|
Post by hellodolly on Apr 12, 2023 13:43:53 GMT -5
Yeah, I remember the stuff from ages ago. I thought there was something about naked shorting relevant to today. No, I haven’t seen any shorts here lately have you? Never stopped being relevant is my suspicion. Have I seen any shorts? Yes. They're everywhere, but they always play dumb. What I can never figure out with people who short stocks is why they play dumb? So, you're a seller and not a buyer. OK. Make your money, but don't have to play dumb or hide that it doesn't exist or you are on the other side of the trade. You can be short and not be involved in the schemes of Wall Street. They are like the boogeyman for some reason. Here...but, not really "here", instead over there, but not "there". Three card monte....makes no sense you can't stand up for your positions rather, hide them. For transparency, I have never shorted any stock. Instead, I play the 3X leveraged bull/bear ETFs depending on the trends. Some times I get in and out the next day, or I hold for a few. I'll also tell you I'm much better at calling the entry but, I'm terrible at calling the exit. Some times, too much money was left on the table but at least I executed my plan so, to me, they're wins and losses regardless of the outcomes. Emotions can be left out when you execute your plan. But c'mon man...if we have short sellers here, no big Fckn deal. But, have the balls to say it.
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Apr 12, 2023 14:24:56 GMT -5
Agree dolly that if they were here, they might as well say it. Shorting is a legal strategy and has been quite effective over the years with MNKD. There used to be some shorts who frequented this board. But no longer, to my knowledge. gorman says “they’re everywhere” but hasn’t named any here, so it’s just disinformation which serves no useful purpose.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Apr 12, 2023 14:30:30 GMT -5
Thanks for posting, no wonder I don’t recall it, as I surely didn’t read those 100+ pages. Not planning to now either, so cliff notes appreciated, TIA. Curious whether any of those docs reference activity post-2017. So not only were you and ktim too lazy to perform a simple search of my posts or look back in this thread to find the court docs—when someone else does the work for you you are too lazy to even read the documents. Pathetic! That’s childish behavior.
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Apr 12, 2023 15:51:00 GMT -5
Guilty as charged for not going back to search all your posts or read the 100+ pages of docs to rehash stuff from a decade ago. I do vividly recall buying into the “naked shorts are causing our stock to not flourish” theory, and back then the short interest was sky high, as were the share borrowing and lending rates. Time marches on and lessons are learned.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Apr 12, 2023 16:34:03 GMT -5
I’ve posted multiple cases in this thread alone. I even called you out for mocking it as being a “conspiracy theory.” I guess you weren’t paying attention! That "" isn't a phrase I tend to use as it is an almost meaningless cliché, so you might be confusing me with someone else. I have questioned unsubstantiated claims such as that there is some huge pool of "fake shares" that exist. So I may well have pointed out "unsubstantiated" or even "inconsistent with my researched about the topic". I certainly would be interested in links to any SEC court cases specifically discussing MNKD trading. If you've posted those, please point to them, or repost, or let me know where I can look it up on SEC site. That would be something real I'd like to see. We certainly have had issues over the years with short attacks on MNKD. Any evidence of illegality, I'd like to see. In particular I'd love to know the time periods involved. I like facts. Are you replying as cretin using ktim or talking for cretin under ktim? I’m confused because you are implying I was talking to you when in fact I quoted cretin as you can clearly see above. And, as you already know, it’s cretin who likes to call things that are actually true “conspiracy theories” in an attempt to discredit the thing (for whatever reason, my guess is to fit cretin’s agenda, whatever that may be).
