Oh, my goodness, cnbc are on the rampage just a few weeks ago. They were part of mainstream media, now they're dedicating a whole hour to this whole amc gamestop issue, and it seems that they're taking this seriously now whether that happened because of the slip up that melissa lee had with the naked shorts or it's a natural movement of Changing narrative, i don't care, the thing is that it is changing, and now we have a whole hour dedicated by one of the largest providers of mainstream media, talking about this in an objective, fair manner. Now, if you don't agree with what i say, if you still want to see them as enemies and just ignore whatever they do, just because they're mainstream media, fine you're free to do it, but i call it like i see it. What i saw yesterday was really fair.

Now, i'm not going to replay trey's interview and ma interview, i mean that's kind of been done. I do want to address a few points from dave lauer's interview now. Dave lauer is a former city little trader and he had a lot of interesting insights both on the super stone channel and this interview, and i want to address it. Also, i'm going to show you a few things that west christian said which are critical to this whole thing.

So stick around with me: don't click, nothing, don't smash, nothing don't buy. Nothing. Just give me your attention and i'm going to show you a really cool thing. Let's bring in dave lauer he's a former high frequency trader at citadel.

He is now ceo of irvin ai. Why why a raw deal? What about the deal is raw half of all trading, taking place off of exchange and up 70 or more in stocks like gamestop and amc, i think, is a real problem and it's costing everyone uh money. It's costing the retail investors money who are trading through their brokers and who's, all of whom orders are being sent to people like citadel and virtue. But it's costing pension plans and mutual funds money because they're the ones trading off of the exchange quote.

And if that quote is wider because of all this off exchange trading taking place and by some estimates, 25 or more, is how much wider the spread is than if all of those retail orders were to make it to the exchange. So if they're trading against a wider spread, that's 25 percent too wide or artificially widened, that's costing pension plans money. That's costing mutual fund companies money, that's where everyone that's where retail truly has all of its wealth, and i think that's a big problem. I really like what dave lauer did with this question, because he took a topic: that's perceived to be super niche and really related only to wall street beds, gamestop and the ape movement, and he made it into your problem.

Even if you're not part of that movement. Essentially, what he told you hey guys, this practice causes price discrepancy. People who trade off these platforms actually get better prices than you, and just so you know your money, your pension money. All of your money is in funds that actually gets screwed by these practices.

So you should care about it, not just us. I think it's a really good point that he made here and the other point that he made here is that what it actually does for the market is not clear. Why should you have a dark pool? Why should you be able to trade off exchange? What does it actually do for the market? Nothing good. The only thing it creates is informational gaps.

It does not make the market more efficient in any way shape or form. I think really great answer by dave here. So they're getting a raw deal because they have to pay more under this current antiquated system that was built by incumbents, you say: yeah, that's right and and when you have uh the internalizers in a de facto duopoly, you have also you other. You have other issues around corporate concentration of power and antitrust and and gary gensler has said exactly that.

70 of gamestop is trading through citadel and virtue and they're also making markets on exchange and they're the the designated market maker on the nazi, for example, they have a huge information advantage and, and that kind of information advantage means that they have a lot of power To set the price of that stock since you worked at citadel and you have comments about what you call this duopoly running off, exchange trading of virtue and citadel, do you think that they use what they see in terms of order flow to their advantage? That seems like a dangerous question to answer um, and so i i i would never say you know, i would never accuse anybody specifically of um, manipulating markets or anything like that um. But i i think that, having that kind of information is sub-optimal for markets having that concentration of information is not what where we want to be, i really want to give you the play-by-play here, because it's not what it seems like it seems like she asked a Question and then he avoided, he didn't answer it directly, but what happened here is actually something very different. Melissa lee asked this question. Knowing dave lauer would not be able to answer completely, otherwise, obviously he's going to get sued, he doesn't want to get sued by citadel.

Naturally, so what she did here is something very interesting. She asked the question just to make a point of it being asked to air the question. She knew he's not going to be answering and she knew that she's never gon na get a straight answer out of him, but she did it to put it out there and that's how you put light on the problem. Obviously, she's not gon na get sued she's a reporter asking a question: that's within the realm of what she can do.

He can't answer, but the question was asked and the answer makes it quite clear what he thinks and what she thinks now. I think she deserves a lot of credit for asking that, because definitely it means she's doing her job and putting these things out there for the sunlight to take care of them. Now, if you don't appreciate me giving credit to cnbc and melissa lee in this case, well, it's your problem, not mine, i'm gon na do what i believe in i'm gon na call it like. I see it good job melissa.

