Top Tweets for #MMTLPshareCount

You are getting a little repetitive now (still in denial, I get it!). This isn’t misdirection my Libertarian friend, it’s market structure 101. So here is my final attempt: You’re STILL describing the transfer agent’s ledger, which tracks legal shares. I explained THAT has nothing to do with the economic exposure created in modern markets. so let’s go point by point: You: “Transfer agents reconcile the share count each day” YA WE KNOW! Correct, but irrelevant! Transfer agents reconcile: 1. issued shares 2. registered holders 3. book-entry movements They do not reconcile: •internalized trades •dark-pool matches •swap-based exposure •CFDs •ex-clearing fails •CNS netted obligations •option-market-maker synthetic longs •rehypothecation chains NONE of that EVER touches the TA. Even the SEC and FINRA explicitly state the TA sees ONLY the legal float, not economic activity. YOU: “There can be no unreconciled imbalances” This is factually FALSE. What kind of bubble do you live in? Regulators themselves acknowledge: •Fails do persist (Reg SHO)! •Rolling FTDs are allowed! •Synthetic long/short offsets exist! •Internalization prevents reconciliation across venues! •Dark pools do NOT update the lit order book! •CNS nets positions without share delivery! If imbalances were impossible, we WOULD NOT have: •Threshold lists •Buy-ins •Special settlements •400% short interest events (you know the stocks) •Multi-year FTDs •Large-scale share recalls The historical record contradicts your claim. YOU: “Synthetic shares that don’t touch the primary market can’t affect price” Here’s the news flash that… my Libertarian friend is Economically impossible! This shows your misunderstanding of price discovery mechanics. Off-exchange trading ABSOLUTELY affects price because: 1. internalizers peg fills to NBBO (say what?) 2. dark pools use midpoint pricing (oh snap!) 3. ATS executions contribute to benchmark prices (holly freak!!) 4. derivatives bleed into spot via hedging (oh oh!) 5. arbitrage normalizes prices between venues (no, no, no!) 6. ETF market-making links basket components (yours bids at VIRTU, CITADEL etc) 7. futures and swaps push the underlying (those SoBs!) You’re quoting the transfer agent handbook. I’m quoting the SEC. This isn’t theory, look at the SEC 2022 Market Structure Report (link https://t.co/0Di8kx40NM) : The market-structure analysis makes one thing crystal clear: When trading migrates off-exchange, the SEC directly states that off-exchange volume “may affect price discovery and the quality of market prices.” Their words, not mine. So let’s be adults: Transfer agents reconcile legal shares. Price discovery happens in the market, not in the registrar’s spreadsheet. If you still think off-exchange activity has “no impact” on price… take it up with the SEC, because your argument isn’t with me. It’s with the regulator you’re pretending to defend. YOU: “People like you never have tangible data.” Then YOU my Libertarian friend, simply haven’t looked. The data is public: •FINRA ATS volume reports •Reg SHO FTD data •Blue sheet data •TRACE-equity pilot •OCC delta-hedging impact •NSCC CNS mechanics •SEC dark-pool transparency filings •Academic microstructure studies •FINRA 2024 dark-pool transparency initiative •SEC 2022 Market Structure Report •DTCC SFT rule filings •OATS / CAT reporting data These sources OPENLY acknowledge: •synthetic exposure •non-delivery risk •cross-venue fragmentation •off-exchange price impact •rehypothecation feedback loops This is not fringe. It is documented, regulated, and studied. A humble suggestion to all, STOP describing legal share issuance. START understanding and describing market microstructure. They are not the same system, and that’s exactly the point MMTLP exposed verifiably acknowledging the need for #Bitcoin IMHO.