Yes, I am aware of Velben goods (as well as Giffen goods): if you go into my comment history you'll see I actually mentioned them just in the last week.
> You didn't break economics with your "why are luxury goods so expensive even though they're not better" argument, unfortunately.
I do not see (a) where my claims imply breaking any economics principles, and (b) did not claim they're not better. As someone with an engineering degree I was taught all about trade-offs in design. Different situations may call for a need for different characteristics of a design: one person's situation may call for VW (simple commuting) while another's a Porsche (dealing with a mid-life crisis).
My point was that different items, which have different prices, have different value to different people. So to say what something is "worth" can be completely arbitrary, independent of price. Similarly, various people can find the same item "worth" differently, depending on what they value, so each is will to pay a different price: this is what auctions are all about after all.
In the case of GME: the people who actually care about the retail company may value it one way, and thus are willing to pay a particular price for each stock; while the people who care about fulfilling their (shorting) option contracts may have a different value and are wilting to pay a different price. What each stock is "worth" is different to each of them.
Sure, and all of that cashes out in an equilibrium, called marginal pricing. There's no breakdown in the notion of value here. Nothing incoherent about it.
I don't think the point of mentioning Veblen goods was defining a namespace. The point is that this is such well-covered ground in economic theory that there's actually a name for it. The Wikipedia link is presumably a pointer to where you can start reading more answers about these questions (e.g. conspicuous consumption for social status).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good
You didn't break economics with your "why are luxury goods so expensive even though they're not better" argument, unfortunately.