4 ms·
I think you didn't understand that paragraph. The implication is that Goldman couldn't get the stock, and in fact did not bother, and just lied and said they d
by jblow 14y ago
I think you didn't understand that paragraph. The implication is that Goldman couldn't get the stock, and in fact did not bother, and just lied and said they did.
- tedunangst 14y agoI get that. But there's no explanation as to why that's bad for the client, as is implied by the article.
- p0ckets 14y agoIt's not bad for the client. They wanted to short, and they did. Also, there are now non-existent shares being traded which artificially depresses the price, which is good if you shorted the stock.
- quantgenius 14y agoI think the paragraph means that the client THOUGHT Goldman couldn't get the stock and did not expect them to be able to get it but Goldman was able to get the stock.