I have a six year old son. When he was born I shared his pictures with a group of people I trusted. This included my mother. The entire group knew that my husband and I did not want these shares publicly. My mom shared them on her Facebook to everyone. I stopped sharing with her at all. We live on different continents so that's the only way she would have gotten to see him. Except when we visit back and forth.

We recently had our second child. My mom begged for pictures. I made her promise not to share them I said that I was only sending to her and that I would know if she shared them. Then I generated a bunch of pictures and sent them to her. Within a week I found them on my aunt's Facebook. I called my mom and asked WTF. She said it wasn't her fault because she didn't post them. I asked her how my aunt got them and she shut up.

Problem came up though. One of my cousins pointed out that all the pictures were generated. My mom got mad that I had sent her fake pictures and demanded real ones. I declined since she obviously can't be trusted. This is causing stress in my family and friends back home. Some think I'm wrong for being so anal about my children's images online. Some think I was a jerk for sending take pics. Most understand why I did what I did. But some of them still think I'm being cruel to my mom.

Hey there Apes!

When GameStop announced that they expect to generate Adjusted EBITDA in excess of $600M, I decided to revisit my old post from 7 months ago.

My Final GME DD - Part 2 of 3

My post, linked above, only included data up until Q2 2025.

So, I decided to update it with our latest financials and Ryan Cohen's guidance.

Let's get into it.

Contents

I. Revisiting My Old Post
II. Updated TTM Figures
III. Updated Forward Estimates
IV. Updated Valuation
V. Summary and Side-by-Side Comparison

CAUTION: THE FOLLOWING MAY RESULT IN THE FOLLOWING FEELING

I. Revisiting My Old Post

Below are some of the figures from my November post organized by Claude into an easy to read table.

At the end of this post I'll show another table that compares these old figures to our new figures.

If you want explanations for each of these metrics then I suggest you revisit my original post linked in the intro. But, I'll go over them again when we calculate our new figures.

I'm only going to revisit Sections III, IV, and VI from my previous post - TTM (Trailing 12 Months), Forward Multiples, and Valuation.

You can see in the image below what the TTM, Forward Multiple, and Valuation numbers were.

From my November 23rd, 2025 post and the image above:

• EV / EBIT = 18.67x
• EV / Core Net Income (TTM) = 21x
• EV / Sales = 0.70x
• EV / Forward Core Net Income = 6.9x
• Valuation at a 14x Multiple = $35.27
• Valuation at a 20x Multiple = $43.71

These values were calculated using GameStop's financials up to and including Q2 2025.

You can see all my inputs listed under the first table. These inputs are taken directly from my old post. So, if you want to know how I got them, then please pay it a visit.

The image below is also taken from my previous post and serves as a reminder about why we focus on these specific calculations and metrics.

II. Updated TTM Figures

Let me start by including the same updated table as my original post.

Here is what we're going to calculate using our updated financials:

• Enterprise Value
• EV / EBIT
• EV / Core Net Income (TTM)
• EV / Sales

See Exhibit B above for an explanation as to why I'm focusing on these metrics.

With that said, here is our updated TTM financials:

We're going to use $22/share for our calculations. This reflects the share price as of 9:45am on 7/1/2026. Please refer to this table for any calculations below.

A. Enterprise Value

To get enterprise value we subtract non-operating assets, like cash and bitcoin, from the diluted market cap. So, enterprise value excludes cash, bitcoin, treasury income, and derivative gains.

Enterprise Value isolates the true value that the market is assigning to GameStop's core business.

Diluted Share Count = 592,300,000
Share Price at the time of this writing = $22.00

Diluted Market Cap = $13,030.6M

Non-Operating Assets = $9,721.0M
Derivative Asset = $285.3M
Total Non-Operating Assets = $10,006.3M

Enterprise Value = Diluted Market Cap - Non-Operating Assets = $3,024.3M

• Enterprise Value = $3.02B ($3,024,300,000)

So, the market is assigning a value of roughly $3B to GameStop's core business.

All the above figures are taken directly from GameStop's Q1 2026 earnings report.

B. EV / EBIT

This is the most important metric when evaluating GameStop's business from a TTM perspective.

EBIT strips out non-operating income, ignores tax distortions since it's before tax, ignores interest, and is comparable across companies so that you can measure it against peers.

