Does anyone have that video about 'the dark side' or something, where that software company was basically shorted to oblivion, and where they talk about the massive levels of failures to deliver, and how the SEC won't even disclose the figures? Also, why aren't attorneys specializing in securities' law more aggressively pursuing these matters? Does the SEC think that they can refuse to disclose the FTD data forever? Where is Congress? Or the DOJ? Why is the bullshit allowed to go on in perpetuity?
"Why is the bullshit allowed to go on in perpetuity?" The way I see it, as the awareness of naked shorting grows, it will/is/has become an industry, an economic force outside the realm of the direct result of the act itself. There will be no incentives to solve the problem because to do so would eliminate the need for the beaureauractic economy it may somehow create. Would the crusaders move on? They never do, "it's never enough" "there's always more that need to be done". Always asking nebulous questions to which no one person can answer, why? Because, that's why. If I sound flip, excuse moi, but there are plenty of examples and flaws to go around in any system, nothings perfect.
Excellent questions. There are major enforcement actions on the way. The Goldstein article is one, but there are more happening, and they are more tiltled towards naked shorting. Attorneys are being aggressive. Overstock should get discovery soon. That means alot. The law is set up so little companies can't get discovery until they prove they need discovery, which you can't do until you GET discovery. Great system. Congress, another story. It has taken us three years to get Frank to help. He use d to complain he didn't have power. Spector and Grassley are after the SEC, but Dodd, Schumer have their hands in Stevie's pockets, and they want it squelched. This is about naked shorting, but it is much, much more. It is about hedge funds that believe it's all about the trade, no matter who they destroy, and how illegal the trade. They fight with money. They've bought off lobbyists and politicians. They have to. They have wedged themselves into a box that means billions, or jail. I was told by a top investigator several years ago, "there will be no pensions." I didn't know what he meant. Now, I know. Another top Washington Official, "Wall St. will kill America." I believe that too. Oh the video you speak of is Bloomberg. It's on You Tube. "Phantom Shares". The software company you speak about announced a fine deal yesterday, one of many. It has survived, and is actually prosperering. Yet is still trades at .19 as the MM desk of one of the big three seems determined to trade it at the lowest possible price. If he lets it go, he's toast. Here's Forbes on Sedona Corp. http://www.rgm.com/articles/forbes5.html I have had the good fortune to review just a few pages of Elgindy's transcripts, before they were given to major reporters. In those transcripts, I read about the SEC tipping Elgindy off as to an investigation, major hedgies running maybe 1/5th of what they run now. Ask yourself, why don't the reporters run with it? Treat yourself. go to antisocialmedia.net. Read about "Mr. Pink". You'll love it. Fellas, if you had the information these guys operate with, let's just say you could live in Connecticut too. I am willing to bet, that every swingin' dick who reads this that is not in on it (you know the Black Guard, as Patrick calls them, reads this) HAS LOST MONEY TO NAKED SHORT SELLING. Have a nice day
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/18/business/18dann.html?_r=1&oref=slogin This is what I was trying to think of PSLRA. It limits suits to those that can prove they were harmed, preventing those plaintiffs from getting discovery. This guy has already hammered Frank to investigate the SEC. At issue is the interpretation of a provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The S.E.C. is urging the court to adopt a standard that would make it harder for shareholders to prevail in fraud lawsuits against publicly traded companies and their executives. The commission argued that the litigation reform act required investors to show by evidence âa high likelihoodâ that the defendant possessed the intent to violate the law.
Prosecutors Said Probing Stock-Loan Scheme Reuters NEW YORK (May 17) - Prosecutors are investigating employees of Wall Street banks, including Bear Stearns Cos. and Morgan Stanley , over alleged kickbacks involving short sellers, and may soon bring criminal charges, a published report said. Three people have taken pleas in exchange for cooperation with prosecutors in Brooklyn, New York, who have conducted the nearly 18-month-long probe, Business Week magazine said on its Web site, citing unnamed sources. The scheme may have cost financial firms and short sellers millions of dollars in unnecessary fees, the magazine said. Current and former employees at the stock loan desks of Bear and Morgan Stanley are drawing the most scrutiny, the magazine said, citing unnamed sources. Also under investigation are current and former employees of Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Janney Montgomery Scott, Merrill Lynch & Co. and Nomura Securities, it said. Robert Nardoza, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney Roslynn Mauskopf in the Eastern District of New York, declined to confirm or deny the existence of a probe. Representatives of Bear, Goldman, Merrill, Morgan Stanley and Nomura declined to comment. Janney did not immediately return a request for a comment. A short sale is a bet that a stock price will fall. In a typical short sale, a trader borrows shares and sells them, hoping to buy them back later at a lower price. According to BusinessWeek, prosecutors are examining whether employees on Wall Street stock loan desks received kickbacks from "finders" who track down shares for them to lend to short sellers. The article said investigators were examining whether the finders did not do enough work to justify their fees, or whether they even provided a legitimate service. In April 2005, the New York Stock Exchange issued guidance on the use of stock finders. "Recent examination findings (in many instances) call into question the business justification for interposing a finder," it said. "We have seen only limited instances where a finder is actually providing services that an effective internal stock loan department could not provide." NYSE spokesman Brendan Intindola on Thursday said the Big Board was still examining the issue and has "several" cases pending.
"They have wedged themselves into a box that means billions, or jail. I was told by a top investigator several years ago, "there will be no pensions."" I'll get back to you on that, unfunded pensions are not being destroyed by hedge funds.
Oh, I can't wait. Let me ask you... With all this going on, how many Pension administrators and Mutual Funds have complianed on behalf of their shareholders?
Ahhh, Sedona! That was the one. Thanks, flytiger. There was great video - basically a powerpoint slide show - about the whole matter; how there are hundreds of millions of FTDs everyday, and how the SEC was refusing to even disclose such info to congress. Settlement on many of these transactions took as long as 58 days, when it was found to happen at all.
So why doesn't the SEC allow daytraders to short intraday only without having to locate the stock first? Woudn't this solve a whole bunch of problems for daytraders and thus make the markets more liquid without contributing to the naked short problem?