3 ms·

No. Other party still has to deliver your order and you enforce the delivery vigorously. The speed and extent of stock price changes is what makes them differen

• anamax 17y ago
  > No. Other party still has to deliver your order and you enforce the delivery vigorously. One expects "no" will be followed by supporting argument. Instead, we see more argument for same. After all, the "other party ... vigorously" is just as true of stocks as everything else. Note that the argument against short selling is actually driven by folks who argue against it because they think that it "unfairly" drives prices down and lets people profit from that. They bring up non-delivery because that's an appealing argument, but it's not a huge problem and it's not what they're trying to stop. Yes, I know about the VW short-squeeze a year or so ago. What of it? (Before you get too excited about the fact that some folks lost a lot of money, make sure that you understand WHO lost a lot of money.)