LOL LOL LOL!
Omg I better run the country, whiningtiger is after me.
Where will I go?
Naked Short Selling
- Thread starter flytiger
- Start date
LOL LOL LOL!
Omg I better run the country, whiningtiger is after me.
Where will I go?
But, sometimes it shows up guys have three ISP's four alias, then, there's a money trail. I don't have those skills. So, it's not me.Nice detective work there, Inspector Jacques Clouseau.
Skills? At this point, I would be amazed to find out that you can dress yourself in the morning.
C just said put action indicates a bear raid on C.
Although the SEC wll do away with this rule, they'll need a comment period.
14:51 SCALP ScalpTrader: Cramer making the same point I was making on Citi today -Update-
On CNBC, Cramer just noted that Citi (C 18.31 -0.30) should get ready b/c the Shorts are preparing to raid it (a la, LEH, MER and AIG). Notes Put positions in the name are giving away the planned attack.
Ah, who needs a money center bank????
Although the SEC wll do away with this rule, they'll need a comment period.
14:51 SCALP ScalpTrader: Cramer making the same point I was making on Citi today -Update-
On CNBC, Cramer just noted that Citi (C 18.31 -0.30) should get ready b/c the Shorts are preparing to raid it (a la, LEH, MER and AIG). Notes Put positions in the name are giving away the planned attack.
Ah, who needs a money center bank????
SEC Said to Be Unlikely to Impose Short-Sale Ban on Every Stock
By Edgar Ortega and Jesse Westbrook
Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is unlikely to expand to every stock the curbs imposed two months ago on naked short sales, three people familiar with the matter said.
Regulators are instead likely to focus on measures that would strengthen requirements that brokers deliver shares they sell short, said people familiar with the agency's thinking. SEC spokesman John Nester said staff may offer recommendations as early as this month, and declined to comment on specific plans.
The commission in July imposed an ``emergency'' order that expired last month limited to mortgage finance companies Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and 17 brokerage firms. The rule, which triggered dozens of e-mails of support to the agency, required investors betting on a decline in stock prices to arrange to borrow the shares before completing the so-called short sale.
``The SEC is very likely going to get some negative comments from retail investors, but institutional investors that employ significant short-selling strategies, including hedge funds, are going to be very glad,'' said Sean O'Malley, a former SEC lawyer and now a partner at Goodwin Procter LLP in New York.
The American Bankers Association had urged the SEC to broaden the ban to include all publicly traded banks and bank holding companies. The Managed Funds Association, the largest hedge fund industry group, asked regulators not to renew the order, saying it damps legitimate trading.
Manipulative Investors
The SEC is concerned that manipulative investors may use the sales, which are legal in some circumstances, to drive down prices by flooding the market with orders to sell shares they don't have, or naked short selling. In traditional short sales, traders borrow shares that they sell. If the price drops, they profit by buying back the stock, repaying the loan and pocketing the difference.
Regulators may require that traders disclose to the agency short positions they have in stocks, said a person briefed on the SEC's plans. The U.K. Financial Services Authority required hedge funds and other speculators in June to reveal short positions equaling 0.25 percent or more of a company's shares during a rights offer.
The SEC staff also may shorten the time brokers have before they must step in and buy a company's stock to clear a short sale, said two people who declined to be identified because the conversations with regulators were private. The new rules may also eliminate an exemption that options market makers had from delivering shares of companies in the so-called threshold list.
Companies are listed when they have a high number of borrowed shares that have not been delivered to buyers. For those companies, the SEC mandates that brokers step in after 13 days to buy the stock. The SEC staff is considering shortening that time frame, two people said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edgar Ortega in New York at ebarrales@bloomberg.net; Jesse Westbrook in Washington at jwestbrook1@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: September 13, 2008 00:01 EDT
By Edgar Ortega and Jesse Westbrook
Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is unlikely to expand to every stock the curbs imposed two months ago on naked short sales, three people familiar with the matter said.
Regulators are instead likely to focus on measures that would strengthen requirements that brokers deliver shares they sell short, said people familiar with the agency's thinking. SEC spokesman John Nester said staff may offer recommendations as early as this month, and declined to comment on specific plans.
The commission in July imposed an ``emergency'' order that expired last month limited to mortgage finance companies Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and 17 brokerage firms. The rule, which triggered dozens of e-mails of support to the agency, required investors betting on a decline in stock prices to arrange to borrow the shares before completing the so-called short sale.
``The SEC is very likely going to get some negative comments from retail investors, but institutional investors that employ significant short-selling strategies, including hedge funds, are going to be very glad,'' said Sean O'Malley, a former SEC lawyer and now a partner at Goodwin Procter LLP in New York.
The American Bankers Association had urged the SEC to broaden the ban to include all publicly traded banks and bank holding companies. The Managed Funds Association, the largest hedge fund industry group, asked regulators not to renew the order, saying it damps legitimate trading.
