You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
They just banned short selling in US
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Quote from patchie:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/98443-hedge-funds-eat-their-young
I can only wonder, is this why Chanos was so opposed to reporting his short positions? He did not want long funds abusing him the way he abuses them. Certainly reporting short positions would allow long interest hedge funds to attack your companies the way short interest funds read SEC filings to go after the investments of distressed long funds.
Hedge funds are already forced to disclose their long positions. They often short to hedge long positions. If they have to reveal both legs of their trade, it reveals their strategy. Strategies are proprietary (okay, sometimes they only <i>think</i> they're proprietary, but in theory all strategies should be proprietary). Revealing a strategy to the public for free makes it difficult or impossible to capitalize on the work you put into your business.
The whole revealing of long or short positions is BS anyway. It serves no public purpose.
Quote from Angrycat:
Hedge funds are already forced to disclose their long positions. They often short to hedge long positions. If they have to reveal both legs of their trade, it reveals their strategy. Strategies are proprietary (okay, sometimes they only <i>think</i> they're proprietary, but in theory all strategies should be proprietary). Revealing a strategy to the public for free makes it difficult or impossible to capitalize on the work you put into your business.
The whole revealing of long or short positions is BS anyway. It serves no public purpose.
That is crap. Hedging is an excuse for everything. If that is the case, I say don't report the long position report only the short. Furthermore, what about the short only guys, they just get a free pass because...
Short sellers communicate strategies to each other (Chanos holds a conference with a group of short interest HF in Florida every year). Short sellers will also go activist and attack companies publicly WHEN IT SUITS THEM.
Chanos claims that the release of such information will create copy cats and damage a market. I say, if that is the case shut down all public activism.
Short sellers communicate strategies to each other (Chanos holds a conference with a group of short interest HF in Florida every year).
----------------
Big fucking deal. Trial lawyers hold conferences determining which corps and products to target, along with a few how to's on succesful litigating. How is that any different? Trial lawyers bankrupt more than 60 cos with asbestos exposure. Name me 60 co's bankrupt as a direct result of hedge funds.
----------------
Big fucking deal. Trial lawyers hold conferences determining which corps and products to target, along with a few how to's on succesful litigating. How is that any different? Trial lawyers bankrupt more than 60 cos with asbestos exposure. Name me 60 co's bankrupt as a direct result of hedge funds.
Quote from nutmeg:
Short sellers communicate strategies to each other (Chanos holds a conference with a group of short interest HF in Florida every year).
----------------
Big fucking deal. Trial lawyers hold conferences determining which corps and products to target, along with a few how to's on succesful litigating. How is that any different? Trial lawyers bankrupt more than 60 cos with asbestos exposure. Name me 60 co's bankrupt as a direct result of hedge funds.
The reason that Chanos paid huge money to have Richard Baker lobby for non-disclosure was because of "how dangerous it could be for the markets". Copy cats could create a disturbance on the efficiencies in pricing and a piling on could happen. those are not my opinions it is Chanos.
Chanos PR Team stated "We appreciate, too, that the SEC has modified its short sale disclosure emergency order to protect the confidentiality of investors' portfolio management strategies. Forcing public disclosure would have had serious consequences for investors."
So...by that logic, why hold a conference to get a gang together in a short?
If Chanos is lobbying hard for non-disclosure because this is proprietary and can have "serious consequences" in the markets, he should keep it proprietary. If this is going to be opened up for big funds to gang together, why then can't the general public know since the general public is informed of long positions.
BTW..Fuck lawyers they are for the most part as crooked as these guys. Milberg Weiss proved that.
Nutmeg, are you always this caustic? Is it standard operating procedure to come in with piss and vineager without actually presenting rational thought?
Unlike you, I have an open mind. I can believe that short selling, if properly executed and with proper transparency can be valuable to a market. You on the other hand seem to be content believing that all short selling funds should be presented for sainthood. you seem to be of the belief that only wealthy CEO's and long investors commit fraud and that the only non-greedy investors in this world are short sellers.
short sellers should neither be put under any constraint a long investor is nor should they be granted exemption from those standards long investors must achieve. markets work best when their is fairness by equality.
1. When a long shareholder buys a stock they must either have teh cash on hand or buy on margin. By settlement date it is pay up or lose the position. Short sellers should be required to meet the exact same standards. That standard is best met with a mandatory pre-borrow.
