddit warriors” or not, you have to respect those numbers. Debt, no debt, dilution is always a risk with pennies, that’s inherent. Do your own research, we all have opinions and thoughts, it was simply just mine. Take a look around reddit, I’m seeing a lot of arrows. Best of luck in your trading, hopefully everyone gets rich tomorrow somehow. Unless you’re a bear, then in that case, daddy needs a new rug🎅🏼

MethFistHo

Denver is a shell of what it was pre-covid. Downtown became expensive and full of homeless so people stopped coming downtown. There are plenty of cool places to hang out in Arvada, Wheat ridge, DTC, Parker, etc. so there's really nothing bringing people downtown other than for sports.

GullibleTangerine698

DTC has been around that for last 3 days. They can exit on paper , but it would spike the price a lot more when they exit at this price. Idk the ceiling tho. Thanks for looking out, if its genuine.

Top_Satisfaction_124

ok guys... so the stock that shall not be names: the short interest is going down fast and DTC is low. On the surface it seems bad for a squeeze, but this is the exact conditions before the fake meat company mooned. The covering causes a liquidity crisis because covering literally puts buying pressure on the stock. NFA, but just my observation,.

GullibleTangerine698

DTC ignores liquidity and volatility. It is a math calculation using SI and Volume. In real life, shorts cannot all cover at once because there are not enough free-trading shares available. When multiple shorts try to buy back at the same time to try to cover in that time frame /volume frame, the price will still technically explode. So even though “days to cover” says 0.02, real covering could take hours or days depending on some factors like: • liquidity - shares to borrow - free trading shares • Overall volume on the day • buying pressure (Buying volume) • forced buy-ins at the price. margin calls etc. And all of this can spike price.

Difficult_Winner_777

DTC only needs to be 7+ on big-float plays like GME. On microfloat plays, it does the opposite it collapses toward zero because shorts are recycling the same tiny supply all day just to stay alive. HKD’s real DTC was basically zero before it nuked upward. SGBX at 0.12 isn’t safety. It’s the same microfloat choke-point forming.

Difficult_Winner_777

If you look at it in pure math terms, DTC collapsing is exactly what you expect in a microfloat squeeze, whether it was HKD in 2022 or SGBX now. DTC is just: Days to cover = Short interest ÷ Average daily volume For SGBX right now, rough numbers are: Short interest ≈ 1.4M Volume on the big days ≈ 10 to 12M So: 1.4M ÷ 12M ≈ 0.12 days to cover That does not mean shorts are safe. It means they’re churning volume like crazy. You can hit 0.12 DTC in two ways: 1. Shorts actually close into real liquidity (SI drops, CTB drops, borrow refills). 2. Shorts recycle the same float back and forth all day to keep price pinned (SI stays high, CTB stays insane, borrow stays at 0). What we see in SGBX is case 2: CTB ~500%, borrowable shares stuck at 0, FINRA short volume 40–60%. That’s not shorts “easily covering,” that’s shorts spinning the wheels on a tiny float. With HKD there isn’t clean public DTC data from the blow-off period, but mechanically it was the same pattern: float was microscopic, volume went vertical, and any attempt to cover size in a low-float book sent it straight from 13 to 2555. Near-zero DTC is just the math version of that same situation.

Difficult_Winner_777

DTC doesn’t measure whether shorts can cover It only measures how much volume was reported. When most of that volume is shorts recycling the same shares through dark pools and internalization, DTC collapses even though they’re still completely trapped. If shorts actually had real liquidity to close, CTB wouldn’t be ~500%, borrow wouldn’t be zero, and SI wouldn’t be triple the float. The 40% day wasn’t covering It was fuckin synthetic churn to defend the position. The real move starts when the recycled volume stops and the float stops rotating.

Difficult_Winner_777

Nobody has reliable official “DTC right before liftoff” numbers for HKD. Most services only show current data or backward-looking estimates, and Markit was reporting HKD’s short interest as less than 0.1% of OS during the run, which was obviously nonsense given how it traded. What we do know is that HKD’s float was microscopic, volume went vertical, and any attempt to cover in size sent it straight up in other words, the effective days-to-cover was basically zero. SGBX showing 0.12 DTC now is the same mechanical signal: shorts are sitting on a tiny float and can only survive by churning intraday volume. So we cannot say “HKD had exactly 0.12 DTC,” but we can say that this kind of near-zero DTC is exactly what you see right before a microfloat squeeze blows up.