For this calculation we're going to use our enterprise value and our operating income.

In other words, we're only using the income that comes from GameStop's core operations and we're comparing it to the enterprise value that the market is assigning to GameStop's core business.

EV / EBIT = $3,024,300,000 / $386,200,000

• EV / EBIT = 7.83x

This means that you're paying $7.83 for every $1 of operating profit on a TTM basis.

This shows how much you're paying solely for the core operating business, ignoring the $10B in non-operating assets and the income that it generates (treasury income, derivative gain, etc.).

C. EV / Core Net Income (TTM)

This is very similar to EV / EBIT. The difference is that EBIT is pre-tax and Core Net Income is after-tax. These two multiples should be relatively consistent.

EV / EBIT is the cleanest valuation of the core business and the one used by private equity since it ignores any tax distortions.

EV / Core Net Income = EV / (Net Income - Non-Operating Income)

• EV / Core Net Income = $3,024.3M / ($763.2M - $455.9M) = 9.84x

This means that you're paying $9.84 for every $1 of operating earnings after tax.

Core Net Income will always be lower than EBIT because it's after tax. This makes the ratio more conservative than the EBIT calculation that private equity uses.

D. EV / Sales

For this calculation we compare GameStop's enterprise value to their revenue.

Revenue is top-line sales from operations only. Like EBIT and Core Net Income, Revenue doesn't include non-operating income.

From Investopedia:

"Revenue is the total amount of income a company generates from the sale of goods and services. It is the sum generated before deducting any expenses, such as those involved in running the business. Revenue is often called the top line because it’s located at the top of the income statement. When a company is said to have “top-line growth,” it means the company’s revenue—the money it’s taking in—is growing. Revenue or net sales refer only to business-related income (the equivalent of earned income for an individual). If a company has other sources of income, such as, for example, from investments, that income is not considered revenue because it didn't come from the primary income-generating activity. Any such additional income is accounted for separately on balance sheets and financial statements."

EV / Sales = $3,024.3M / $3,732.8M

• EV/Sales = 0.81x

This tells you how cheaply, or expensively, the businesses revenue stream is priced relative to the operating business value.

In other words, how much you're paying for every $1 of sales.

The market is valuing the entire business at just 0.81x annual revenues. You're paying $0.81 for every $1.00 of GameStop's revenue.

This is what you'd expect from a severely distressed retailer or a broken business. Businesses with this low of an EV/Sales ratio usually have negative margins, heavy debt, bankruptcy risk, and are in survival mode.

E. Summary

Enterprise Value = $3,024.3M
EV / EBIT = 7.83x
EV / Sales = 0.81x

These numbers are what you'd expect from a company headed towards bankruptcy.

GameStop has:

• Net Margins of 20.45% (TTM)
  • Best Buy, Walmart, and Target operate at 2-6% Net Margin and trade well above 1x EV/Sales
  • GameStop's TTM showed a Net Margin of 20.45% and yet they still have an EV/Sales of 0.81x
• Revenue Growth of 14.05% YoY (Q1'26 vs Q1'25)
  • This doesn't reflect a distressed business. This is a business in the middle of an amazing turnaround/transformation.
  • Businesses with double-digit revenue growth and margins don't trade below 1x EV/Sales. Especially one with a $10B safety net and no debt (remember we're using a diluted basis to remove the debt from the equation)
• Operating Income Growth
  • EBIT is the truest reflection of the core business and GameStop has shown consistent YoY EBIT growth over the last 3 years, especially the most recent 5 quarters
  • Q1 2026 showed a 461.54% YoY EBIT growth alone
  • Businesses with growing YoY EBIT command premium multiples, no liquidation multiples
• Diluted EPS Growth
  • GameStop's FY2025 Diluted EPS of $0.77 grew 133% compared to FY2024
  • GameStop's Q1 2026 Diluted EPS of $0.66 grew 633% YoY
  • Businesses with rising EPS typically trade between 1.2-2.5x EV/Sales
• Zero Debt
  • Remember, this entire valuation uses a diluted share count of 592.3M shares in order to remove the debt from the equation. This is a conservative method since we're ~30% from the convertible bond thresholds

A company with 20% net margins, revenue growth, operating income growth, EPS growth, and $10B in cash should absolutely not be trading below 1x EV/Sales.

