This is the part that's been bothering me for a few days now. Do they mean you can put up for sale, but allow no buyers? So the only effect is to drive the price down.
This way they can drive any publicly traded business to bankruptcy, unless they (wink, wink) follow the new Dem Left totalitarian control. Freedom? Ha ha...
Think less political. They do it for financial control. As I understand it, Thursday they did this to drive price down to allow short sellers to make contract purchases. Otherwise they’d have lost billions more.
They risked jail to keep from losing everything.
The discussion is actually over who gets to buy. By suspending certain trading venues from buying, small traders are impeded and Gamestop stock being sold is thereby directed to desperate short seller hedge funds.
” buying creates excess counterparty risk, but selling doesn’t, WHO’S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRANSATCTION? ONe hand can’t clap. Somebody has to buy the trade.
This is the part that’s been bothering me for a few days now. Do they mean you can put up for sale, but allow no buyers? So the only effect is to drive the price down.”
The only thing I can figure is that the counter party in this case is the clearing house itself. There are not two parties to a trade but three - the seller, the clearing house and the buyer.
Because Citadel sold and/or lent stocks they didn’t have, now they are desperate to buy them at ridiculous because the prices are going to get even more ridiculous.
“This way they can drive any publicly traded business to bankruptcy”
Once the company issues shares, shareholders are mainly a legacy issue. If there’s money to pay a dividend, that’s good, if not, that’s OK.
Paying the executives is the most important concern.