Difficult_Winner_777

Every claim you made falls apart the moment you compare it to the actual SEC filings instead of assumptions. 1. “If the filing doesn’t say restricted, shares must be unrestricted.” Completely false. In U.S. securities law, shares are restricted by default unless they are issued under a registration statement or qualified exemption. The 10-Q does not reference any registration statement, legal opinion, shelf takedown, or Rule 144 seasoning. You cannot claim unrestricted with zero legal basis. 2. “They can dilute millions before December 29.” Directly contradicted by Nasdaq Rule 5635(d) and every financing agreement SGBX has. They all contain 4.99 percent beneficial-ownership caps and 19.99 percent issuance limits. PRE 14A Proposal 8 explicitly states new authorized shares only exist after shareholder approval and after the Certificate of Amendment is filed. 3. “Float is definitely 5M+ and Fintel is wrong.” If float were 5M+, we would not have 500–600 percent CTB, zero borrow availability, 40–60 percent short-volume ratios, and HKD-style intraday moves. The market behavior contradicts your claim. Float updates slow, but the liquidity profile does not lie. This is microfloat behavior, not multi-million-float behavior. 4. “Short interest % float is meaningless.” It’s meaningless only if float magically expanded. You have provided no evidence that any of the October shares entered float. Again, no registration, no prospectus supplement, no Rule 144 notice. If those shares were truly free trading, lending supply wouldn’t be zero. 5. “Borrow fee doesn’t prove microfloat.” Correct, borrow fee alone doesn’t — but borrow fee + zero availability + high SI + high short-volume + DTC collapse absolutely does. That combination only exists when borrowable supply is tiny. If float were large, CTB would normalize instantly. 6. “HKD comparison is invalid.” HKD comparison is mechanical, not fundamental. HKD ran because supply was locked, float was tiny, and shorts had no exit. SGBX has locked dilution until Dec 29, a microfloat until registration, and SI multiple times the tradable float. The structures are analogous, regardless of jurisdiction. 7. “Conversions are usually free trading.” Not unless they were registered or specifically exempted. You have not cited the registration statement because none exists. The 10-Q does not connect the October conversions to the October prospectus. Your argument is assumption, not evidence. 8. “Shorts can cover intraday.” Only if shares exist to cover with. They don’t. That’s why CTB is 500 percent, availability is zero, and DTC sits near zero. Shorts are recycling volume, not closing positions. Big difference. Bottom line: Your entire rebuttal is built on assumptions that contradict the actual filings, Nasdaq rules, and observable market microstructure. I’m quoting law and SEC text. You’re guessing. Only one of those survives contact with reality. This guy just asked chatgpt to form a rebuttal Is this the best shorts can do? Im fucking bullish to the MAXIMUM NOW

Difficult_Winner_777

The borrow-loan percentage only reinforces the point. If nine percent of all outstanding shares are already loaned out and borrow availability is still basically zero, that tells you the float is tiny and fully spoken for. As for catalysts, the company already signed a definitive merger with New Asia Holdings, which owns Olenox’s drilling operations and Machfu’s industrial IoT platform. The final step of that merger converting the preferred into common is literally on the Dec 29 ballot. Until that vote and the amendment filing, no new shares can legally hit the market, which is why shorts are stuck recycling volume and why DTC keeps collapsing.

Ambitious_Cress8002

By definition, DTC assumes volume is real. If volume is fair-market volume, then yes: low DTC = shorts can exit easily. How do we know volume doesn't reflect real liquidity?

Difficult_Winner_777

DTC being low does not mean shorts can easily exit. It means shorts are relying almost entirely on intraday volume and dark pools to avoid being forced to exit. This exact pattern appeared in HKD before it launched. When the float is tiny and the short interest is larger than the float, the only way shorts survive is by constantly recycling the same borrowed shares. That creates artificial volume. The volume looks big, so DTC drops, but the real borrowable supply never increases. You can see that in SGBX with zero to forty thousand shares available and five hundred percent CTB. In HKD, days to cover fell to almost nothing while the stock was under suppression. Once the recycling loop broke and shorts could no longer hide inside the volume, the price exploded even though the DTC number was low. That is what a collapsing DTC actually means in a microfloat squeeze. It means shorts are using volume as a shield, not that they are safe. If the float is small, the borrow pool is empty, the CTB is extreme, and the dilution valve is closed until a specific date, a low DTC is simply the pressure building before the break.

_hiddenscout

Disney reports Q4 adjusted EPS $1.11, consensus $1.02 \-- Q4 revenue $22.5B, consensus $22.78B. \-- Sees 'double digit adjusted EPS growth' in FY26 vs. FY25, consensus $6.49. \-- Sees 'double digit adjusted EPS growth' in FY27 vs. FY26 Q1 segment guidance Fiscal 2026: \-- Entertainment: DTC SVOD operating income of approximately $375 million. \-- Theatrical slate comparisons to drive an adverse impact to segment operating income of $400 million compared to Q1 fiscal 2025. \-- Lower political advertising revenue of $140 million compared to Q1 fiscal 2025. \-- Unfavorable comparison to $73 million of Star India operating income in Q1 fiscal 2025. \-- Experiences: $90 million in pre-opening expenses at Disney Cruise Line, driven by the Disney Destiny and Disney Adventure. \-- $60 million in dry dock expenses at Disney Cruise Line. Seems so long ago when there was that expression of don't bet against the mouse.

BrightLengthiness853

They've concluded their research they don't need to dilute - as mentioned in the DD. They are fully funded - $80m in the bank. News coming soon. Short DTC 8.6 days.

DaPurpleRT

They are probably calculating using outstanding shares - so not eliminating the 3xx million shares that are unusable per DTC rules till at least April 2026.

OurNewestMember

Yes, the OCC and DTCC/DTC will ensure your options contract "payout". There are many parties involved, no matter how thinly traded the standardized options contract: Your options securities account --> broker (regulated) --> clearing broker --> OCC (central counterparty Clearinghouse) The OCC makes sure you and your options counterparty don't screw each other (by collecting collateral, etc) Then at expiration, OCC clearing works with DTCC to arrange for receipt/delivery of the option contract's deliverable shares (guaranteeing the buyer/seller needed to fulfill your options contract) So no matter how thinly traded the option, the receipt and delivery of cash and shares is handled/arranged "for you" by centralized parties like OCC and DTCC the entire time your trade is open. So you're really dealing with massive, centralized counterparties, not the very few contra options holders/writers. That's why it's not so important how thinly traded the options contract is to ensure you get fulfilled at expiration.