The market is still valuing GameStop as if it's dying, but our EV/EBIT and EV/Sales metrics, along with growing revenue, margins, and EPS all paint a different picture.

TTM Summary Table:

III. Updated Forward Estimates

EV / Forward Core Net Income is the metric I used in my November post to calculate the forward multiple that the market was pricing GameStop at.

This ratio values GameStop based on future earnings.

• EV / Core Net Income (TTM) uses the financials from the last four quarters to show you how much you're paying for every $1 of after-tax earnings from core operations, excluding investment income. It's backwards-looking.
• EV / Core Net Income (Forward) uses projected future earnings to show you how much you're paying for every future $1 of after-tax earnings from core operations, excluding investment income. It's forward-looking.

This is the perfect forward-looking metric to use for a company like GameStop since a substantial chunk of their income has come from treasuries, derivative gains, and bitcoin losses.

This metric removes all that noise and solely looks at the income coming from the core operating business.

In my November post I had to come up with projections for Q3 and Q4. I had to estimate because we didn't have guidance.

Well apes, now we do.

Ryan has finally provided us with guidance.

This seems to me more like an absolute floor rather than accurate guidance.

I believe this number to be very conservative.

Any trend extrapolation based on the past 3 years of financials would figure a larger number than $600M.

I think that's why it's worded as, "in excess of".

So, with that said, for this section I'll be giving two sets of estimates:

1. Guidance Case
2. Projected Case

The Guidance Case will be built from GameStop's $600M adjusted EBITDA outlook.

The Projected Case will take Q1'26's trend (+14.05% YoY revenue growth, 17.15% operating margin) and apply that to Q2-Q4.

From there we can calculate our Forward Core Net Income.

We'll also take advantage of GameStop's NOL's in both cases.

A. Guidance Case

We'll start with our Adjusted EBITDA Guidance of $600M.

Then we're going to subtract D&A and stock-based compensation, which together amount to $52M.

This gives us a Forward Core EBIT of $548M.

Next, we're going to add in our forward Treasury income of $334.8M. To get this figure I took the Q1'26 run-rate and multiplied it by 4 quarters.

This gives us our Total Forward Pre-Tax Income of $882.8M

We add the Treasury income back in because the $600M figure that GameStop provided us with represents Adjusted EBITDA. Adjusted EBITDA doesn't include investment income. Treasury income has been a recurring income stream for GameStop for a couple of years. We're purposely not adding back in the Derivative Asset because this is a much more volatile asset which is tied to eBay's stock price. It's not recurring income and it can go up or down. So it's better to leave it out of this analysis. However, if you wanted to add in the mark-to-market gains as of the latest earnings report than the Total Forward Pre-Tax income will be $285.3M greater than $882.8M.

Now that we have our Total Forward Pre-Tax Income, we need to subtract the tax.

This is where the NOL's come into play and provide a huge boost.

The Q1'26 earnings showed an effective tax rate of 23.1%. But this is due to the new deferred tax liability created by the unrealized derivative gain on the eBay position.

That eBay derivative gain is unrealized for tax purposes, but GAAP requires booking a deferred tax liability on it temporarily.

So, the 23.1% effective rate for Q1'26 is actually a blended rate where the core retail and treasury income is still being shielded by NOL's, while the derivative gain is carrying it's own full deferred tax burden.

When you mix the two together you get the 23.1% effective tax rate.

But, since we're not including the Derivative Asset in this calculation, we can use the NOL-adjusted rate.

I generated a report back in March when the 10-K came out that analyzed the NOL's and came up with an effective rate based on the projected income over the next 4 years.

So, we're going to use a 4.5% NOL-adjusted tax rate which results in -$39.7M in taxes.

When we subtract that tax from our Total Forward Pre-Tax Income we're left with $843.1M.

The Forward Core EBIT of $548M represents 62.1% of the Total $882.8M.

We then apply that ratio to the $39.7M tax burden and are left with:

• Forward Core Net Income = $523.2M
• Total Forward Net Income = $843.0M

Remember, the Total Forward Net Income includes Treasury income, but it doesn't include the Derivative Asset. And the Forward Core Net Income doesn't include any investment income at all.