Manipulative Investors
The SEC is concerned that manipulative investors may use the sales, which are legal in some circumstances, to drive down prices by flooding the market with orders to sell shares they don't have, or naked short selling. In traditional short sales, traders borrow shares that they sell. If the price drops, they profit by buying back the stock, repaying the loan and pocketing the difference.
Regulators may require that traders disclose to the agency short positions they have in stocks, said a person briefed on the SEC's plans. The U.K. Financial Services Authority required hedge funds and other speculators in June to reveal short positions equaling 0.25 percent or more of a company's shares during a rights offer.
The SEC staff also may shorten the time brokers have before they must step in and buy a company's stock to clear a short sale, said two people who declined to be identified because the conversations with regulators were private. The new rules may also eliminate an exemption that options market makers had from delivering shares of companies in the so-called threshold list.
Companies are listed when they have a high number of borrowed shares that have not been delivered to buyers. For those companies, the SEC mandates that brokers step in after 13 days to buy the stock. The SEC staff is considering shortening that time frame, two people said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Edgar Ortega in New York at ebarrales@bloomberg.net; Jesse Westbrook in Washington at jwestbrook1@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: September 13, 2008 00:01 EDT
Is this article good news in your opinion? I guess I am confused - they won't enforce the naked shorting rules, but they will try to tighten the rules on FTDs? I am assuming that essentially limits the effectiveness of naked shorting to a shorter duration of time. If so, can't you just roll over your naked short indefinitely after delivery? Just wondering what your take is on this.
Actually, I'm a bit confused. But then again, so's the SEC.
If this fits with what I was told, every stock on, or that hits SHO will have the same restrictions as the "19". The 19 worked, regardless of the ton of articles quoting Arturo Bris, who's a shill for the shorts. I also heard Options MM exemption was history. I don't see anything about that. There was some legislative deal Thursday granting the SEC some new 'powers' that wasn't disclosed.
The rule would then be, once the stock hits SHO, firm borrow that you pay for even if you don't use it. The remarkable thing is, the NYFed put these jerks in a room and told them to solve the LEH thing. The NSS deal is killing them,, (saw an article on MS level 3 marking them as "next" after AIG, C) and they still can't stop it. That means it's totally out of hand.
If you're trying to monetize it, I guess you just monitor SHO. There's stuff on there at a penny that would have to soar. I'm sure OSTK and TASR, MDTL, CALM, JOSB would go up a multiple.
I think what this is showing is, Wall St. sold its soul to the offshore devil who is pressing his bets, and they can't stop him.
I'll just say some high level people are very upset by this same tactic by a corrupt SEC.
The decision to not extend the order will likely be well received by hedge funds and other Wall Street players who complained it was too costly to short and reconfigure back-office systems. As soon as this month, the SEC staff is expected to propose the Commission finalize two previously recommended rules.
One would no longer allow option-market makers to sell short without locating the stock and delivering them. The second rule would make it a fraud for a customer to lie to a broker about whether they have located the stock, his intention to deliver it and for not delivering it within three days.
Imo, the second rule re "fraud" would allow fraud statutes to apply whereas now I think it is a violation of a regulation.
But the word "customer" is a caveat, I'm assuming the firm would not be charged with a crime but the individual.
One would no longer allow option-market makers to sell short without locating the stock and delivering them. The second rule would make it a fraud for a customer to lie to a broker about whether they have located the stock, his intention to deliver it and for not delivering it within three days.
Imo, the second rule re "fraud" would allow fraud statutes to apply whereas now I think it is a violation of a regulation.
But the word "customer" is a caveat, I'm assuming the firm would not be charged with a crime but the individual.
Since this is a trading board, it would be instrumental to look at it in a monetarization mode.
Obviously, you could see 'AIG yesterday. Not subj to uptick or firm borrow rules, it melted. Any stock that does any capital raise is a target. Once the stock gets below t he price of any secondary, or rights offering it's toast.
Maybe, if enough stuff gets destroyed, and Wall St. doesn't have any more busiess at all, vs. the little they have now, cooler heads will prevail.
Watch put volume. Use Najarian's Option Monster. You see the put vol, they are going to use the exemption to destroy any target company. I guess that's just he way it is.
AIG and Mer were layups. Oh well. Bon Appetit
Obviously, you could see 'AIG yesterday. Not subj to uptick or firm borrow rules, it melted. Any stock that does any capital raise is a target. Once the stock gets below t he price of any secondary, or rights offering it's toast.
Maybe, if enough stuff gets destroyed, and Wall St. doesn't have any more busiess at all, vs. the little they have now, cooler heads will prevail.
Watch put volume. Use Najarian's Option Monster. You see the put vol, they are going to use the exemption to destroy any target company. I guess that's just he way it is.
AIG and Mer were layups. Oh well. Bon Appetit