SmallCapsOnly

Adding more to $LENZ Good earnings report on expansion plans with new drug that is FDA approved Public traction is beginning to grow stronger My avg price is $32, great entry point for those that done want bags like mine. Stock is shorted 40% as well. Oh and Sarah Jessica Parker is the spokesperson for 2026 DTC campaign 😂

Scquwer

Watch VIPZ, new gambling platform. Very strong management. Was a reverse merger, and as typical old sellers took a bit to get out, but it’s been stable at .22 for now. Les Ottolenghti is a high level executive in casino Arena and is leading the AI charge for the next level gambling platform. They are currently in Tennessee looking to get more licenses, and a solid collaboration with UNLV , partnerships for developing stronger AI for player engagement as well. Anyway, I’m not saying buy it. I’m just saying watch it read the news and study. All OTCs are going to look like shit on a fundamental level, so really look into the management and their track record. Of that in the OTC is a bet on management, well true the CEO is important to most companies. It is particularly in OTC because they are smaller and the management needs to be hands-on get shit done types. For VIPZ, very quiet very low volume for now been stable. Seen it pop from $.22-$.40 a couple of times before algos reset, showing the old seller is pretty much done. The DTC hasn’t changed for a long time. Yes of course I own shares, but I’m not telling other people to buy it, but I do tell him to watch it. Watch the news and see what happens and once it starts going up again or gets attention then you could decide if it’s right for you. But I cannot stress. OTCs are always limited information terrible fundamentals so you can’t sit there and argue with strangers on those metrics cause you will always lose and just waste your time arguing with them. You need to vet management more than anything. It will still be a high risk high reward arena water so this should not be core money that should not be Plan B money. That should be 100% discretionary money the same kind of money you would go to a casino and blow or blow on a big night at the bar or buy a bunch of scratchers that’s the kind of money you should be using the OTC. That amount is different for everyone but the definition still remains the same.

portilladani

Because their whole business runs on AI. Their algorithm decided who to show each ad to, based on who is most likely to respond. They’ve been improving advertising efficiency by using AI to improve what they call retrieval, and the only reason they’re growing is because advertisers see a positive return due to the algorithm being so good. I’m in advertising and Meta is the best channel for DTC brands, mainly because of their algo. So yes, for them, the way to scale revenue is by improving their AI.

DucDeBellune

Yes, people keep invoking Rule 144 to cite that they can’t trade for six months, but that’s not how Rule 144 works. The 6-month clock is the default holding period for restricted securities of reporting issuers, but when new shares are issued solely in exchange for other securities of the same issuer (e.g., converting/exchanging notes), Rule 144(d)(3)(ii) lets you tack the old holding period to the new shares. The SEC’s own guidance says that in a Section 3(a)(9) exchange, the new securities assume the character of the old and tacking is permitted. BYND’s October deal was an exchange offer with existing noteholders, not a cash sale to the public. The company then released the contractual lock-up at 5:00 p.m. ET on Oct 16 (as per themselves) and DTC moved the contra-CUSIP into the unrestricted CUSIP on Oct 17 i.e., those shares trade on Nasdaq like any other BYND. Also, just do the math. Current shares are trading at $1.66. Market cap is 656.21m. Divide the market cap by share price to determine the amount of shares = 395m. The math proves 390m+ shares are actively being traded. Again, stop trying to spread misinformation to get people to pump a dying stock.

r3dditing

Only about 700,000 new shares won’t be registered the previous 316 million shares are freely tradable: : from beyond’s or page: the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period. New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants Look those cusip numbers up and they are register we shares!

Mother_Plastic_8047

Got FLWS. Let them bloom to the moon. DTC is barely 2, so once volume spikes it’s game over for the shorts. One halfway decent catalyst and this floral delivery company is going to send bouquets straight to Valhalla.

xtanaka99x

Total Cash: $628.62 and Total Debt: $79.31M. This looks very healthy. And it looks like they have been buying back shares a little by little. Held by institution is 82.08% and 11.48% SI. DTC is only 2.24 but this is not short squeeze play so who cares. (Source: Fintel) Your +20% projection is realistic to me.

DalaDanny

You're asking exactly the right question here. Let me break down what's happening with actual sources so everyone is on the same page: 1. "How can the Cost-To-Borrow (CTB) be around 9% if the shares are supposedly still locked up?" They're not locked anymore. BYND explicitly stated the lock-up ended at 5:00 p.m. ET on Oct 16. Immediately after, the Depository Trust Company (DTC) transferred all those previously locked-up shares from the restricted (contra) CUSIP into the unrestricted, tradable CUSIP on Oct 17. That means these shares are free to trade and lend out now. Source: SEC Exhibit 99.1 Press Release (clearly mentions the lock-up expiration and shares becoming tradable). 2. "A CTB of 9.25% indicates plenty of available shares, so Short Interest (SI) must realistically be around 13–17%." We need to be cautious here. CTB is broker-specific (in this case, from Interactive Brokers via ChartExchange), and it represents supply and demand within a particular broker's lending pool. One broker’s number doesn't reflect the entire market's short-borrow situation and certainly doesn't pin down a precise market-wide SI percentage. It does suggest ample availability at that specific broker right now, though. Sources: ChartExchange CTB Data (Interactive Brokers feed) Interactive Brokers CTB explanation 3. "If the CTB is low, that means the 316M shares are definitely part of the float now." Exactly right on this one. Those shares are indeed tradable. The official record date (Oct 16) SEC filing clearly states there were 397,607,401 shares outstanding at that time. The new shares from the debt exchange became tradable immediately after the lock-up expired (Oct 17), significantly increasing available float. Source: BYND SEC DEF 14A Proxy Filing 4. "How do we reconcile Ortex previously showing over 100% SI with this new float?" Good question. The confusion earlier this week was mostly a denominator issue: Ortex was briefly showing extremely high SI percentages because some data providers were still using an outdated or smaller float number, causing short interest percentages to appear inflated. The actual absolute short share count didn't explode—it was just a calculation artifact from using the wrong denominator

