3 ms·

"far from perfect" - well that misses the mark by a long shot. We still have unsettled shorts happening every day that are often naked and regularly stay naked

by toolz 4y ago

"far from perfect" - well that misses the mark by a long shot. We still have unsettled shorts happening every day that are often naked and regularly stay naked for months on end - companies are destroyed from this blatant market manipulation. Gamestop was 140% short! Is this uncommon? Many people seem to think not. The corruption in wall-street runs so deep that tax payers have to foot the bill when no middle class person would look over the toxic loans being packaged up pre-2008 and think that wasn't a scam. This crashed the world economy, it's hard to imagine a bigger scam ever being possible without the former bank CEOs running every financial branch of the government promising bail-outs to the "too big to fail" scammers.

Closi 4y ago
> Gamestop was 140% short! Is this uncommon? Many people seem to think not. This is silly. Of course it is uncommon - if it was common we would see short squeezes all the time.
kristjansson 4y ago
> 140% We're still stuck on this[0]? [0]: https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market-struction-conditions-early-2021.pdf https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market... @ Page 25
- toolz 4y ago
  Yes I'm still stuck on that, it's a story people often recognize and just because there has been no naked shorting found as of that report doesn't mean there isn't significant naked shorting involved. With the shorting moved to dark pools on top of the fact there were likely 45 million shares still shorted after that reporting data shows, it's not as clear cut as you might be implying. Many people are confident naked shorting happens and GME hit 140%, the highest ever according to that report. So yeah, consider me skeptical that the SEC was able to find evidence of a non-scandal and used that evidence to report a non-controversial finding. You can bury your head in the sand and pretend the market is fair if you want, but I'll stay skeptical.
  - kristjansson 4y ago
    I don’t know that I’d go so far the other way to infer the market is _fair_ to retail traders, but the 140% short number is not itself evidence of impropriety. All it requires a lot of longs allowing their shares to be lent (check) and a lot of shorts with appetite, conviction, and deep pockets (check).
MrMan 4y ago
this is foolish commentary. its like a trader on Wall Street complaining about javascript frameworks
nradov 4y ago
Naked shorting doesn't destroy companies. Hypothetically even if the stock price goes to zero that doesn't prevent the company from operating as a going concern. Incompetent managers destroy companies. Sometimes those managers try to deflect blame for their own failings by whining about short sellers.

by toolz 4y ago

Closi 4y ago

> Gamestop was 140% short! Is this uncommon? Many people seem to think not. This is silly. Of course it is uncommon - if it was common we would see short squeezes all the time.

kristjansson 4y ago

> 140% We're still stuck on this[0]? [0]: https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market-struction-conditions-early-2021.pdf https://www.sec.gov/files/staff-report-equity-options-market... @ Page 25

toolz 4y ago
Yes I'm still stuck on that, it's a story people often recognize and just because there has been no naked shorting found as of that report doesn't mean there isn't significant naked shorting involved. With the shorting moved to dark pools on top of the fact there were likely 45 million shares still shorted after that reporting data shows, it's not as clear cut as you might be implying. Many people are confident naked shorting happens and GME hit 140%, the highest ever according to that report. So yeah, consider me skeptical that the SEC was able to find evidence of a non-scandal and used that evidence to report a non-controversial finding. You can bury your head in the sand and pretend the market is fair if you want, but I'll stay skeptical.
- kristjansson 4y ago
  I don’t know that I’d go so far the other way to infer the market is _fair_ to retail traders, but the 140% short number is not itself evidence of impropriety. All it requires a lot of longs allowing their shares to be lent (check) and a lot of shorts with appetite, conviction, and deep pockets (check).

MrMan 4y ago

this is foolish commentary. its like a trader on Wall Street complaining about javascript frameworks

nradov 4y ago

Naked shorting doesn't destroy companies. Hypothetically even if the stock price goes to zero that doesn't prevent the company from operating as a going concern. Incompetent managers destroy companies. Sometimes those managers try to deflect blame for their own failings by whining about short sellers.