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Apr 12, 2023 16:38:25 GMT -5
Guilty as charged for not going back to search all your posts or read the 100+ pages of docs to rehash stuff from a decade ago. I do vividly recall buying into the “naked shorts are causing our stock to not flourish” theory, and back then the short interest was sky high, as were the share borrowing and lending rates. Time marches on and lessons are learned. The SIR is still very high as compared to the average. Days like last week where 90% of transactions were short as reported by the FINRA information Harryx1 shared don't inspire confidence everything is hunky dory and I'm unable to be oblivious to it. When I've tracked the short behavior in the past, I've noticed that the SIR doesn't seem to account for the full volume of shorting that's reported, and I'm not an expert but have assumed it meant shorting could happen in bursts to squash a rapidly increasing share price, but then either get covered or potentially "misreported" or otherwise managed so that the SIR is high, but not "sky high" (whatever that means).
|
|
|
Post by mango on Apr 12, 2023 16:39:00 GMT -5
Guilty as charged for not going back to search all your posts or read the 100+ pages of docs to rehash stuff from a decade ago. I do vividly recall buying into the “naked shorts are causing our stock to not flourish” theory, and back then the short interest was sky high, as were the share borrowing and lending rates. Time marches on and lessons are learned. I’m glad you are admitting that this is not a “conspiracy theory” as you have implied and mocked several times before. It’s highly plausible, and likely, illegal naked short schemes are taking place currently with MannKind, but as the public is finding out, it’s rather easy to get away with!
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Apr 12, 2023 16:58:31 GMT -5
Whatever you want to call the theory is your choice. Hold onto that narrative for a while longer, I suspect you’ll come around eventually. But that’s not my concern, diversity of opinion keeps things interesting!
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Apr 12, 2023 17:06:50 GMT -5
Check out cretin's most recent platitude in the "Latest Short Interest" thread. "conspiracy", "theory", "narrative". FUD
|
|
|
Post by mango on Apr 12, 2023 17:24:00 GMT -5
Whatever you want to call the theory is your choice. Hold onto that narrative for a while longer, I suspect you’ll come around eventually. But that’s not my concern, diversity of opinion keeps things interesting! If you had read the court documents you would know it is not a theory. You just look silly calling it that now.
|
|
|
Post by harryx1 on Apr 13, 2023 9:08:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Apr 13, 2023 9:44:29 GMT -5
“The actions and inactions of FINRA and its members in allowing these liabilities to persist and be substituted with liabilities for different securities in a different company, all while leaving shareholders with counterfeit shares, is unacceptable.”
That answered one of the questions I had about Regulation SHO. It says that if you have a Failure To Deliver (FTD) you eventually have to close out the position (which I assume is mostly complied with voluntarily and also mostly unenforced when it's not) and that closing out the position must be done with shares of "like kind and value". And I always wondered, what the heck does "like kind and value" mean? Now I know. It means whatever the market maker (and apparently FINRA) want it to mean.
I didn't realize FINRA was a self-regulation not-for-profit setup by the financial industry (to avoid additional government oversight). This is common. There are numerous examples within multiple regulated industries of using industry associations to act as a buffer between the regulators and the regulated. If it ever worked well with FINRA, that appears to have broken down. I'm shocked (he said sarcastically as possible).
|
|
|
Post by RainbowUnicorn on Apr 13, 2023 14:55:43 GMT -5
“The actions and inactions of FINRA and its members in allowing these liabilities to persist and be substituted with liabilities for different securities in a different company, all while leaving shareholders with counterfeit shares, is unacceptable.”
That answered one of the questions I had about Regulation SHO. It says that if you have a Failure To Deliver (FTD) you eventually have to close out the position (which I assume is mostly complied with voluntarily and also mostly unenforced when it's not) and that closing out the position must be done with shares of "like kind and value". And I always wondered, what the heck does "like kind and value" mean? Now I know. It means whatever the market maker (and apparently FINRA) want it to mean.
I didn't realize FINRA was a self-regulation not-for-profit setup by the financial industry (to avoid additional government oversight). This is common. There are numerous examples within multiple regulated industries of using industry associations to act as a buffer between the regulators and the regulated. If it ever worked well with FINRA, that appears to have broken down. I'm shocked (he said sarcastically as possible).
ADMINISTRATIVE "Law"/regulation takes away representative government and Constitutional protections in regards to the legal "system".
|
|
|
Post by biffn on Apr 26, 2023 9:15:36 GMT -5
sell volume at 10 this morning. Any ideas?
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Apr 26, 2023 9:32:16 GMT -5
Relatively light volume and the SP being blown around in the breeze.
|
|