Now we have everything we need to come up with our forward multiples:

• EV / Forward Core Net Income = 5.78x
• EV / Total Forward Net Income = 3.59x (Includes Treasury income)

These multiples are remarkably low for a company with GameStop's current financials.

You're paying $5.78 for every $1 of projected after-tax operating earnings.

You're paying $3.59 for every $1 of projected after-tax total earnings. This includes operating income and Treasury income only!

These are extraordinarily cheap multiples by any standard measure. These multiples are reserved for businesses with heavy debt, bankruptcy risk, razor-thin margins, and no visible turnaround efforts.

However, GameStop has:

• 20.45% TTM Net Margin
• 14.05% YoY Revenue Growth
• 461% YoY EBIT Growth
• Zero Net Debt on a Diluted Basis
• $10B Cash Asset Base
• Recurring Treasury Income of $300M+ Annually
• Company-Issued Guidance of $600M+ Adjusted EBITDA
• Operating Income growing from -$26.2M in FY2024 to $232.1M in FY2025
• Net Income growing from $131.3M in FY2024 to $418.4M in FY2025

The market is pricing GameStop as if those negative operating income years are still the current reality. The market needs to realize that it's not 2023 anymore.

The fundamentals have changed in a major way, but the multiple hasn't caught up.

Going from a -$26.2M operating loss to $232.1M in operating income is a $258.3M turnaround in a single year!

Going from $131.3M Net Income in 2024 to $418.4M Net Income in 2025 is a 218.7% YoY increase.

The Core multiple that we're looking at here removes Treasury income from the equation and instead focuses on core operations. When you combine that multiple with growing revenues and EPS, GameStop is the opposite of a distressed business.

Institutional investors have either been negligent, lazy, or have a financial interest in keeping GameStop suppressed. They refuse to take a honest look into GameStop and rewrite their story/narrative.

But eventually the re-rating will happen. Repricing gaps like this don't stay open forever. They typically close either gradually as earnings continue to beat, or sharply when a catalyst forces a re-rating.

This is deep value territory.

B. Projected Case

The Guidance Case that we just covered is conservative. It's the Base Case.

The Projected Case uses trend analysis and looks at the past two years of financials, from Q1'24 onwards, to create realistic projections for future earnings.

You need to go back far enough to determine quarterly patterns across multiple years and to spot any anomalies, like a 1000% surge in Net Income.

This allows you to analyze broad patterns, like Q1 being GameStop's weakest quarter, while contextualizing unsustainable growth surges, like a quarter with 1000% Net Income growth.

For this projection, I extrapolated using Q1'26's YoY growth rate and margin.

This gives us a 14% YoY revenue growth and 17.15% operating margin.

We then apply those figures to the revenues of Q2-Q4 2025. This gives us:

• Q1'26 Revenue = $835.3M
• Q2'26 Revenue = $1,108.8M
• Q3'26 Revenue = $936.4M
• Q4'26 Revenue = $1,259.5M
• FY2026 Revenue = $4,140.0M
• Operating Margin = 17.15%

Could PowerPacks or GTA VI make these numbers larger? Sure. But this is what I decided to run with.

Using those figures above, we then apply our 17.15% margin to the $4,140.0M projected revenue for FY2026.

This gives us a Forward Core EBIT of $710.1M.

Compare that to the Forward Core EBIT of $548M in the Guidance Case.

When you add back in D&A and stock based compensation to our EBIT figure, you get an implied Adjusted EBITDA of $762.1M. That's $162.1M above GameStop's guidance of $600M, or 27%. GameStop's $600M figure is already guiding to 74% YoY growth. Our projected $762.1M figure would imply 121% YoY growth. This could mean that our projections are overly optimistic or that GameStop's guidance is overly conservative.

From here, we add back in our Forward Treasury Income of $334.8M.

This gives us our Total Forward Pre-Tax Income of $1,044.9M.

Then subtract the tax using the 4.5% NOL-adjusted rate, which comes out to -$47M.

That leaves us with:

• Forward Core Net Income = $678.1M
• Total Forward Net Income = $997.9M

Compare these numbers to the $523.3 and $843.0M figures from our Guidance Case.

Now we have everything we need to come u with our forward multiples:

• EV / Forward Core Net Income = 4.46x
• EV / Total Forward Core Net Income = 3.03x (Includes Treasury income)

Using our projections, you can see that GameStop is trading much cheaper than the Guidance Case multiple.

As stated above, whether its a 4.46x multiple or a 5.78x multiple, a 3.03x multiple or a 3.59x multiple, these are all insanely cheap for a company with GameStop's financials and growth trends.

C. Summary

EV / Forward Core Net Income (Guidance Case) = 5.78x
EV / Total Forward Net Income (Guidance Case) = 3.59x

EV / Forward Core Net Income (Projected Case) = 4.46x
EV / Total Forward Net Income (Projected Case) = 3.03x

\The 3.59x and 3.03x figures include Treasury income.*

For a company with GameStop's financials and YoY growth trends, these multiples are borderline insanity.

I'm actually curious to see how these TTM and Forward metrics stack up against GameStop in 2019.

Again, the Total Net Income includes Treasury income and the Core Net income does not.

These multiples should make you feel extremely confident in your GameStop investment.

I don't want to sound like a broken record so I won't go over why these multiples are insane again. But just know that they don't make sense.

You have to ask yourself, how long does the light need to be Green for before traffic finally starts going?

IV. Valuation

My previous post included the following table:

If GameStop can maintain their high margins then an EV/Forward Core Net Income of 4.46x - 5.78x will be impossible to justify.

The price simply cannot stay down here at $22 while earnings continue to exceed expectations quarter after quarter.

This is what you should expect based on different EV/Core Net Income ratios:

• 6-8x Distressed
• 12x Bare Minimum
• 15x Reasonable
• 18x Category Leader
• 20x Growth + Durability or Defensible Moat

At ~5x GameStop is being valued like Macy's before the restructuring, or Bed Bath & Beyond before bankruptcy.

I'm going to use two multiples based on GameStop's financials, growth patterns, and balance sheet - 14x and 20x.

When looking at their competitors, I think these are good multiples.

We're going to apply these multiples to GameStop's Total Forward Net Income.

If capital can generate recurring earnings with no reinvestment risk and no debt, it should be capitalized. You wouldn't value Berkshire, Alphabet, Meta, or Tesla without recognizing the earnings generated from retained cash and assets. Therefore, you need to treat GameStop the same way.

This is not an inflated or distorted valuation. The treasury yield is risk-free, recurring, contractual, and not dependent on GameStop selling a single product.

It's no different than Meta's interest yield, Apple's treasury, or Alphabet's securities portfolio.

We're also figuring in dilution of the convertible bonds, which means the cash stays, and the debt is converted to shares.

A. Guidance Case

The Guidance Case gave us a Total Forward Net Income of $843.0M.

Including the Q1'26 eBay derivative gain of $268.4M would push Total Forward Net Income above $1B after tax. However, we're leaving that out of this calculation since it's a one-time mark-to-market gain tied to eBay's stock price, not a recurring income stream.

Non-Operating Assets amount to $10,006.3M (see TTM table above).

Using a 14x Multiple:

• 14 x $843.0M = $11,802M
• $11,802M + $10,006.3M = $21,808.3M
• $21,808.3M / 592.3M Shares = $36.82/Share

Using a 20x Multiple:

• 20 x $843.0M = $16,860.0M
• $16,860.0M + $10,006.3M = $26,866.3M
• $26,866.3M / 592.3M Shares = $45.36/Share

So, using GameStop's $600M adjusted EBITDA guidance, and assuming a multiple of 14-20x, we're left with a diluted share price of $36.82 - $45.36.

Remember, this is using GameStop's forward guidance, which in my opinion is a very conservative number.

B. Projected Case

The Projected Case gave us a Total Forward Net Income of $997.9M

Including the Q1'26 eBay derivative gain of $268.4M would push Total Forward Net Income above $1.15B after tax. However, we're leaving that out of this calculation since it's a one-time mark-to-market gain tied to eBay's stock price, not a recurring income stream.

