My perspective MrM is that MMs SELL naked short contracts (supposedly borrowed shares) for .0001. If shorts choose to sell those borrowed shares on the market at .0002 for example, they would then make a clean 100% profit if, after selling, they replaced those borrowed shares at .0001 today. IMO, a few did that today (bought .0001s to close their contract). Most today, IMO, were NEW short naked contracts bought at 1s.
The real moneymaker for these shorts are in the sale of course. Why sell at .0002 when the real gain is initiated when the news of GTCH's sale is finally announced.
During the spike of that surge, retail buyers will actually be buying non-existent naked shares, not the real share at a much higher pps. The nakedness of each of those shares actually are 'clothed' when the short buys back the replacement shares (ideally at a lower price than those naked shares they sold - because (supposedly) actual retail share holders are selling their shares to make a profit as well.
All smoke and mirrors if you ask me. Yet, somehow the MMs make it all work. I think SHs would make more money if it was ALL REAL and short borrowing was outlawed. HA!
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