DalaDanny

Respectfully, several core facts in OP’s post are outdated or just wrong. Line-by-line: 1) “The 316M new shares are *unregistered* and *not freely tradable yet*.” ▸ Reality: The lock-up expired at 5:00 p.m. ET on Oct 16. After that, holders “will be able to sell all of the New Shares.” DTC then moved the shares out of the contra CUSIP into the *unrestricted* CUSIP on Oct 17. ▸ Sources: SEC 8‑K (Item 1.01) and Exhibit 99.1 press release with the DTC details. – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1655210/000119312525240364/d60690d8k.htm – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1655210/000119312525240364/d60690dex991.htm 2) “Float is still tiny (only ~70–100M tradable) until SEC registration goes effective.” ▸ Reality: As of the Oct 16 record date there were **397,607,401** shares outstanding. The “tight float until registration” angle is no longer true once the lock-up rolled off and DTC moved shares to the unrestricted CUSIP. ▸ Source: Company DEF 14A (proxy), Record Date section. – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1655210/000119312525242542/d940803ddef14a.htm 3) “Short interest >100% proves a structural squeeze because float is locked.” ▸ Reality: Ortex did show SI >100% of *public shares* at one point, but that % can compress as the denominator (free float) expands when the new shares hit the unrestricted line. % of float ≠ fixed; the absolute shorts aren’t magically growing. ▸ Source: Reuters summarizing Ortex and noting shares released. – https://www.reuters.com/business/beyond-meat-short-interest-surges-past-100-public-shares-ortex-data-shows-2025-10-23/ 4) “Borrow fee 800–900% means shorts are trapped right now.” ▸ Reality: CTB spiked intraday (Oct 14–15) into the ~800–900% area, then fell hard as supply loosened. By Oct 24 it was ~20–50% on common trackers, and on Oct 26 Interactive Brokers feed showed ~9.25%. ▸ Sources: – Fintel CTB history: https://fintel.io/ss/us/bynd – IB feed snapshot (ChartExchange/CompaniesMarketCap mirrors): https://chartexchange.com/symbol/nasdaq-bynd/borrow-fee/ https://companiesmarketcap.com/beyond-meat/cost-to-borrow/ 5) “Dark pool short volume ~250M = that many *shares short*.” ▸ Reality: Daily “short volume” is **trading flow** (prints marked short), not the stock’s outstanding **short interest**. FINRA and others explicitly warn not to conflate the two. ▸ Sources: – FINRA explainer on Short Interest vs Short Sale Volume: https://www.finra.org/investors/insights/short-interest https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/information-notice-051019 https://www.finra.org/finra-data/browse-catalog/short-sale-volume-data/daily-short-sale-volume-files 6) “There’s no supply; that’s why volume is low and a squeeze is inevitable.” ▸ Reality: Supply increased materially (316,150,176 new shares issued in the exchange), and **liquidity is massive** (multiple sessions >1B shares traded). Squeezes can pop—but sustained moves fight a big supply overhang from noteholders. ▸ Sources: – SEC 8‑K issuance: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1655210/000119312525240364/d60690d8k.htm – Reuters on 1.2B+ shares traded Oct 21: https://www.reuters.com/business/beyond-meat-shares-soar-planned-walmart-distribution-2025-10-21/ – WSJ/FactSet on 2B+ shares traded Oct 22: https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-tesla-earnings-10-22-2025/card/QIrRiAHyuXGJHi6gCCXR 7) “Near-term catalysts are all bullish.” ▸ Reality: BYND pre-announced Q3 rev. ≈ $70M and GM ~10–11% (okay vs expectations), but Nov 19 Special Meeting also seeks (i) Nasdaq 5635(d) approval to issue shares under the new notes, (ii) *increase* authorized shares to 3.0B, and (iii) a reverse-split framework—each a potential dilution/overhang mechanic. ▸ Sources: – Reuters on prelim Q3: https://www.reuters.com/business/beyond-meat-expects-post-quarterly-revenue-above-estimates-2025-10-24/ – Proxy (Special Meeting 11/19, proposals incl. 3B auth. shares & reverse split): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1655210/000119312525242542/d940803ddef14a.htm TL;DR — The post’s central thesis (“float stays tight until a resale registration, so a mechanical squeeze is inevitable”) is **false**. The lock-up expired 10/16, DTC moved shares to the unrestricted CUSIP on 10/17, and trading/liquidity show the supply is very much present.

Background-Summer-56

No, you are wrong. 100% are freely tradable. The convertible notes are unregistered and their time started when they were issued. Rule 230.144(D)(3)(ii) explicitly states that the shares are tradable on the public market after conversion. Why are you lying? Please explain. There is no registration requires and these shares are now a part of the public float. And the short data is also being updated to reflect this. Link to CFR 230: Here is the text of the rule: (ii) Conversions and exchanges. If the securities sold were acquired from the [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144) solely in exchange for other securities of the same [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144), the newly acquired securities shall be deemed to have been acquired at the same time as the securities surrendered for conversion or exchange, even if the securities surrendered were not convertible or exchangeable by their terms. This is perfectly clear. The 1-year period started with the issuance of the convertible notes. And then from BYND's press release on their website, it explicitly states in plain language that the 316M securities are available for public sale: [https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock](https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock) Text: By tendering Existing Convertible Notes in the Exchange Offer, each participating holder of Existing Convertible Notes was deemed to have agreed with the Company that from and after the Early Settlement Date and until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 16, 2025, it would not transfer, sell, exchange, assign or convey any legal or beneficial ownership interest in, or any right, title or interest therein (including any right or power to vote), or otherwise dispose of (whether by sale, liquidation, dissolution, dividend, distribution or otherwise) any New Shares, or enter into any contract, option, or other agreement with respect to any of the foregoing; provided that an exchanging holder of Existing Convertible Notes was permitted to sell up to approximately 37.45% of the New Shares received by such holder in the Exchange Offer (the “Freely Tradeable Shares”). **The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above.** With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period.   New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.   ... **The New Shares and other securities offered in the Exchange Offer have not been, and will not be, registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any other securities laws. ...**