2. short sellers should be required to file quarterly their short interest levels and then file additionally based on threshold levels. longs are required to meet these standards and there is no reason short sellers should not either.
Now if you want to provide logical responses as to why these equivalent standards between a long and a short should not be carried out, have at it. but try and do it without the piss and vineager.
Unlike you, I have an open mind. I can believe that short selling, if properly executed and with proper transparency can be valuable to a market. You on the other hand seem to be content believing that all short selling funds should be presented for sainthood. you seem to be of the belief that only wealthy CEO's and long investors commit fraud and that the only non-greedy investors in this world are short sellers.
short sellers should neither be put under any constraint a long investor is nor should they be granted exemption from those standards long investors must achieve. markets work best when their is fairness by equality.
1. When a long shareholder buys a stock they must either have teh cash on hand or buy on margin. By settlement date it is pay up or lose the position. Short sellers should be required to meet the exact same standards. That standard is best met with a mandatory pre-borrow.
2. short sellers should be required to file quarterly their short interest levels and then file additionally based on threshold levels. longs are required to meet these standards and there is no reason short sellers should not either.
Now if you want to provide logical responses as to why these equivalent standards between a long and a short should not be carried out, have at it. but try and do it without the piss and vineager.
why these equivalent standards between a long and a short should not be carried out,
------------------------
Protection of the investors.
Angry cat gave you one answer to your question, proprietary trading. Buffett gets an occasional exemption on a long position.
"The wording and legislative history of the statute make clear Congress' intent that Section 13(f) information be promptly disseminated to the public. Congress also recognized that, in some instances, disclosure of certain types of information could have harmful effects, not only on an investment manager, but also on the investors whose assets are under its management. To balance these competing interests, Section 13(f)(3) authorizes the Commission to delay or prevent the public disclosure of information as it determines to be necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors."
------------------------
Protection of the investors.
Angry cat gave you one answer to your question, proprietary trading. Buffett gets an occasional exemption on a long position.
"The wording and legislative history of the statute make clear Congress' intent that Section 13(f) information be promptly disseminated to the public. Congress also recognized that, in some instances, disclosure of certain types of information could have harmful effects, not only on an investment manager, but also on the investors whose assets are under its management. To balance these competing interests, Section 13(f)(3) authorizes the Commission to delay or prevent the public disclosure of information as it determines to be necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors."
Quote from nutmeg:
Short sellers communicate strategies to each other (Chanos holds a conference with a group of short interest HF in Florida every year).
----------------
Name me 60 co's bankrupt as a direct result of hedge funds.
In Sept of 2001, Thedeal.com published a story by Stacy Mosher about 60 companies 'financed' by LadenburgThalmann. Two survive. JAGH and SDNA. The rest are gone, as are thousands of others. But there were 58 in one place.
Now you'll say, "but I said, Hedgefunds". That 's who perpetrated the trades and death spirals.
Quote from nutmeg:
why these equivalent standards between a long and a short should not be carried out,
------------------------
Protection of the investors.
Angry cat gave you one answer to your question, proprietary trading. Buffett gets an occasional exemption on a long position.
Nutmeg, there is a great difference between occasional exemption and full exemption. Can you explain to me how a short seller trading is proprietary but a long investor trading strategy is not.
please don't spin this, tell me in logical sense why the differing standards.
Quote from patchie:
Nutmeg, there is a great difference between occasional exemption and full exemption. Can you explain to me how a short seller trading is proprietary but a long investor trading strategy is not.
please don't spin this, tell me in logical sense why the differing standards.
Granted short and long are both proprietary and equal, maybe it is a poor arguement on Chanos part, perhaps it is the only agruement they wish to disclose. I couldn't pretend to know what the SEC or Chanos underlying reasons were or are.
If a short position is known, it wouldn't be all that hard to short squeeze for no other reason than the person with the most money wins. Is that fair?
A long position which gets nailed by the shorts will have a catalyst other than a deep pocket.
Stocks go up for one reason, the likelyhood that it will go higher. Stocks will go down for 1,000's of reasons.
The nss crowd is trying to condense the 1000 of reasons into one, naked shorting, hence the tough sell for you guys.