Citigroup Lobbying SEC to Reinstate Short Selling Ban....Breaking

[libertad]

Obviously the regulators are always going to be behind the curve....as has been proven....

A SS ban will mean even more impromptu hedge fund liquidations...

Which will serve just the opposite intention and purpose....

By the way...what is an insolvent firm supposed to be worth either stock or bond wise ?

Adding the glut of financials as well.......

 

[perr]

Zodiac4u
This bear market has reshuffled the wealth in this country in a major way and its my belief that the fed has been behind this whole thing. The fed has pushed us into excepting globalization and in the process destroyed our manufacturing sector, They have involved us in foreign wars that they deemed fit to be involved in and have been entirely funded by our social security. Social security that millions of Americans have come to rely on for retirement that they have spent. They have aided in helping push oil prices higher when we are siting on oceans of oil and now they have had a hand in destroying our financial system. The very same financial system that funds commerce as well as providing many others as a vehicle for retirement. Sure they are saying they are doing every thing they can to fix it. Fed Cox sucker is sitting on his hands while trillions are being skimmed off by his wall street cronies. The very same ones that are some of the largest short sellers. Yup! another great job! Thanks again fed for all your hard work. Wow! I feel better already. Back to selling/buying
===========================


Everyone in the gov'mint were involved in this RIP-OFF AND ROBBERY OF THE AMERICAN
CITIZENS IN THERE OWN COUNTRY. Here we are working hard two jobs, just keeping
our country moving forward. AND THIS IS WHAT THE OUR GOV'MINT DOES TO US.(they all need
to be brought to TRIAL).

WE NEED A NEW SYSTEM. Everything stays in place, we just need new people PICK BY US THE
PEOPLE.

As you mention the Fed's was and still is totally involved (use'ing Greenspan with his 5 hour TV shit, and his Wife who is still working the TV channels as of today).

===========================




nutmeg
Mom and Pop retire? it's an Aesops fable. The moral: Pop dies before retirement, Mom lives off Pop's life insurance until she is severely Alzihemic (almost sounds arabic doesn't it? Ali-Abadabado Alzi-Himick) then becomes a burden on her children.

===============================================

When have you ever seen MORE PEOPLE DIEING IN HOSPITALS, this is no accident.

Everyone would normally die at home with some accidents maybe at hospitals . (part of working with gov'mint to get rid of Mom and Pop before retirement, plus there older been there and are wiser to the game).They are really being Murdered in the hospital. OOOooo he/she DIED FROM THERE ILLNESS.
The young don't know all this yet.

DON'T GO TO HOSPITALS or NURSING HOME TOO, they killed my dad in one. Didn't give him one of
his medications for a few days. He told me on my last visit with him. They lied, said the'll look in it????
They did NOT.


trade well, and stay well.
perr

 

[SteveD]

I don't think the uptick rule is the problem....

I think when the regulations are updated basic short selling as we know it will not be allowed.....

Think about if: Being allowed to sell something you don't own is absurd....

Hedge a long posistion: Futures/options address that now

Spreads are entirely too thin for an "uptick" to even occure now


SteveD

 

[nutmeg]

Think about if: Being allowed to sell something you don't own is absurd....
--------------------

It is called a "middleman". There are plenty of examples of business's that sell what they don't own. They don't even have to physically be involved with the product, I could sell you anything on line right now I don't own. You want a book? I'll order it for you, have amazon drop shipped it to your door. You send me a check and I'll send amazon the balance, after deducting my fee.

 

[gaj]

Quote from poyayan:

No a problem anymore since you can't short stock under 5 bucks...

WRONG.

maybe *you* can't short a stock under $5.

i, and anyone who uses a halfway decent broker, can.

 

[murray t turtle]

Quote from flytiger:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=935343729&play=1


Interviewer: Let’s talk shorts. Harvey Pitt is former SEC chairman and founder and CEO of Kalorama Partners. Harvey, great to have you with us. Of course the news here is that Citi is asking Congress and the SEC to reinstate the temporary ban on short selling. Harvey, this seems almost like an act of desperation on the part of a company whose stock is just going down and down and down and they have no answer for shareholders.


Harvey Pitt: Well I think that’s exactly right. The fact is this is a real plea for help and real act of desperation. It’s only going to make matters worse for Citi Group. It’s not going to solve their basic problems. Their problems were caused by bad investments, bad management, lack of transparency and no real risk management efforts to avoid the problems they now confront.

Interviewer2: Chairman Pitt, do we need to bring back the Uptick Rule? Would that make a difference here at all?


Harvey Pitt: I don’t believe so. The Uptick Rule was almost non-existence in terms of its detrimental affects. There’s a very simple solution and the SEC has it and they know what it is.


It’s very simply this. If you want to sell a stock short you have to have a legally and forcible right to produce that stock on settlement day. That’s all it takes. If the SEC does that people will not be able to sell short unless they have actually first located and gotten their stock.


Interviewer2: In other words that would do away with naked shorting right?


Harvey Pitt: Absolutely; and naked shorting is what’s causing a lot of the problems in the market.


Interviewer2: Because nobody is forced to deliver. Nobody must deliver. Too much of that going on.


Harvey Pitt: That’s been the real problem. People in affect are just gambling. They’re assuming the stock price will go down. They then spread false rumors to help the stock go down, but they have no skin in the game because they haven’t committed to produce the shares that they purportedly are selling.