Background-Summer-56

Bullshit, these shares are freely tradable: The convertible notes are unregistered and their time started when they were issued. Rule 230.144(D)(3)(ii) explicitly states that the shares are tradable on the public market after conversion. Why are you lying? Please explain. There is no registration requires and these shares are now a part of the public float. And the short data is also being updated to reflect this. Link to CFR 230: Here is the text of the rule: (ii) Conversions and exchanges. If the securities sold were acquired from the [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144) solely in exchange for other securities of the same [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144), the newly acquired securities shall be deemed to have been acquired at the same time as the securities surrendered for conversion or exchange, even if the securities surrendered were not convertible or exchangeable by their terms. This is perfectly clear. The 1-year period started with the issuance of the convertible notes. And then from BYND's press release on their website, it explicitly states in plain language that the 316M securities are available for public sale: [https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock](https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock) Text: By tendering Existing Convertible Notes in the Exchange Offer, each participating holder of Existing Convertible Notes was deemed to have agreed with the Company that from and after the Early Settlement Date and until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 16, 2025, it would not transfer, sell, exchange, assign or convey any legal or beneficial ownership interest in, or any right, title or interest therein (including any right or power to vote), or otherwise dispose of (whether by sale, liquidation, dissolution, dividend, distribution or otherwise) any New Shares, or enter into any contract, option, or other agreement with respect to any of the foregoing; provided that an exchanging holder of Existing Convertible Notes was permitted to sell up to approximately 37.45% of the New Shares received by such holder in the Exchange Offer (the “Freely Tradeable Shares”). **The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above.** With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period.   New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.   ... **The New Shares and other securities offered in the Exchange Offer have not been, and will not be, registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any other securities laws. ...**

Background-Summer-56

This post is factually incorrect: The convertible notes are unregistered and their time started when they were issued. Rule 230.144(D)(3)(ii) explicitly states that the shares are tradable on the public market after conversion. Why are you lying? Please explain. There is no registration requires and these shares are now a part of the public float. And the short data is also being updated to reflect this. Link to CFR 230: Here is the text of the rule: (ii) Conversions and exchanges. If the securities sold were acquired from the [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144) solely in exchange for other securities of the same [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144), the newly acquired securities shall be deemed to have been acquired at the same time as the securities surrendered for conversion or exchange, even if the securities surrendered were not convertible or exchangeable by their terms. This is perfectly clear. The 1-year period started with the issuance of the convertible notes. And then from BYND's press release on their website, it explicitly states in plain language that the 316M securities are available for public sale: [https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock](https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock) Text: By tendering Existing Convertible Notes in the Exchange Offer, each participating holder of Existing Convertible Notes was deemed to have agreed with the Company that from and after the Early Settlement Date and until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 16, 2025, it would not transfer, sell, exchange, assign or convey any legal or beneficial ownership interest in, or any right, title or interest therein (including any right or power to vote), or otherwise dispose of (whether by sale, liquidation, dissolution, dividend, distribution or otherwise) any New Shares, or enter into any contract, option, or other agreement with respect to any of the foregoing; provided that an exchanging holder of Existing Convertible Notes was permitted to sell up to approximately 37.45% of the New Shares received by such holder in the Exchange Offer (the “Freely Tradeable Shares”). **The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above.** With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period.   New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.   ... **The New Shares and other securities offered in the Exchange Offer have not been, and will not be, registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any other securities laws. ...**

Background-Summer-56

The convertible notes are unregistered and their time started when they were issued. Rule 230.144(D)(3)(ii) explicitly states that the shares are tradable on the public market after conversion. Why are you lying? Please explain. There is no registration requires and these shares are now a part of the public float. And the short data is also being updated to reflect this. Link to CFR 230: Here is the text of the rule: (ii) Conversions and exchanges. If the securities sold were acquired from the [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144) solely in exchange for other securities of the same [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144), the newly acquired securities shall be deemed to have been acquired at the same time as the securities surrendered for conversion or exchange, even if the securities surrendered were not convertible or exchangeable by their terms. This is perfectly clear. The 1-year period started with the issuance of the convertible notes. And then from BYND's press release on their website, it explicitly states in plain language that the 316M securities are available for public sale: [https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock](https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock) Text: By tendering Existing Convertible Notes in the Exchange Offer, each participating holder of Existing Convertible Notes was deemed to have agreed with the Company that from and after the Early Settlement Date and until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 16, 2025, it would not transfer, sell, exchange, assign or convey any legal or beneficial ownership interest in, or any right, title or interest therein (including any right or power to vote), or otherwise dispose of (whether by sale, liquidation, dissolution, dividend, distribution or otherwise) any New Shares, or enter into any contract, option, or other agreement with respect to any of the foregoing; provided that an exchanging holder of Existing Convertible Notes was permitted to sell up to approximately 37.45% of the New Shares received by such holder in the Exchange Offer (the “Freely Tradeable Shares”). **The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above.** With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period.   New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.   ... **The New Shares and other securities offered in the Exchange Offer have not been, and will not be, registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any other securities laws. ...**

