Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: SAJ; Hostage
Please give me ONE example of a company where TOTAL short sales, naked or borrowed, exceed total issued shares.

For examples, two of the most shorted stocks currently:
Frontier Communications Corp. (FTR)- 204 million short shares (20.5X ave. daily trading volume in stock) versus total issued 1 billion shares
RR Donnelly (RRD)- 57 million short shares (32X ave. daily volume) versus 182 million issued shares

Legally a broker can sell shares he doesn't hold only in the course of market-making, where he has a reasonable expectation to cover by the settlement date.

Given the penalties and regulatory risk, a reputable broker-dealer would not deliberately engage in short selling.

I don't believe there's any evidence that naked short selling is a big risk, I suspect it's a cat's paw to eliminate short selling entirely, so that corporate executives can better entrench themselves from gimlet-eyed opportunist investors.

Then we'd have to depend more on the "gubbmint" to expose securities fraud.
38 posted on 05/17/2012 11:24:26 AM PDT by kenavi (1% of the 1% were born in the 1%.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: kenavi

Yes sure there are examples. I admit I haven’t paid attention to this subject for many years but I remember Mike Snyder doing a devastating special report (video) on naked shorting where he produced examples of companies that at the end of the day had more shorted shares outstanding than existed.

Give me some time to see if I can dig that report up.

But the real nail in the coffin for defenders/deniers of naked shorting was when Mike interviewed an investor that had bought every share of a small publicly traded company. He owned 100% of the stock and had no agreement with any brokerage to lend the shares, no hypothecation agreement.

And he showed how this company was shorted to 130% or so even though every share was owned by one individual who had never given permission to anyone to borrow his shares for shorting.

Can’t remember the name of the company but will try to find it. It’s been 4 or 5 years that I was in the market.


39 posted on 05/17/2012 11:42:58 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: kenavi; SAJ; Hostage
I left one word out:

Given the penalties and regulatory risk, a reputable broker-dealer would not deliberately engage in NAKED short selling.
40 posted on 05/17/2012 11:43:13 AM PDT by kenavi (1% of the 1% were born in the 1%.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: kenavi; SAJ
Found it. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aEOpTqmLZB7A

Also I spelled Mike's name wrong, it's Schneider not Snyder.

The company was Global Links.

Here's the relevant part of the transcript:

SCHNEIDER: In March 2005, the Senate Banking Committee confronted then-SEC Chairman William Donaldson with a story about Frank Dobrucki's company, the Nevada-based real estate holding company, Global Links. An investor named Robert Simpson had set out to prove that small companies were indeed frequent targets of abusive naked short sellers.

Simpson placed an order for $5,000 worth of stock in Global Links. That got Simpson ownership of all 1.1 million Global Link shares in the market. Not some of them, all of them.

UNIDENTIFIED: There were no shares available to be borrowed, and yet in two days, there were over 50 million shares traded. That's clearly something that needs work.

SIMPSON: I was absolutely blown away when I bought 1,282,050 shares, which equated to 111 percent of the issued and outstanding. I just couldn't even fathom that. So, it wasn't just crooked, it was Wild West times 10.

SCHNEIDER: The day all this started, trading in Global Links opened at 10 cents a share. Within a second, the price dropped to a penny. An hour and 16 minutes later, Global Links stock was trading at eight one-hundredths of a penny. Prices dropped 99 percent in less than two hours.

41 posted on 05/17/2012 11:53:35 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: kenavi
Just one? Trivial.

At various times over the past 3 years, the shares of Sirius, the satellite radio company, have shown more "short" shares than ever were issued by the company. The recent run-up over $2/share chased a lot of these away, but the naked shorters may be coming back now. They WILL be coming back w/o more money printing by Helicopter Bennie and the Inkjets, aka QE or Twist.

You'll need to go to the pinks to find most of the companies in this situation. Not surprisingly, excessive naked shorting also has the undesirable side effect of driving the share price to pennies, quite artificially.

45 posted on 05/17/2012 2:07:04 PM PDT by SAJ (What is the next tagline some overweening mod will censor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: kenavi; SAJ; Hostage
Please give me ONE example of a company where TOTAL short sales, naked or borrowed, exceed total issued shares.

See Bloomberg: `Phantom Shares,' Failed Trades and Naked Shorts. Scroll down to the example of a company named Global Links. An investor set out to prove naked shorting. He had bought ALL 1.1 million of the shares of Global Links. Yet there was subsequently 50 million shares worth of trading activity. He wound up owning 111% of the company.

48 posted on 05/17/2012 2:23:03 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (If I canÂ’t be persuasive, I at least hope to be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson