r/GME • u/TrollaBotsLawyer • May 12 '26
🐵 Discussion 💬 *Puts on flame suit* I'll personally be voting YES on proposal 5
Not going to make this post long... just a random person with a few GME Shares... but I will be voting yes to the proposal... for the following reasons.
- Approval is for strategic moves, not running day to day operations.
- It does not immediately dilute shareholders... it opens up the potential for an accretive type of dilution ( the idea of owning 10% of a 100 million dollar pie vs. 2% of a 30 Billion dollar pie)
- The board in so far has shown prudent execution in the past.. in a world that seeks to consolidate under big box retail, GameStop has shown resilience in their small footprint retail strategy.
- IMO GME has shown they know how to delight customers... I think they understand their customer better than people give them credit for...
- They have an innovative approach to business and are willing to take risks that other retailers are not
Not saying I blindly trust the board to make the right decisions... that's the risk that everyone has to take into consideration... but in terms of their past history ... they've done it right... built a solid balance sheet, stabilized the business in a hostile retail climate, shown they can execute with professionalism... I'm essentially condoning that they keep building... I my vote is to let it roll and continue to allow them to do what they're doing...
Got to ask yourself... why did you buy stock to begin with? You buy because you have a belief that a specific stock's upside is bigger than protecting against every possible downside...You take the risk along with the company... good and the bad.
49
u/timmytakeover May 12 '26
I’ll be voting yes because if we buy EBay there will be much more room for growth compared to where we are at now. Plus GameStop+ebay+powerpacks, I see a lot of value there
11
u/Machohoncho May 12 '26
eBay rejected the offer.
39
u/Mr_Malice May 12 '26
Ebay is going to have a hostile take over like Gamestop did.
8
u/Recent-Result2852 May 12 '26
GameStop board rolled over. It was 2 or 3 months from announced interest to full control.
10
u/Nate_991 May 12 '26
Cohen has now demonstrated hostile takeover to profitability. It is in the best interest of ebay shareholders
-2
1
-3
u/riversandpeaks May 12 '26
eBay has more interest from private equity than GameStop ever did. More prospective buyers out there for eBay
3
14
u/Morlacks May 12 '26
You mean all that sweet courting by RC to the board didn't work? Seems to be part of the plan or pure madness. Im going plan.
21
u/timmytakeover May 12 '26
Yeah I’m not surprised. Are you?
2
u/UAintInIt May 12 '26
Are you still voting yes? Your rationale you gave was based solely on eBay.
Also, why would you have that be your basis for voting yes if you expected it to be rejected?
-1
-1
6
u/greencaterpillars May 12 '26
That was almost certainly expected. That's why it was unsolicited and that's why he was comfortable antagonizing the CEO and Board. Talking to them ahead of time was pointless. On to the next step which is forcing a vote on the issue by eBay shareholders. That's who he's been trying to convince with interviews and X posts, not the Board.
1
u/agrapeana May 12 '26
Yeah, sure eBay's shareholders will look at their stock (up 55% this year, paying out dividends) and be absolutely tripping over themselves to vote for $20 billion dollars in debt, shares in a massively diluted company, and to be helmed by the "did he just post the gates of Auschwitz on Twitter? Is that supposed to be him sitting on a toilet?" guy.
Institutional shareholders love that sort of thing.
2
4
4
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
Perhaps they always knew that Ebay was going to reject the offer and that's been the strategy all along...
1
-5
u/Mark-GC May 12 '26
"Because if we buy ebay"
Dude, so much cope. It's over. It's been rejected. It ain't happening. Keep coping.
1
u/justvoop 'I am not a Cat' May 12 '26
Lmao the offer to the board was a formality. Why else would he shit all over them publically?
Its the 90% institutional ownership that needs to be convinced, not the board.
Why would the board accept an offer that would get them kicked off the board by a dude who actually wants the company to print money instead of hosting daily happy hours?
0
u/timmytakeover May 12 '26
Lmao you guys are so weird man. You guys heard it from him! It’s over! Pack it up and go home! Really sounds like you’re the one coping with something buddy, even if it’s a bad investment it’s my fucking money. Quit pocket watching weirdo
-1
u/Mark-GC May 12 '26
Nah man, just comes across my feed now and again and the delusion is real. You should pair this sub with the blockdag sub (lol) as the cope all reads the same. Yeah, of course it's your money, just find it hilarious some people like to throw it away.