Background-Summer-56

The convertible notes are unregistered and their time started when they were issued. Rule 230.144(D)(3)(ii) explicitly states that the shares are tradable on the public market after conversion. Why are you lying? Please explain. There is no registration requires and these shares are now a part of the public float. And the short data is also being updated to reflect this. Link to CFR 230: Here is the text of the rule: (ii) Conversions and exchanges. If the securities sold were acquired from the [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144) solely in exchange for other securities of the same [issuer](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ef38ef231dcd4f032b6403f8f0d8971&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:17:Chapter:II:Part:230:230.144), the newly acquired securities shall be deemed to have been acquired at the same time as the securities surrendered for conversion or exchange, even if the securities surrendered were not convertible or exchangeable by their terms. This is perfectly clear. The 1-year period started with the issuance of the convertible notes. And then from BYND's press release on their website, it explicitly states in plain language that the 316M securities are available for public sale: [https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock](https://beyondmeat.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock) Text: By tendering Existing Convertible Notes in the Exchange Offer, each participating holder of Existing Convertible Notes was deemed to have agreed with the Company that from and after the Early Settlement Date and until 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 16, 2025, it would not transfer, sell, exchange, assign or convey any legal or beneficial ownership interest in, or any right, title or interest therein (including any right or power to vote), or otherwise dispose of (whether by sale, liquidation, dissolution, dividend, distribution or otherwise) any New Shares, or enter into any contract, option, or other agreement with respect to any of the foregoing; provided that an exchanging holder of Existing Convertible Notes was permitted to sell up to approximately 37.45% of the New Shares received by such holder in the Exchange Offer (the “Freely Tradeable Shares”). **The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above.** With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period.   New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.   ... **The New Shares and other securities offered in the Exchange Offer have not been, and will not be, registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or any other securities laws. ...**

DucDeBellune

This is incorrect. The BYND exchange shares weren’t “OTC-only.” They were contractually locked until 5pm ET Oct 16, then DTC moved them into the unrestricted CUSIP on Oct 17, after which they trade like normal Nasdaq BYND. A contra CUSIP is just a temporary DTCC tag during corp actions. Also, “restricted” stock under U.S. law can be resold publicly (incl. OTC) once Rule 144 (or registration) conditions are met. There’s no rule that says it’s “OTC-only.” >DISCLAIMER: This is not financial advice. I am also not a securities lawyer. I gathered as much.

TravelTalesDJI

Asked Chat GPT to read completely, this is what I got The initial lock-up (which prevented noteholders from selling their new shares for ~3 business days after settlement) expired at 5 PM on Oct 17, 2025. • After that moment, those shares were legally allowed to trade. • But — and this is the key part — they still require registration and clearing (through the Depository Trust Company, or DTC) before they actually appear as tradable on NASDAQ. So this text only ended the contractual restriction, not the regulatory or logistical one. The shares are “freely tradeable” only once the SEC resale registration (Form S-1) becomes effective and the Contra CUSIP shares (088ESCAA6) are converted into the unrestricted CUSIP (08862E109) for open-market settlement Question: It’s saying SEC registration is needed…so it’s not part of the float yet?

GorillaModeSuxNow

I plugged it into ChatBGP, this is fucking epic. All institutional holders got fucking LOADED dumping BYND on us fucktards. Here’s a breakdown of what the announcement by Beyond Meat, Inc. (ticker: BYND) means, and whether the newly-issued shares are accessible to the public: ⸻ ✅ What we know • Beyond Meat issued 316,150,176 “New Shares” on October 15, 2025 in connection with an exchange offer for its convertible notes.  • These shares were subject to a lock-up restriction, which expired at 5:00 p.m. New York City time on October 16, 2025. After that time, holders are permitted to sell the New Shares without the contractual lock‐up limitations.  • Prior to the lock‐up expiration, approximately 37.45% of each holder’s New Shares were already designated as “Freely Tradeable Shares.”  • The New Shares initially were issued under a “Contra CUSIP” (CUSIP 088ESCAA6) to enforce the restriction, and are expected to be moved into the unrestricted CUSIP (08862E109) on or about October 17, 2025 via the DTC (Depository Trust Company) procedures.  • Important: The New Shares were offered only to holders of the convertible notes who satisfied certain conditions (qualified institutional buyers or accredited investors with minimum holdings). They were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933.  ⸻ ⚠️ Are these shares accessible to the general public? Short answer: Not immediately in the sense of being newly offered to the general retail public. Here’s why: • Because the New Shares were not registered, they were initially offered to a limited set of eligible investors (institutional or accredited) rather than via a broad public offering. • After the lock‐up expires, the holders of those restricted shares are allowed to sell them into the market (i.e., give the “float” of those shares to be traded). That means the shares may enter the public trading pool (i.e., can be bought by retail) once they are transferred into the unrestricted CUSIP. • Therefore while you (as a retail investor) likely cannot participate in the original issuance, you can purchase those shares (or other shares of BYND) on the public market, as soon as they are moved into the unrestricted CUSIP and become part of the freely‐traded float.

