> the increase in activity seems to have come from just two trades.
its interesting how nobody not even a bot was interested in copy-trading that, most likely due to the incredibly low volume, kept everyone else far far away from that ticker
only 15,000 shares traded today. paltry.
curious if they, were they able to cover that short
> curious if they, were they able to cover that short
Volume for EIS on 10/9 (first market day after the attack) was ~341k shares, it’s possible they were on the buy side of 2/3rds of those trades, I’m guessing there was not a lack of sellers on 10/9.
I don’t think is a bot thing but a people thing… when there’s a sudden grow in volume whoever sees that assumes that whoever took that position knows something that they don’t know and thus taking a similar position is often a “sensible” action, even if only to hedge against unknowns…
its interesting how nobody not even a bot was interested in copy-trading that, most likely due to the incredibly low volume, kept everyone else far far away from that ticker
only 15,000 shares traded today. paltry.
curious if they, were they able to cover that short