My naive models of how stocks are valued are by the relationship (number of stocks that exist) * (price of stock) = total value of company. This squares intuitively with my naive models of stocks themselves, i.e. that owning one of N shares is like "owning 1/N of the company".
Now let's consider GameStop. For one reason or another, its prices surged at the end of January 2021. It's now been almost 11 months since then, and though it's nowhere near the peak price (\$483 according to this) it still seems much, much higher than it should be -- I'd expect to have fallen to around the $20 that it was for 4 years pre-2021, but it's still well over \$100. Assuming that GameStop didn't do anything for it to suddenly gain value, how is this possible? In other words, why aren't people ("actual" traders, not my uninformed parents) noticing that owning their share of the company is worth way less than what they paid for it?
A potential answer is that the bubble just hasn't burst yet, and the stock is expected to really crash sooner or later. This is somewhat unsatisfactory because my current perception (could be wrong!) of what people think about GameStop is that the whole thing's blown over, no one's doing anything crazy anymore, etc. If this is the route your answer takes, it would be nice if this is addressed.