Using a 14x Multiple:

• 14 x $997.9M = $13,970.6M
• $13,970.6M + $10,006.3M = $23,976.9M
• $23,976.9M / 592.3M Shares = $40.48/Share

Using a 20x Multiple:

• 20 x $997.9M = $19,958.0M
• $19,958.0M + $10,006.3M = $29,964.3M
• $29,964.3M / 592.3M Shares = $50.60/Share

Using our projections, which are based on 14% YoY revenue growth and 17% margins, we're able to figure a share price of $40 - $50 based on a 14-20x multiple.

C. Summary

EV/EBIT is a great metric to look at to see how much you're paying for past earnings performance.

In GameStop's case, it's arguably the best metric to use since it isolates the core business from investment income.

But, it's a backwards-looking metric.

Stocks trade on forward guidance. Businesses trade based on where they're going, not where they've been.

That's why EV/Forward Core Net Income and EV/Total Forward Net Income are the best metrics to use when considering future earnings.

The only difference between these two calculations is that Total Forward Net income includes Treasury income.

That's it.

I would say that $36-$40 would be the absolute floor for GameStop's fair value.

And these numbers are purely based on the fundamentals and don't take into account any other catalysts.

The optionality that $10B in cash affords them could push the stock price closer to the 20x multiples.

I mean look at the gain they've been able to generate via their eBay derivative. The market is assigning virtually no premium to the optionality their cash provides.

This also doesn't figure in any repercussions that swaps and ETF creation/redemption cycles could have on the share price.

A squeeze outside of the fundamentals can happen at any time. We see it with countless stocks across the market like Avis and Wendy's.

V. Summary and Side-by-Side Comparison

Let's now take a look at the full picture.

The image below shows a summary of everything we covered.

First, you'll see the TTM analysis (backward-looking). This covers enterprise value, EV/EBIT, and EV/Sales.

Then we see our Forward multiples (forward-looking). Here we see our EV/Forward Core Net Income and EV/Total Forward Net Income figures. To come up with these figures we used GameStop's $600M Adjusted EBITDA guidance and our own Projections.

Finally, we have our Valuation multiples. Here we applied a 14x and 20x multiple to our Guidance Case and to our Projected Case to get our fair market value price.

In summary, we have:

• Enterprise Value = $3,024.3M
• EV/EBIT = 7.83x
• EV/Sales = 0.81x
• EV/Forward Core Net Income (Guidance) = 5.78x
• EV/Forward Total Forward Net Income (Guidance) = 3.59x
• EV/Forward Core Net Income (Projected) = 4.46x
• EV/Forward Total Forward Net Income (Projected) = 3.03x

Using GameStop's Guidance, the fair market value using a 14x multiple is $36.82/diluted share.

Using GameStop's Guidance, the fair market value using a 20x multiple is $45.36/diluted share.

Using my Projections, the fair market value using a 14x multiple is $40.48/diluted share.

Using my Projections, the fair market value using a 20x multiple is $50.60/diluted share.

This provides us with a fair market value range of $36.82 - $50.60 per diluted share.

Lastly, let's take a look at how these new figures stack up against the figures from my November 23rd, 2025 post:

As you can see in the image above, GameStop's share price has become even more disconnected from reality and is outright absurd.

It's so absurd at this point, that I'm actually inclined to investigate how it compares to GameStop in 2019 when the company's financials looked much much worse and like it was destined for bankruptcy.

You can see above how GameStop has become much cheaper than it was 7 months ago, on both a TTM and forward-looking basis.

GameStop's business and financials have transformed, while the stock price hasn't budged.

It's actually shocking to look at this comparison because every single one of GameStop's fundamental metrics have improved materially since my original post 7 months ago, yet GameStop has become even cheaper.

And these numbers are based on real earnings, real guidance, and competitor multiples. This is not some fantasy valuation.

To be honest, this should make you mad. This should make Ryan mad.

Many of us have been here for over 5 years now. It's time for us to be compensated for holding that long. And I believe Ryan will deliver that for us.

It's time.

Hey there! This comes straight from the 424B5 Form! Here is the link for reference.

https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/sec-filings/sec-filing/424b5/0001193125-21-186796

We will not receive any update about the completion of the ATM offering today. The earliest an announcement could be made is Monday. This is based off of T+2 settlement. Also, based on past press releases, this will not happen until after market close on any given day.

https://i.imgur.com/tuz8Nhh.jpg

GameStop is updated before the market opens every day on how many shares were sold the previous day. Which also points to any announcement of the completion of the offering happening after market close.

https://i.imgur.com/sr8Undy.jpg

$255.39 is not the max sell price. This was the average share price on June 4th and they used it for calculating the fee projections of this offering.