What retail traders can do right now like is there? Are there any actionable insights that they can take away from this discussion other than the idea that, yes, they are disadvantaged, but is there anything they can do to better position themselves? Given the present circumstances, i i think so um and i think that they can take a good, long, hard look at their broker and how does their broker handle their orders? I think this question dave lauer watched a little bit, but again it's not his expertise. That's not the guy to ask. You should have wes christian there and ask him because he would have given you another answer. How do i know this because he already did check it out.

It's a great question: they have rights to file a class action and it comes in many forms uh. Could they file a class action against the brokers? Yes, uh? Could they file a class x against the company for not taking action against the brokers? Yes, if, if a company has actual knowledge of fraud, that's being perpetrated against that company and takes no action, it is an absolute breach of fiduciary duty. So that's number one number two. So that's a cause of action against the company for doing nothing.

That would be omission. Number two: you could sue the brokers as a class for the commission of doing it. Okay, uh, the the harrington case we filed in the southern district of new york is a large shareholder against the brokers. Okay, uh.

The very thing i'm speaking of or alternatively, i talked about it last time if it depends on whether it's a direct or derivative cause of action, uh, a derivative action means you put the corporation on notice. Listen. This has happened to us to the company you've taken. No action, i'm telling you i've been damaged by this other shareholders have been damaged.

You need to bring an action against them or we're going to bring that action. Most state laws will allow you to bring a derivative action depending upon the nature of the claim, and if the company doesn't bring it, you bring it in their name. So there is a vehicle by which shareholders can force the company. In some cases, it's a case-by-case analysis to take action on on your behalf and the other shareholders.

Back and again, i want to give you the play-by-play here, because it gets a little bit tricky with all the legal mumbo jumbo. Essentially, if you're part of this there's a lot, you can do. Obviously, the one thing that nobody talks about is that mc gamestop and all of these shorter companies - if they know that there's monkey business going on, they can sue these guys. They can sue them directly.

This is insane nobody's talking about this. The other thing is that you can actually form a class. Do a class action, lawsuit class action, lawyers, don't work on actual fees, they work off percentages from backhand, so nobody's gon na spend a dime on this. The other thing - and the most important here is derivative suits derivative suits, are one of my favorites and very little known derivative suits is when a guy who's, just a shareholder of a company, a minority shareholder, can force a company to sue on the company's behalf.

Even if the board of directors and the management does not want to do so, if it's in the best interest of the company, so even though the company does not want to do it, you as a small shareholder, can make them do it and they'll pay for That derivative lawsuits are amazing and they're paying in the ass for the people who running the companies. However, that's a little known thing that can really make a difference if all of the ape movement, the games of movement, bands together and files, a lawsuit to mandate the company to force the company to sue these guys who are manipulating the market they'll have to do It because it's obviously in the best interest of the company, so there's a lot here that can be done on the legal side, besides just short squeezing these guys that we need to be talking about. Obviously the short squeeze is an effective tool to battle these guys, but there's a lot of other tools that you can apply in addition to it to actually increase the pressure that we all need to be talking about, just listen to west christian. Would you submit that the playing field, in terms of where we were 10 years ago, to where we are we now in terms of the retail, has never been narrower? I think i mean i my sense is the playing field has never been flatter than it is now your comments notwithstanding yeah, if you're going to compare to um, you know early days of reg, nms or pre-nms uh, there's no doubt that the electronification of markets has Been an incredible uh trend for everybody, you both the the institutional asset managers holding money.

You know holding the wealth of retail as well as individual retail investors. I i would never deny such a thing, but i think, if you're looking to assign uh reasons for that um, it's hard to say that you know off exchange. The increase of off exchange trading is helping, or it's hard to say that the the practice of internalization is helping relative to something like decimalization uh, which dramatically brought down costs for people without all of this complexity that we've then introduced. I think they've handled this really well.

It was a straw man question. Essentially, nobody claimed that things are worse now than they were 10 or 20 years ago. We're claiming that things today are not good enough. There's no good reason there's nothing that benefits the market as a whole by having these dark pools.

So i hope you enjoyed this. This was just my two cents again, my own opinion might be inaccurate, might be wrong, might be the ramblings of mad men. You have to do your own research, allegedly blah blah blah a huge shout out to our channel members to our patrons for making this possible. You guys are amazing if you want to participate in a 30-day 30 stocks against inflation project on our patreon page and channel members.

Section go right ahead. It's five bucks per month. You can check it out, join it and leave once you get the 30 companies, but you'll also be supporting the channel. So why not? Thank you, everybody we'll see you in the next video.

So what can you do? You can continue to grow? You can continue to speak out. You can continue to try to co-invest with each other in some legal way to where you can become a bigger bully than they are for god's sake, so who i, as they say you, men and women, who are doing that. I'm sick of this crap and i'm gon na stop it. Okay,.