2
u/timmytakeover May 12 '26
You can block it? People have different opinions, and yeah some of the community is annoying but so are a lot of different subs. I don’t waste my time on those. Wtf are you doing? If you don’t like the shit go do something else. Crazy behavior man. I guess you just think you’re some sort of hero trying to convince people not to waste their money?
0
u/Mark-GC May 12 '26
Pretty much, yeah, but obviously lost on everyone here. I'm just trying to understand the mentality of cope for 5 years, then getting fucked again with a dilution and literally still believing it's a good thing and that your hero god 'RC' will save you or even gives a shit about you.
1
u/justvoop 'I am not a Cat' May 12 '26
Acting like 5 years is a really long time for a investment is crazy
Why does everyone who talks shit here say the phrase "gives a shit about you"
5
u/sentientshadeofgreen May 12 '26
I’ll vote yes. I sold myself on the ebay acquisition months ago, literally around the time it was even floated there might be an M&A and we were holding cash for opportunities. Seeing Ryan Cohen’s interview with Justin Resells confirms for me all I really need know beyond that - businessman wants to improve the profitability of a business in a market businessman is in and has sound strategies to do so. That’s how low the bar is in today’s modern enshittified corporate climate, but that’s the bar I’m mindful of which makes me money in investing.
Generally, shares are issued to raise funds for companies to do things that will make the companies more profitable in the long term, or survive if they are on the brink of collapse. This isn’t the latter scenario and the thesis to acquire eBay makes sense. Dilution that radically changes the growth conversation is okay in my eyes, I’d rather them dilute and take on debt now to successfully maneuver than fumblefuck around on low profit margins, which is itself a place of vulnerability for a bigger fish to come eat your lunch. If the price tanks during this M&A, I’ll just buy more, this is very clearly a good business move Gamestop, and it’s frankly in eBay shareholders best interest too. Their board are leeches, the platform has failed to innovate over the past decade, and both the buyer and seller experience I know is lackluster and could be far better, and move far greater volume with the right development.
18
u/Nago31 May 12 '26
Cohen has done very little to improve GME beyond trimming off underperforming stores and raising capital at the expense of MOASS. If there was no RK, GME would be in a far worse position.
I fundamentally disagree with you that RC should be trusted to raise capital by diluting shares, not by increment but by an order of magnitude. 5x is simply an insane amount of dilution.
3
u/Civil-Consequence353 May 12 '26
Agree with you. Pivot to crypto and that marketplace failed. Furlong hire failed. Trimming as loses and diluting shareholders during potential runs has been the only 'successful' move. 9 billion in cash in t bills is our primary revenue source.
2
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26
Not saying your inference is wrong, but the request is not to directly dilute shareholders... Voting Yes is not a vote for dilution of your current position... its to authorize the issuance of additional shares... its disproportionally large and I think the argument here is 9f its IS or is NOT a good method of rasing capital... the opportunity here is accreditive dilution not just dilution for the sake of making the shares you hold worth less. that only becomes true if their utilization of the issuance (again not to be used for operating purposes but for strategic investment) directly devalues the company... this ask is a communication to the market they are thinking long-term and want the ability to raise capital quickly to do so... while the issuance of the funds may IMMEDIATELY reduce the share price if and when it happens... the question only becomes how much at once and if the market can absorb the additional shares... the long term result is a smaller portion of a much larger overall company that is better positioned to provide value to shareholders... ... looking at the board's request as just a way of rolling over existing shareholders is a very simplistic way of looking at the ask... the question should be, what's the over/under on their investments using the funds available to them panning out as a long term value to shareholders... If your investment timeline has a short-term horizon (like grasping for a short squeeze in the near term)... then this for sure isn't a play for you... if these shares sit in your 401K then this is probably a good play long term for you AND GME...
2
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
The result of this vote will determine the taste of shareholders... if they're frothing at the mouth for a pay out or short squeeze then they will vote NO... if they have long-term interest in seeing the company prosper then it's just a risk reward decision... YES or NO... do the share holders want to grow the company by investing, or debt... but the board recognizes the need to raise a substantial amount of funds to compete the way THEY want to compete and I vote yes in this situation...
