Huh? The Enforcement Division? Isn't that the Madoff Glee club??? SEC Inspector General: Agency Rarely Probes Short-Sale Abuse By Sarah N. Lynch Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The Securities and Exchange Commission's inspector general released a report Wednesday that found that the agency's enforcement division has brought very few actions against naked short-selling and suggests that the SEC must improve how it processes short-selling complaints. David Kotz, who is also investigating the enforcement division for its handling of the Madoff fraud, said that between Jan. 1, 2007, and June 1, 2008, only 123 of the 5,000 naked short-selling complaints received by the SEC were forwarded for further investigation. The reason they were forwarded, he said, is because the subjects of the complaints were involved in other ongoing cases. "Our audit determined that enforcement's existing complaint receipt and processing hinder enforcement's ability to respond effectively to naked short-selling complaints and referrals," the report says. Naked short-selling involves selling shorts without having borrowed the securities to make a delivery. Last year, the SEC took some actions to restrict short-selling and also tightened its rules to prevent abusive practices as well. Kotz recommended the agency improve how it handles complaints by subjecting them to an "in-depth triage analysis" often used by the division to scrutinize other types of complaints it receives. Kotz's report prompted strong negative reactions from the SEC division, which said in a release that it did not concur with most of the recommendations. While division officials said they are concerned with naked short-selling that results in market manipulation, they noted that some naked short-selling can occur for legitimate reasons. "In recent months, a small but vocal cadre of advocates has emerged decrying the practice and suggesting it has damaging market effects," enforcement division managers said in a release. "But there is hardly unanimity in the investment community or the financial media on either the prevalence or the dangers of 'naked' short-selling." The division further criticized Kotz's report, saying it cites no "bona fide studies or empirical evidence" to show the impact that naked short-selling has on the market. It added that many of the complaints that come in "provide no support for the allegations." -By Sarah N. Lynch, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6634; sarah.lynch@dowjones.com
CALM my ass. Here is an article analysing CALM: http://seekingalpha.com/article/72895-calm-longs-walking-on-eggshells I put up the 1 year chart of CALM with the Nasdaq and guess what, they both dropped exactly the same % in the same timeframe!!! There was no extra selling... Are the rest of your picks are as good of examples as CALM??? In the 2 years frame your destroyed stock of CALM is up 90%, compared to the Nasdaq down -35%....
Your next example FRPT is up 275% in the last year compared to the market being down -30%... When did that big naked short value destroying occur? Giving timeframes might have helped your case.... JOSB has been followig its index the Nasdaq, no extra value drop there either....Lately actually outperforming it by 20%.... Same with SNDA, which is the ONLY pennystock in your list. Again, give me timeframes and explanations why the company was sound, otherwise those stocks just follow the market where they are listed in.....
Calm is a family enterprise. They cut a deal for a secondary with Paine Webber when the stock was 25 bucks. Before they knew it, the stock was 12. They canceled the secondary to the refrain of "YOU CAN"T DO THAT"!!!!! The stock went to two, or so. At the initiation of Reg Sho, january 5, 2005, CALM was featured in the Wall st. Journal as the most shorted stock. That, of course, was just the reported short. I think you can figure out what happened. Don't tell me the company wasn't harmed. Wanna know why Wall St. vaporized? I guess a nice secondary, corporate accounts and all just isn't good enough. You have to steal it all. These were companies targeted by naked shorters that survived. That was the challenge. You tell me how many were wiped that had something to offer. That were destroyed for illicit gains, and should be here. That 's the tough question. But the answer is, they all should have been allowed to sink or swim on their own, according to the published laws. That worthless pile of shit, the SEC, has filing requirements that cost us corps billions. What good are they if the money grungers have their own secondaries based on inside information whenever they want. Don't bother me anymore. You're a fool - an apologists for the Bolsheveks that put us here.
It can. Trust me. That said, there is not a single bank with transparant business model or sound business practices, get it? If the balance sheet of ANY bank would be transparant, the bank would fail. Why do you think we have the FDIC? That is why naked shorting caused the global financial meltdown.
You don't get it do you. The way that banks operate, they are ALWAYS (over)leveraged. Even triple A banks are leveraged, always. If a rumor is banks are undercapitalised comparatively to other banks, people withdraw their money, causing a SELF-FULFILLING prophecy. You say it yourself, they banned ALL shortselling. Not just naked short selling. How does this prove naked short selling didn't cause the meltdown, if they banned two totally different types of market activity?
You still don't understand. The issue is naked short selling. When there are billions "phantom shares" (i.e., none of them are borrowed) floating around, it's a huge issue. Some big hedge funds and other players have been called out, and none have provided a cogent response. They just cry about it being a "conspiracy theory." It's not. The data is there and the burden of proof is on them.
It never went below 5 and after that it had an incredible run up to 48. That's exactly what I said before, once the market recognizes that a stock is unjustly undervalued, it corrects its price, in this case upward. Now tell me, where were those naked short sellers from 6 to 48?? After all the trick worked once, shouldn't it worked again, and again and again??? 700% return in 2 years and no naked short seller was able to stop it??? Edit: Just looked it up, CALM went up 1000% in ONE YEAR!!! Of course it was heavily shorted and I am sure lots of short got burnt in the process and probably helped to rocket it up from $2 to $23... Hello.....
This video is completely biased, just like a majority of the things flytiger writes. No wonder he likes it so much. Here are some comments: 1. The narrator says that the naked shorting is obviously being done by the same person who bought the puts. BS. Where is the proof? 2. The fail figures do not take into account the total volume on the day. 3. The narrator tries to make some sort of point that BSC and LEH were taken down by short sellers. But the truth is that BSC and LEH were taken down by themselves, by ridiculously overleveraging themselves with bad bets. They got what they deserved.
I'll give you one. Remember Hibernia and I think Capital One? Well they merged, and Katrina hit. Some hedgie, somebody else look it up and post it, decided the deal would have to be repriced. So, he went to short HIbernia (Louisiana bank). No shares were available, so he did what any red blooded capitalist would do........he naked shorted it. I call this guy and say, "you're a wheel. Know anyone running Louisiana money. They have to own Hibernia. " skip skp. The guy at the pension fund said, and I paraphrase........." well, they cost us $150,000, but we made a lot of money." So, if you think you've got some pension somewhere that's gonna pay you , think again. Because that story is real. And you just can't fix stupid.