Gold-Distribution189

Alright, let’s clear the smoke once and for all. There’s been a flood of half-baked info, old screenshots, and “hot takes” flying around on Reddit, X, and Fintel screenshots. Here’s the full picture based on SEC filings, Rule 144 law, and current short data as of October 25, 2025. 1. ⁠The Truth About the “316 Million New Shares” • Beyond Meat issued 316,150,176 new shares through an exchange offer for its 0% Convertible Senior Notes due 2027. • This was disclosed in the Form 8-K filed October 13, 2025. • These shares replaced roughly $1.15B of debt with $202.5M of 7% notes due 2030, eliminating ~97% of old debt. Great for balance sheet. But it diluted existing shareholders. 2. Why These Shares Aren’t Freely Tradable Yet Here’s where most people get it wrong: The new shares were issued but NOT registered for public trading. • The 8-K states these were issued in a non-registered transaction under Rule 144A — meaning they’re restricted securities. • Under Rule 144, restricted shares can’t be publicly sold for 6 months (for reporting companies) unless an effective resale registration is approved by the SEC. • No such filing (Form S-3 or S-4) has been declared effective on EDGAR yet. Translation: They exist on paper, but can’t legally trade on the open market until April 2026 or until the company files a resale registration. 3. “But They’re at the DTC — Doesn’t That Mean They’re Tradable?” Nope. • DTC simply holds them under restricted CUSIPs (“Contra CUSIPs”), which are book-entry placeholders, not public float. • This is normal during restricted share issuance. • They can sit at DTC while being non-tradable — exactly like employee RSUs before vesting. So even if the shares “show up” in internal databases, they’re not part of the float until they’re unlocked. 4. Why the Float Numbers Are All Over the Place This is where all the FUD started. MarketWatch / Ortex 384M (total authorized) ~17% Includes restricted shares that can’t trade yet IBKR / FINRA ~65M (tradable float) ~100%+ Excludes restricted shares — reflects real market pressure Both are technically correct, depending on which “float” definition you’re using. But from a market mechanics perspective, only the tradable float matters for short squeeze dynamics. 5. What This Means for Shorts • Borrow rates remain high (40–60%+). • Short availability is still under 2M shares per Fintel. • Fails-to-deliver data shows spikes above 8.7M shares. • The effective float being traded right now is small enough that price action remains extremely volatile. In other words: The “super squeeze” isn’t dead — it’s just delayed until dilution actually hits the market. 6. Key Legal Timeline (Rule 144) Shares issued (Form 8-K) Oct 13, 2025 Exchange of notes for shares Contractual lockup expired Oct 16, 2025, 5:00 PM ET Lockup removed, but shares still restricted Rule 144 6-month window Until ~April 15, 2026 Earliest possible public resale if no registration filed Possible SEC resale registration (Form S-3) TBD Once filed & effective, shares enter float instantly Until that happens — those 316M shares cannot legally trade. Period. 7. TL;DR Summary Yes, 316M new shares were issued. No, they aren’t publicly tradable yet. The real float right now is ~60–70M shares. Short interest relative to tradable float is still massive (80–100%+). SEC resale registration or Rule 144 expiry (April 2026) is the trigger for those shares to unlock. Borrow rates + low availability confirm the float is still tight. 8. What Happens Next? There are two possible outcomes in the near term: 1. SEC Resale Filing Appears: • Float expands dramatically. • Shorts breathe easier short term. • Stock may dip before stabilizing. 2. No Resale Filing Yet: • Float stays restricted. • Borrow costs remain high. • A squeeze remains possible on technicals and pressure. Either way, this is a data mismatch, not a conspiracy. The filings, timing, and mechanics explain every number on the screen. 9. Final Takeaway This isn’t a meme. It’s just complex SEC timing meets high short exposure. The new shares are locked by law under Rule 144 and aren’t part of the tradable float yet. That’s why IBKR, Fintel, and Ortex can all show different “truths” — because they’re measuring different buckets of shares. So ignore the Twitter hysteria. Until the SEC resale registration goes live, the real float is still tight, shorts are still cornered, and volatility remains extreme.

benjhg13

I commented elsewhere saying this was wrong but you are in fact correct. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I glazed over the CUSIO DTC transfer. I guess now the only hope for BYND to go up is if the 316mill dilution was already priced in at $0.50.

tpg2191

> Believe it or not, I posted these comments on another post on wallstreetbets a few days ago and the moderators deleted it. I don't understand why because the Due Diligence is clear, logical, and cited. It’s probably because your due diligence is factually incorrect. > In the above image, that lock up restriction is in reference to the agreement made on those shares, as detailed in their 8-k filing The shares are definitely freely tradable now that the lockup agreement is over. BYND announced this themselves the day after the 8k you referenced. Initially the exchanged shares were in a Conta CUSIP which had restrictions and then were transferred to the regular CUSIP which could be traded after October 17th. https://investors.beyondmeat.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock “The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above. With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period. **New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.**”

Key_Dog_8793

This is a well sourced read on the scenario. I think there's fud in every direction. This isn't even beneficial as OTC to hedge funds because shorts can only be covered by DTC eligible registered securities. So either they submit an S3 to register them, or rule 144 plays out time. This will be obvious to see and have a timeline per sec data.

Super_Rush7926

Bro look at the Days to Cover… 0.05 DTC is terrible if you are looking for a short squeeze

UnbrokenChill

BYND is dead. No way this squeezes again. RSI 50 DTC 0.32 Short interest 39% Volume still insanely high. Institutional ownership: 3% There's and argument for a recovery play, but the short squeeze thesis is gone imo

No-DD-Just-Vibes

Apparently those retards think it's gonna squeeze with 0.04 DTC 😎

PhD_Ric

No, eBay is not doing well. They are being too greedy with sales fees and everyone is leaving the platform to sell DTC or through fbm

MaxReddit2789

Absolutely inaccurate All 316m shares became sellable starting Last Friday when the Short post settlement agreement lock-up ended (could have taken 1 business day, so, until this Monday yo get them deposited at DTC) Close to 40% of these were actually sellable as of October 16 The thing is, the noteholders have been extremely patient in their selling They needed 3$ to recover their investment, but they definitely went for 1.5-2x that, so made 500m$-1B$ profit (if they sold everything)

tpg2191

Look at the 13D filings, it’s just the BYND common share Cusip. Plus it was already announced that the contra cusip was already converted https://investors.beyondmeat.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-release-500-pm-new-york-city-time-lock “The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above. With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period. **New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants. **“

fatitude

The idea of a short squeeze is for institutional shorts to buyback and cover their positions causing price to squeeze. Days to cover = DTC. Prior to reddit hype, it would have taken 8 trading days for shorts to cover their position. People tend to use DTC with an "overshorted" stock to assume: Institutions shorting the stock will be paying so much in borrowing fees over 8 trading days that they eventually have to start covering their position which will drive price up. But increased volume does 2 things, it decreases the borrow rate and DTC in favor of shorts. For an institution to cover their shorts, they have to find a seller. With daily volume increasing from 30M to 1B, there is an abundance of supply (sellers) that shorts can buy to close their positions. What would have taken them 8 days to cover only takes them 2 hours to cover now. We've had 2 full trading days of price action at elevated volume, what are the chances shorts have already covered to avoid millions/billions of loss?