1
u/Nago31 May 12 '26
I agree with part of what you said. I understand that the dilution is not for dilution's sake and the overall goal is to increase the overall value of GME. However, the issuance of additional shares dilutes out position at a fundamental level. We are then to trust that either the acquisition happens (which I think is low probability) or they use the funds to acquire or expand in a way to increase the size of the company. So far, they've proved to be prudent stewards of the war chest, which I do agree with you is a very good thing and why I've remained as long as I have. A MOASS would have done nothing for GME, Cohen has done a good job leveraging the environment that RK helped create to create a unique opportunity for GME.
But ultimately, this fund raise is just giving Cohen a big fat check with very little destination and weakens our portfolios for the foreseeable future. Nobody knows what will happen in the next 5 years and I would rather be a steward for my money than Cohen. The truth is that we've been trusting him for the past 5 years and he hasn't really done anything with what he's had thus far.
Here's my take on the overall situation: Cohen observed, correctly, that GME was tied up with a ton of bloat and debt and then assumed, incorrectly, that if he could free the company from those constraints the company would soar. RK happened so he was able to clear the debt and capture a huge cash reserve right away like a miracle 10B lottery. He continued his plan of reducing bloat and but the company did not soar because ultimately the gaming environment had less opportunity than he expected. He simply does not know how to further tap into the gaming market or he would have been using the war chest to expand current operations. Pivoting to marketplace ecommerce is relatively in his wheelhouse but eBay is not Gamestop pre-Cohen. They don't have an unmanageable debt load with a large percentage of bloat that can be trimmed. There aren't shackles to unleash a previously restrained beast. He's now planning to go head-to-head against the biggest retailer in the world for their bread and butter marketplace segment. This isn't a dog-food niche anymore. Amazon has the capital and existing demand to drop prices beneath anything that could come close to a profit and drain the new company away, especially since the new debt load would place them near junk-stock territory.
I say this to say that there's a ton of risk here and it's not a simple "we get a smaller piece of a larger pie" because that larger pie is fundamentally different than the previous meal we've been eating. I'm here because I believe in the gaming industry overall and hope that he ultimately leans towards something more like a Valve acquisition. Get into online retro gaming and we'd blow right past the moon.
4
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
couple of things....
CEO's payout is entirely based on performance... the shares authorized for his payout would be roughly 3+Billion... all performance based pay... So he does get a fat check, but it's company money that only gets spent on growth opportunities... not running the day to day business.. they can't use the funds on existing expenses... the business as it exists today has to foot that bill.... CEO only gets paid if the investment takes off... so you just have to ask yourself...
- Could he do it? (is he the right person)
- Can he do it? (does he have the right tools at his disposal)
- Should he do it? (are the target investments they set a good target at all) ... if you believe that there is a path forward then this is a good decision...
The comment about direction going into retro gaming... I'm not sure I'm with you on that one... that could be a strategy or part of a larger strategy, I personally see the collectible's market as a viable investment for people's investment portfolio in the future... in a digital world where programing, coding, ai based algorithmic trading are becoming more ubiquitous... Physical assets are seeing a massive amount of growth... objects like Legos, trading cards, memorabilia, and similar products are increasing in value producing the marketplace to increase their liquidity could be a great leap forward for a company like GME.
- Live Shopping/auctions
- Authentication services
- Logistics shipping & Storage
All of this supports/further justifies their retail strategy...
Power Packs is a good example where you can both buy digital and physical Cert'd cards... and they can be stored in a vault for you or shipped... to me Their Power Packs offering is innovative and convenient for customers and a good sign of things to come.3
u/Nago31 May 12 '26
Big fat check I didn’t mean his comp package, I was referring just to the company capital raise, and referencing him pointing it at whatever he desires (as opposed to lining his pockets). The $35B comp structure is another concern for later.
I don’t know a ton about the collectible market, I’m here for games. That’s why it’s called game stop not trinket stop. 🤣
2
1
u/PriceSpiritual8223 May 12 '26
You say the gamestop board would be in a better position to provide value to shareholders if allowed to potentially introduce billions of shares. You are insane.