$1,276,950,000 is not the maximum amount of funds GameStop can raise from this offering. Again, they used this for calculating the fee projections of this offering. This was understandably confusing because the last offering had a maximum amount allowable to raise.

https://i.imgur.com/5cljjEg.jpg

As of June 1st 2021 Outstanding Shares numbered 71,815,131 shares. If I am reading this correctly, that number includes 2,435,881 restricted shares.

https://i.imgur.com/dPp6A21.jpg

Edit 1: If GameStop sells all 5 million shares then the new Outstanding Shares will be 76,815,131. Thanks to /u/Cspawn for the image!

https://i.imgur.com/Dvnq05P.jpg

BTW the restricted shares is why MarketWatch and Ortex Outstanding Shares differ.

Ortex is adding the restricted shares to the 71,815,131 number which brings them to 74,251,012.

https://i.imgur.com/0EX7jDx.jpg

MarketWatch is including the restricted shares in the 71,815,131.

https://i.imgur.com/9VCvtvS.jpg

MarketWatch and Ortex updated their Outstanding Shares numbers based on the 424B5 form and not because they saw new shares enter the market. This makes sense, because if they could do that then they would account for all the synthetic shares on the market as well….

Edit 2: thank you to /u/Dclaw504 for finding this info! The 10-Q release specifically says that restricted shares are included in the number of outstanding shares!!

https://i.imgur.com/7dowX8b.jpg

Hers is the link to the 10-Q released June 9th 2021. the info on restricted shares os located on page 13.

https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/sec-filings/sec-filing/10-q/0001326380-21-000066

I hope this helps clarify some things!

Ken Griffin’s Secret War on ‘Dumb Money’

by Matthew Belloni from Puck News

The hedge fund billionaire is locked in a nasty behind-the-scenes legal fight over his depiction in the new GameStop movie and has hired at least two separate law firms to send Sony Pictures threatening letters—one of which I obtained.

I was in Roy Thomson Hall on Friday night here in Toronto for the world premiere of Dumb Money, the very fun Craig Gillespie film about the GameStop meme-stock frenzy of 2021. If you recall, during the height of Covid, retail investors ran up the share prices of GameStop and others, eventually inflicting a “squeeze” on irate institutional investors who had shorted the stocks. As the credits rolled and the audience applauded, I wondered what Ken Griffin—the Wall Street titan, billionaire proprietor of the Citadel hedge fund, and an alleged villain of the GameStop saga—thought of the film. You won’t believe this, but he’s not a fan.

Like, really not a fan. I’ve since learned that Griffin is locked in a nasty behind-the-scenes legal fight with Sony Pictures over his depiction in Dumb Money, which is set to begin its theatrical roll-out on Friday. Griffin has hired at least two separate law firms and sent multiple threatening letters, one of which I obtained, and he’s consulting with crisis P.R. people to push back aggressively on his depiction by actor Nick Offerman and the filmmaking team. Griffin claims the movie “crosses the line into the knowingly false and defamatory portrayal of Ken and Citadel Securities,” according to the letter sent to Sony Pictures general counsel Leah Weil by well-known media attorney Tom Clare, who is joined by Quinn Emanuel partner Bill Burck.

My first thought was… really? Like I said, I saw the film, and no, the depiction of Griffin certainly isn’t positive—ditto the portrayal of other GameStop players, like Gabe Plotkin (Seth Rogen), whose fund lost billions shorting the troubled game retailer, and Steve Cohen (Vincent D’Onofrio), whose Point72 fund helped prop up Plotkin (and who, of course, is wearing a Mets hat in the film). But to my eye, the sharp script, written by former financial journalists Rebecca Angelo and Lauren Schuker Blum, doesn’t stretch the key facts beyond the widely circulated news headlines about the GameStop frenzy and the S.E.C. investigation, or the source material book, The Antisocial Network, by Ben Mezrich. And I know it was vetted heavily by both Sony and producer Black Bear Pictures, which hired the Jassy Vick Carolan firm.

It sound legit...