Opposite-Occasion881

Their DTC test sold out in an hour

Opposite-Occasion881

Their DTC test for beyond steak and ground beef sold out in an hour You’re just not the target demographic

Opposite-Occasion881

Their DTC test sold out in an hour

Arizenheimer7

You do know days to cover doesn't work like that? It's not an *absolute* metric it's relative based on the amount of shares short and the average volume. You prob know that already but this reply makes it seem like you think there's no way that they could cover over in 8 days. Which they absolutely could (a bunch of different scenarios could make this possible) no matter what DTC says. Not tryna be a wet blanket just wanna make sure that anyone who might not know this doesn't go all in just based on DTC and get rekt.

According_Revenue_65

If BYND volume stays around **100 million/day for the next 3 days**, the short-interest ratio (DTC) will climb toward **0.4–1.0 days**. That makes it **3-8× harder** for shorts to exit smoothly. If price holds above \~$2–3 during that period, tension builds fast — the perfect setup for the next squeeze wave.

According_Revenue_65

If BYND volume stays around **100 million/day for the next 3 days**, the short-interest ratio (DTC) will climb toward **0.4–1.0 days**. That makes it **3-8× harder** for shorts to exit smoothly. If price holds above \~$2–3 during that period, tension builds fast — the perfect setup for the next squeeze wave.

Lagoon___Music

The stuff he posted about their DTC channel on X most recently is hilarious. I help food brands like beyond with ecommerce for a living and he is massive overblowing the results of their DTC efforts, it's scale, and what it takes to be successful. I'm in deep in this run but I just thought that was a hilarious thing for him to highlight

No-DD-Just-Vibes

0.23 DTC 🤡

kanadabulbulu

They had 36% available right away, and market priced not just that in pretty much everything in two days, thats why price went 80% down in couple of days. DTC and cusip clearance can take half day or less or full day, depending on firm. Since debtors are bunch of institutions, i think full day would be the case. BM post announcements for Monday, they know Monday would be very important day for the stock , 120 RS lock up gives debtors lots of room to play they have time ...even 120 180 period shows debtors know something we dont know, we r betting entirely on assumptions. We will see on Monday if debtors will play along until 2.87 or dump this stock to oblivion next week ...I agree with OP deal debtors agreed is very bad if they r ok with 650m loss . Don't forget they lend them at 0%. So their loss would be even greater if they dump it.

MaxReddit2789

Are you sure DTC clearance takes a day? When I see Effect Forms for S-3, the very same day of the Effect form there is usually a huge dumping, which would imply the shares were already DTC as soon as the S-3 became effective. Don't see how that lock-up provision ending would be any different

kanadabulbulu

no they are not cleared , they have to clear CUSIP and DTC which takes a day , so they will be ready to dump fully on Monday ... i honestly think they dump what was available until today specially yesterday , so they can join the pump game ...if this goes anytime over 1$ i think they will dump slowly to extend 120 180 days window , they know company got max 1 year to survive and they have time for SS games ...they watch this subs too ...they know everyone talking about BYND and they see the volume ...so your game might pay off but holy shit its volatile as fuck ...

kanadabulbulu

ur calculation purely on debtors recovering their 906M loan idea ... i agree today is the pump day , but how are you so sure they will not start dumping on Monday once they are cleared to go after cusip DTC?

kanadabulbulu

this all comes to debtors , are they going to dump this or wait for recovery , they have plenty of time 120 days until RS limit ... another thing is they are free for any of their share lock up by yesterday 5pm . so they have to clear cusip DTC today , Monday will be the verdict day for this stock , dead or alive another 120 days ... it might also slowly die if debtors sell off everytime it goes up ... but at this moment they can wait for SS and join the pump and dump game , super volatile days ahead ...i dont think it will see 2.87 , i see your calculation and it might be correct but its pure speculation and belief , nothing fundamental is backing ... lets see how it rides ... todays afternoon will be bloodbath on this stock ...bears are strong bulls are convincing debtors are watching on the side ....

stjohnbs

The foregoing lock-up restrictions expire today at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, and, thereafter, holders of New Shares will be permitted to sell any and all of the New Shares received in the Exchange Offer without the contractual restrictions imposed by the lock-up provisions described above. With the exception of the Freely Tradeable Shares, the New Shares were issued into a Contra CUSIP (CUSIP NO. 088ESCAA6) intended to restrict the trading of such security for the duration of the lock-up period.   New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants.

CorvetteCole

yeah at the moment DTC is LTE. I'm not convinced this really matters though. realistically, ASTS can't even max out LTE speeds yet

fa113

Holders of New Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP will no longer be contractually restricted from transferring such common shares following 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on October 16, 2025. Shares subject to the Contra CUSIP are expected to be allocated into the unrestricted CUSIP for the Company’s shares of common stock (CUSIP NO. 08862E109) over the course of the day on October 17, 2025, subject to the procedures of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) and of DTC participants. https://investors.beyondmeat.com/news-releases/news-release-details/beyond-meat-announces-early-tender-results-and-early-settlement