May 6, 2009
How altruistic the naked shorters are. How can they help it if one of the side effects of rapidly driving a share's value down is to make a lot of money when they cover, before they have to deliver. These self-appointed arbitrators of a stock's value have apparently convinced the SEC that they are only doing it for the good of the market, and you buy their arguments. After all, they are a lot smarter than those gullible average people who have put their savings in the market. You know, those honest people that you should be protecting. They are only trying to create liquidity. Shame on anybody who thinks they are only doing it for the money.
Why are you making the main focus of these hearings the uptick rule (which indeed needs to be re-instated), when the elephant in the room is the blatant naked, rapid fire, shorting that goes on every day. Aren't you the least bit curious how thousands of different stocks can plunge within seconds of each other? And just who are the buyers of these big blocks of shares that suddenly became available? Is it possible that it is a closed loop where the "buyer" and "seller" are one and the same, and the "buyer" furnish the shares to make the shorting possible in the first place?
I once had an IRS audit where it was requested that I furnish a record of every trade that I made years before. It was a lot of work, but I got it done. When I was finished, the auditor pulled out a record of those same trades, that she already had. The day, minute and second of every trade was on that list. Have you ever done such an audit of the naked shorters, and demanded to know where they borrowed the shares from, and followed the trail to see who those sudden buyers were?
If not, why not?????
Just once please?????
Or is this hearing just for show?
Del Kroupa