Wrestleknownothing

Inquiring minds want to know. To find the answer check out my post on the Illini and Illini RTC Fans page No need to answer the question @ILLINIWrestlingBlog, I already know your answer.

Now that they are legal in the US, how do you feel about prediction markets? Kalshi, Polymarket, PredictIt all offer prediction markets on the presidential election. Heading into voting all of them had Trump at mid to upper 50% to win. No polls saw the race the same way. Are you more, less, or just as likely to use prediction markets based on the better accuracy than polls?

It is with great honor and humility that I accept this invitation to the Illini and Illini RTC Fans page. As an Illinois resident and father of a Illini who never fought, I feel it is my duty to show up to the club bearing presents. Using the most recent rankings available from Intermat and Wrestlestat lets take a look at The Illini by the numbers. First, what does Intermat have against our Illini? Other than the too formal Zach, Wrestlestat favors the Illini in 4 of the 10 weights and by 2.6 expected points overall. The negative biggest delta is Edmond Ruth, where Intermat does not want to put due respect on that name. On the flip side, Intermat is not penalizing Lucas Byrd nearly as much as the Wrestlestat algo appears to for taking a redshirt. Trend But at least the trend is your friend. With the exception of Attasauov, Intermat has remained the same or upgraded the rankings of the Illini. Is Illinois Better Than Penn State? Before you answer that question take a look at the distribution of AA probabilities for the Illini from 0 to 10 based on current Wrestlestat rankings. Now glance all the way over to the furthest right column, the one that says 10. Now squint. If you squint hard enough you will see that the probability of 10 AAs is a positive, non-zero number. I point this out because the PSU graph has a big fat zero in that column. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

I nominate you to start the dumb takes thread.

That is not what you said. That is not what I responded to.

Except that was precisely Trump's message this campaign.

The cost of borrow on DJT is 62% right now. If you can hide that from anyone, you are doing much better than me.

Clearly

Shorting meme stocks is for someone far more foolish than I. And I am plenty foolish.

And I almost forgot. I mentioned this one a few months back. There is also the bribe conduit potential. What is to stop Israel, or Saudi Arabia, or Russia from buying up ad time on Truth Social? Come visit sunny Moscow the visitor's bureau says. Watch the fireworks while floating in the Dead Sea. Take a segue tour of Riyadh. You don't even need to sign up new users to make this one work.

DJT (52.9% owned by the other DJT) reported Q3 earnings yesterday. It lost $19.2 million on $1 million of revenue. That revenue is down 6% year over year. Somehow the social media outlet owned by the most prolific presidential candidate to ever use social media only sold $1 million worth of ads in the quarter (makes you wonder how the Chinese Bible business, NFT, watch, and others are going). It doesn't matter, of course, the stock is up 5% as I write. What makes DJT a $7 billion dollar company? I don't think it is the $1 million of revenue. And it certainly is not the $19 million of loses. It is obviously a meme stock. So, there is that. But also it should presumably be able to sell more ads in the next four years, too. If Trump is using it as president, don't they have to sign up more users and be able to sell more ads as a result? You can also make a case that it exists to curry favor. Maybe someone offers to monetize Trumps holdings by buying the company for $8 or $10 billion, or whatever. Or maybe someone not quite as rich buys a percent or two so they can say, "Hey, me and you Mr. President. Oh, and I have this other thing I need to talk to you about". And maybe a bunch of rich, but not dynastically rich, people follow suit pushing the stock even higher. Or maybe DJT should merge with Twitter. The Twitter transaction, in a vacuum, has not worked well for Musk. But part of that is it is no longer publicly traded. Taking Twitter private misses out on the greatest source of Musk's wealth, the ability to meme the hell out of his stock. Look at Tesla today. It is up 15% as I type. That is not based on the fundamentals. Nothing about Tesla has changed today. As a publicly traded company it would not matter what Musk paid for Twitter, because he can always sell more overpriced stock to a willing public. By merging with DJT they can take this to the moon, and not need SpaceX to do it.

I did not see a single outlet say Harris would win by a landslide. Every single media outlet I saw said it was too close to call. Which also turned out to be wrong. But that is bad data from bad polling. Not even Fox claimed Trump would win. They only made the case for him winning.

One does not mean the other

Robinhood had to freeze purchases because they did not have enough capital to post collateral with the clearing corp. That lasted 2 days during which Robinhood hit its all time high. AFTER the restriction on purchases through Robinhood was lifted the stock lost 83.5% in four days.

What false news articles?

Good question. When there are 25 events is it OK to say 100 years? I guess, but it still bothers a nerd like me. Grover Cleveland. And as long as we are talking about precision, it has been 132 years.

If anything Gamestop is an example of what happens when short selling is not present

While you tell a tidy story, that is all it is. A story to explain why an investment did not turn out the way you thought. It could be that you are just wrong. It could be that you are fooling yourself about your skill. You are proposing a radical solution to an anecdotal problem and ignoring the public benefit of short selling.

I didn't mean to shoot you, just the message.

I always find comments like "first time in 20 years" silly when an event only occurs every four years. It is playing a little fast and loose.

As long as they cannot / will not enforce the current rules, then this one needs to be on the table.

Where is there rampant market manipulation?

Banning short selling is an insanely bad idea.