|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Sept 27, 2015 11:22:07 GMT -5
I would not use the word genius. In my opinion if he is in fact shorting biotech along with his inner clique it is worse than what he did to MNKD with his FDA emails. This guy actually founded a pharmaceutical company for the only purpose of generating profits and creating havoc within athe sector. I still believe the price hike was a hoax and the attention and havoc created from it played right into his playbook. This is sickening to watch and nothing be done about it. These Biotechnology shorting actions are damaging an important American health care industry and potentially costing lives. It should be stopped immediately. How specifically is shorting damaging the health Care industry?
|
|
|
Post by harrys on Sept 27, 2015 11:41:57 GMT -5
These Biotechnology shorting actions are damaging an important American health care industry and potentially costing lives. It should be stopped immediately. How specifically is shorting damaging the health Care industry? I think he was speaking specifically about the efforts to short MNKD and other small biotechs into oblivion. I think shorting biotech right now is a healthy thing for a sector that is bloated and overpriced. The means by which its being done though (a la Shkrelli) is completely immoral and probably illegal. I would have liked to see market efficiency lead to more reasonable biotech valuations.
|
|
|
Post by avogadro on Sept 27, 2015 13:40:52 GMT -5
How specifically is shorting damaging the health Care industry? I think he was speaking specifically about the efforts to short MNKD and other small biotechs into oblivion. I think shorting biotech right now is a healthy thing for a sector that is bloated and overpriced. The means by which its being done though (a la Shkrelli) is completely immoral and probably illegal. I would have liked to see market efficiency lead to more reasonable biotech valuations. Shorting a startup biotech is shooting fish in a barrel. All they have is the cash from the IPO, one or two research ideas but no products and no sales. Any idiot can short them and make money, an unscrupulous idiot can destroy them. My proposal is to block shorting them until they have reasonable sales and are able to defend their shares.
|
|
|
Post by dinvestor89 on Sept 28, 2015 7:24:58 GMT -5
I think a real great question is, How does shorting help ANY industry.. except for the hedge fund industry....
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Sept 28, 2015 7:41:37 GMT -5
I think a real great question is, How does shorting help ANY industry.. except for the hedge fund industry.... Ha! The same answer that's given for why HFT and dark pools are necessary: "They provide liquidity" to allow money to move more easily through the market so that the pros in NYC, London, Chicago, etc., can continue milking the biggest golden cow ever in the History of Planet Earth What a distorted way of thinking, but they are the ones usually holding the trump cards. For example, using HFT, options strategies, long positions, short positions, and psychological tricks through Cramer and friends, CNBC, Motley Stool, etc, they don't lose. Some HFT firms NEVER lose for a single day in a year. How does this happen? ??
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Sept 28, 2015 7:44:07 GMT -5
I think a real great question is, How does shorting help ANY industry.. except for the hedge fund industry.... I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding among many investors concerning shorting generally. Though it CAN be part of a conspiracy to damage a company, that isn't usually the case. More typically, shorting is just a trade reflecting the investor's judgment that the subject company is overpriced. In this more typical context, shorting is no more "harmful" to the subject company than long investing is "helpful".
|
|
|
Post by mssciguy on Sept 28, 2015 8:01:19 GMT -5
savzak The real concern may be abuses of shorting, like naked shorting (correct me if I am wrong, but it's similar to counterfeiting and allowed for certain purposes but not for manipulation of price). Years ago when I watched Cramer, he admitted on live television that shorts can and do destroy companies. But this is not retail shorting from what I understand.
|
|
|
Post by jbe on Sept 28, 2015 8:05:16 GMT -5
Shorts can manipulate a stock price by claiming they will be buying a bunch of the stock in three days, but want to sell that stock now, which allows the short to drive the price of the stock down (at which point, they buy the stock they are going to need at the artificially lower price they just created by shorting the stock).
I would not have a problem with this if there were a matching long side method to balance the short method....but I don't think there is a matching long method.
I can short sell shares of a stock without having shares in my account, but, my broker will not allow me to buy shares of stock without the necessary money already in my account....
So, it presently seems unbalanced in favor of short sellers' manipulations....so, just as you cannot buy a stock without the cash to buy it, you should not be allowed to sell a stock you do not own.
|
|
|
Post by avogadro on Sept 28, 2015 8:18:21 GMT -5
I think a real great question is, How does shorting help ANY industry.. except for the hedge fund industry.... I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding among many investors concerning shorting generally. Though it CAN be part of a conspiracy to damage a company, that isn't usually the case. More typically, shorting is just a trade reflecting the investor's judgment that the subject company is overpriced. In this more typical context, shorting is no more "harmful" to the subject company than long investing is "helpful". Fear is a much stronger emotion than greed. Thus, when a stock is shorted then bashed every day it has a greater affect on the price than when it is purchased and hyped.
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Sept 29, 2015 12:10:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by harrys on Sept 29, 2015 12:17:11 GMT -5
Smells like a red herring to me... If "over regulation" was the problem then the Socialist Democracies overseas would have the highest drug costs, instead they have drug costs magnitudes lower than the US. The reason we have such exorbitant healthcare costs comes down to simple-unadulterated greed with a sprinkle of mass inefficiency within our healthcare infrastructure.
|
|
|
Post by notamnkdmillionaire on Sept 29, 2015 12:20:56 GMT -5
Smells like a red herring to me... If "over regulation" was the problem then the Socialist Democracies overseas would have the highest drug costs, instead they have drug costs magnitudes lower than the US. The reason we have such exorbitant healthcare costs comes down to simple-unadulterated greed with a sprinkle of mass inefficiency within our healthcare infrastructure. comparing apples and oranges. The health care industry is nationalized in most of those countries unlike here. The point being is that the tinkering and regulation by the morons in DC has led to this. It's the good intention and bad consequences scenario that typically happens when well meaning people create bad policy.
|
|