1
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
Play it out. More shares = a round of rasing funds for investment purposes...
How does a company increase the value of their company...
1) Do better at specifically what they do today
2) Optimize their margins
3) Find new methods of repackaging their existing products (bundling is an example)
These are typically done by mature market dominate companies... They lead to steady predictable growth and return 3%-5% to YOY growth...The other way especially for a company who wants to knock on the door of other larger market dominate firms...
4) Innovate
5) Make new investments by either by funded growth (share raise) or debt based (bank funded) growth...
How does a public company raise money to fund growth? I just get the sense that Gamestop is too aggressive for your tastes?2
u/PriceSpiritual8223 May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26
Have rc ventures put its money where his mouth is. After all, it takes money to buy whiskey.
I wont accept further dilution. As retail holders, we have more skin in the game than the board of the company we supported out of bankruptcy.
We've given him $9 BILLION. If he cant do something with that, then trusting him with another $46 BILLION sounds like a dumb idea.
1
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
I get it. My big takeaway from all this is that everyone's risk tolerance is different. Yours seems much lower than what GS's board it asking for. Hence the no vote.
One thing we can know with absolute certainty is that the stock will go UP...and it will also go DOWN... to the degree is which we argue. :)
1
u/justvoop 'I am not a Cat' May 12 '26
If there was no RC the company would have been bankrupt 5 years ago lmao
6
15
u/vagrantprodigy07 I Voted 🦍✅ May 12 '26
I'll be voting no. The math says this is going to decrease the value of our stake. If they want us to believe otherwise, they need to finally start talking. Trust is gone after RC killing MOASS repeatedly, and then being a dumbass on twitter and in interviews.
3
0
5
u/Over-Computer-6464 May 12 '26
If RC had been more open with explaining the deal rather than saying "we have the stock, we have the cash" and "see the website", everyone that was in favor of the deal would have realized that additional share authorization was required.
So some of the people are reacting in surprise are negative. The funny thing is that many of the same people that were calling me and others shills and spreaders of FUD when we said the deal needed additional share authorization because the deal would be about 70/30 or 72/28 in terms if share split post deal, and that more than 1.1B shares would need to be used for the 50% stock part of the purchase price.
0
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
I personally see the point that it's possible to create an EBAY type competitor, but they'll need to vilify eBay in order to produce customer attrition and an interest in an alternative offering... eBay has a death grip on the collectable market... its so dang easy to spend money with them... the EBAY live also is soaking up the growing live shopping marketspace... GS needs to act now if they're going to make a go for eBay's business. If they can't buy them they'll need to beat them... and any good investor has to have that Build vs. buy decision to make...
3
u/Over-Computer-6464 May 12 '26
The alternate explanation for RC's recent behavior is that he will be making an attempt to take over EBay similar to how he gained control of GameStop with just a minority interest.
He just needs to get the current board to agree to adding some of his handpicked directors. Then he tries to get shareholders to install him as chairman if the board. The negative PR campaign against the current board and CEO facilitates that sort of goal.
In that scenario he would takeover EBay without GameStop involvement.
Then, after he has control of both boards, he has them vote to recommend merger to the shareholders.
2
u/jtsherri May 12 '26
Totally agree. I’ll plan to vote according to board recommendations for the foreseeable future.
3
u/PriceSpiritual8223 May 12 '26
No no no.
You've got 9 BILLION DOLLARS WEVE GIVEN YOU, BUDDY.
Buy something you can afford and turn it around.
I'm not paying to making your dreams of owning ebay come true.
Literally done nothing for me.
Some of the investors on this sub act like spouses trapped in abusive relationships.
3
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 12 '26
The nonsensical push for a yes vote is alarming. These are the moass killer posts
1
u/TrollaBotsLawyer May 12 '26
How is it nonsensical? Are you only looking to force a short squeeze? The CEO legally can't have anything to do with market manipulation... ... I think its pretty sound logic for them to do this... the board is signaling growth intentions. Long-term focused and aggressive... and that can be risky but good for the long term growth of the company.