Interviewer: So if that is at the root of the problem, how do we close that loop?


Harvey Pitt: Well I think that loop has already been closed by the proposals that the SEC has out and that hopefully they are going to be finalizing.


Coming back to the Uptick Rule or banning all short selling will actually hurt investors all across this country because short selling creates more liquidity as long as the people who sell short are economically involved in the transactions and stand to lose as well as to gain.

Interviewer2: Actually Chairman Pitt, Melissa sort of raised this issue, but it seems like whenever a bank is on the brink you do hear all of a sudden again the cries against short selling, but as you just mentioned there is a benefit to it in increasing liquidity into the marketplace and elsewhere.

Harvey Pitt: There’s no question. When I was at the SEC and we had 9/11 corporations all over the country asked us to eliminate short selling for a temporary period. We wouldn’t do it because we were concerned that it would dry up liquidity.

As it turns out that was the right result and I think here allowing short selling, but making sure that people actually are committed to their transactions is what’s required.

Interviewer: Harvey, does the SEC at this point need to say no to Citi Group just by virtue of the fact that if it says yes to Citi there is going to be a long line of people behind Citi asking also for them to be included in this temporary ban.

Harvey Pitt: Absolutely; I think we’ll see it all over. The SEC was pressured earlier last month to engage in a ban on all short selling for a temporary period. I believe that was a mistake although I know why they did it. We cannot afford to repeat that mistake.


Interviewer2: Mr. Pitt, we are awfully grateful to you for staying up so late and joining us tonight. We appreciate it.


[End of Audio]

===================
Thanks FlyT;
free markets for free men.

 

[Landis82]

"Coming back to the Uptick Rule or banning all short selling will actually hurt investors all across this country because short selling creates more liquidity as long as the people who sell short are economically involved in the transactions and stand to lose as well as to gain."

- - - Harvey Pitt


I'm sorry, but Pitt is about as dense as current SEC Chairman Christopher Cox is in regards to the "uptick" rule. Re-instating the "uptick" rule would SLOW the markets down and allow people a chance to "process" the price action that they are seeing. Right now, the VELOCITY of the moves on the downside are at such a high rate that people are unable to "process" what is going on.

I'm not a big fan of Jim Cramer, but he is spot on about this issue and as it pertains to the Ultra-Bear ETF's, etc.

Pitt and Cox are incredibly ignorant.
That's why they can't even begin to fathom that SLOWING down the VELOCITY of the market will allow an opportunity for price discovery . . . When the market drops over 200 points in 7 minutes just before a week ago Friday's close, there is no chance in hell for price discovery, or for money managers/investors to be able to "process" what is going on.

Pitt and Cox are CLOWNS.

 

[QQQBALL]

Quote from SteveD:

I don't think the uptick rule is the problem....

I think when the regulations are updated basic short selling as we know it will not be allowed.....

Think about if: Being allowed to sell something you don't own is absurd....

Hedge a long posistion: Futures/options address that now

Spreads are entirely too thin for an "uptick" to even occure now


SteveD

you borrow and sell... wait, then buy and repay... that is not absurd.

 

[Zodiac4u]

Everyone in the gov'mint were involved in this RIP-OFF AND ROBBERY OF THE AMERICAN
CITIZENS IN THERE OWN COUNTRY. Here we are working hard two jobs, just keeping
our country moving forward. AND THIS IS WHAT THE OUR GOV'MINT DOES TO US.(they all need
to be brought to TRIAL).

WE NEED A NEW SYSTEM. Everything stays in place, we just need new people PICK BY US THE
PEOPLE.

As you mention the Fed's was and still is totally involved (use'ing Greenspan with his 5 hour TV shit, and his Wife who is still working the TV channels as of today).

===========================
trade well, and stay well.
perr [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm with you on almost all, but I do think the system itself works. The reason it doesn't is because Washington and its bed partner the special interest groups have a special way of sifting out the candidates that they consider bad by using their best friend, The Media.

 

[Zodiac4u]

Quote from Landis82:

"Coming back to the Uptick Rule or banning all short selling will actually hurt investors all across this country because short selling creates more liquidity as long as the people who sell short are economically involved in the transactions and stand to lose as well as to gain."

- - - Harvey Pitt


I'm sorry, but Pitt is about as dense as current SEC Chairman Christopher Cox is in regards to the "uptick" rule. Re-instating the "uptick" rule would SLOW the markets down and allow people a chance to "process" the price action that they are seeing. Right now, the VELOCITY of the moves on the downside are at such a high rate that people are unable to "process" what is going on.

I'm not a big fan of Jim Cramer, but he is spot on about this issue and as it pertains to the Ultra-Bear ETF's, etc.

Pitt and Cox are incredibly ignorant.
That's why they can't even begin to fathom that SLOWING down the VELOCITY of the market will allow an opportunity for price discovery . . . When the market drops over 200 points in 7 minutes just before a week ago Friday's close, there is no chance in hell for price discovery, or for money managers/investors to be able to "process" what is going on.

Pitt and Cox are CLOWNS.

Well said! Finally a person with a clue on how the up-tick rule would help stabilize the markets. These clowns know exactly how the up-tick rule would work. They are comparing the two issues as if they are the same. When there is a clear and distinct difference between short selling with or without up-tick rule. If you looked at the historical charts and looked at the volatility before and after the up-tick rule was abolished you will have seen a very distinct increase in volatility since its removal.