I never said it was widespread and was making a statement on the article,period,no more ,no less. You chose to read into my statement the word "widespread" which I never said . "In the article: "Some hedge funds manipulate stock prices at the end of the month to improve the returns that they report to their investors, a new study suggests" Again,they manipulated stocks in order to deceive their investors,that was the whole point of the article and the only reason given in the article that I pointed out in my original post that got lost in this thread,period. You were wrong and decided to go off on a tantrum like a spoiled brat with your immature toe comment. Listen,it's OK to be wrong,You must not be a good trader and probably stay in losing trades too long,due to you not being able to admit you are wrong . Tsk tsk tsk not a good trait for trading. You are now reprimanded ,go to your room until you learn your lesson. : ) PS: I have nothing against HF's ,but please,stop making excuses for the nefarious HF's,it's not a good look.
You have described a couple of different phenomena in this thread... 1. Correct. 2. It may be illegal, strictly speaking, but it's very hard to prove, so, effectively, it's not illegal. 3. Some amount of window-dressing into month/quarter/year-end probably happens, but this isn't what you were describing initially. 4. No, because "it" doesn't work. 5. No, "it" wouldn't have worked.
I am sorry, but I take Jim Cramer's words against yours. You know, the guy who was actually a HF manager... Also, your 3rd and 4th points contradict each other. If it doesn't work, how can they use it for window dressing?
Why would he lie about the past and specially about such a thing like this? There was only downside to acknowledge market manipulation so just making it up would be double stupid. Also you not believing him doesn't prove him wrong, just so you know...
Cramer is no slouch when it comes to managing a hedge fund. I never forgot how he described what had to happen for the market to make to make a bottom to rally from in a time when it was nearly free falling - he was spot on correct. He is a professionally trained and is one of the few that will share his knowledge with the public. Over the fifteen years that Cramer and his partner, Jeff Berkowitz, managed Cramer Berkowitz, the fund returned 24% per year to its shareholders. This is particularly impressive when you consider that these returns are after fees (Cramer Berkowitz took the standard 20% cut of profits and 1% annual management fee.) Cramer was the driving force behind the success of the hedge fund. He had a near encyclopedic knowledge of the stock market that allowed him to participate in nearly every news-driven event. If any company reported their earnings, Cramer would be able to tell you within a second whether or not that number was good.
Like I said, you've described two different things in this thread. If by "It" you mean "market manipulation designed to affect the settlement price of a security", then it does probably still happen, although it's generally a lot more difficult and dangerous to do nowadays. If by "It" you mean the practice that you've described, where someone pushes the price up/down aggressively by buying/selling, so that they can flip and subsequently sell/buy, that has never worked as a trading strategy.
Not really. I made it clear I meant manipulation by sheer size. Not rumors, insider tradings etc. Just by size, this is the topic of the thread. Now if we agree that this used to happen (a la Cramer) and you say it doesn't happen anymore, then you have to tell us when exactly and why this became improbable, unprofitable,etc.
Hold on, didn't you start this whole thread describing a specific strategy? In fact, I distinctly remember options involved... That strategy and its variants you subsequently suggested were specific, rather than generic "manipulation by sheer size". As to what I've described as mkt manipulation designed to affect settlement prices, like I said, it does still happen here and there, I'm sure.