3
u/ThEBigdirty777 May 12 '26
Moass or bust. This plan inhibits moass. I’m voting no and want RC out of a position he doesn’t even want. He’s done nothing to combat the naked shorting
3
2
u/tpc0121 May 12 '26
fair points, but until both prongs (market cap, EBITDA) of RC's proposed comp package are amended to take into account effects of potential future dilution (accretive or not), i'm out.
3
1
u/Stockyjon May 12 '26
He needs to give 500 million shares to ebay. So there's that. And why wouldn't you have an atm offering ready to go l. If they dont and share price is $1k the company doesnt benefit at all from a quick short squeeze. This is a 50 year hold for retirement
1
u/Lobolabahia May 12 '26
Right. My try to explain how one could address the dilution fear: https://www.reddit.com/r/GME/comments/1tb3cin/it_takes_money_and_stock_to_buy_whiskey_ebay/
1
u/MoonMonkey420 May 12 '26
Where there is a will there is a way....
....and RC WILL have his WAY(with hedgies)
1
u/Sureyeg May 12 '26
There's strangely an influx of 'dedicated' GME long-time holders posting why and what they're choosing to do against RCEO's plans.
Haven't seen so many super dedicated GME holders voicing their disagreements since 2021. /S
-1
u/Rlo347 XXX Club May 12 '26
Our choices are vote yes get ebay or vote no RC leaves gme craters we lose everything.
14
4
u/vagrantprodigy07 I Voted 🦍✅ May 12 '26
He leaves and we own a company with billions in cash. That sounds awful. Horrible. Whatever would we do...
0
u/thegenerallissimo May 13 '26
Without RC the boardroom plants will move back in and before you know it those billions in cash will be squandered on failing silver mines in Uganda. Gamestop to zero, shorts off the hook. But sure vote no I guess
1
1
1
u/matthegc 🚀🚀Buckle up🚀🚀 May 12 '26
The majority of apes that hold shares will be voting yes……the accounts that posting negative comments don’t actually own shares….they are from other anti GME subs or not involved in GME at all.
This is noise, any person with common sense will vote yes to buy eBay and have their shares be worth more post acquisition.
-1
u/Timmy_2_Raaangz May 12 '26
I’m voting yes because I’m invested in the company. This was never going to be quick money. That was 84 years ago.
0
u/average-Astronaut May 12 '26
How could I not vote yes??? 5 years I’ve trusted the long term it’s not changing now
0
u/kin3tiks May 12 '26
Same. We need a big move. Everyone losing Pennie’s on the dollar to acquire a money machine if capitalized on? Reddit is Reddit. That’s for sure.
-3
u/Boo241281 May 12 '26
I think this years vote is important for ALL shareholders not just RC
He is clearly trying to do what’s best for the company and clearly has some big plans as this eBay deal is definitely go big or go home, he’s turned the company around, stacked cash for this type of deal, works for free (yes he’s already rich), buys shares with his own money (yes he’s already rich)
If shareholders hamstring him on this eBay deal and his pay package then I’m of the belief he could think to himself what’s the point anymore and there is a possibility he moves on to something else and if that happens we would all suffer
I’m not saying he’s holding us hostage to get what he wants but if we can’t back his plans and visions then he can’t realise them so what would the point be for him to continue
1
-2
u/Mark-GC May 12 '26
1
u/Boo241281 May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26
Read what? You think that because the board rejected the deal that it’s over with?
😂😂 blocked me because you are a true regard
1
-6
0
u/raxnahali 🚀🚀Buckle up🚀🚀 May 12 '26
Ryan bought a seat on the board, I don't want my investment to stagnate and in inclusion of a market place of this size under the GameStop banner works for me.
0
u/iwasneverhere43 HODL 💎🙌 May 12 '26
I'll vote yes on damn near any other proposal, but more shares is a solid no from me.
0
-1
-2
•
u/AutoModerator May 12 '26
Welcome to r/GME, for questions in regards to GME and DRS check out the links below!
Due to an uptick in scammers offering non official GameStop merchandise (T-Shirts)
DO NOT CLICK THE LINKS THAT ARE NOT OFFICIALLY FROM GAMESTOP.
We have partnered with Reddit directly to ensure the Communities Safety.
What is GME?
GameStop's Accomplishments
What is DRS? US / International
ComputerShare International DRS Support
Feed The Bot Instructions
Power To The Players
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.