|
Post by mnholdem on Oct 19, 2017 16:25:33 GMT -5
Great find. This is a good write up to counter all of those naysayers, even on this board, that refuse to believe that there is short manipulation. At some point, when MannKind is healthier financially, I think they should legally go after the brokerages, market makers and individuals that have cheated its shareholders. Actually this article has nothing to do with short manipulation of the underlying stock. It is about the brokers/banks overcharging shorters on interest or underpaying those of us that lend. It's interesting you read it and see in it some noion of short manipulation. I guess that is a form of confirmation bias. Personally I believe shorts and longs manipulate this stock, and there are likely many that play both sides. That creates short term volatility and over sized swings. True, but there have been plenty of suits and SEC fines/settlements related to illegal naked short selling, such as this one from 2010: Goldman will pay the SEC $450,000 to settle a naked-short selling penalties claim, according to the AP.
(The claim is wholly unrelated to the SEC's fraud case against Goldman and the rumored criminal investigation being brought by the Manhattan DA)
Goldman hasn't denied or admitted guilt, but the penalty is based on Goldman's not providing shares it shorted within three days. Usually when shares lapse the three days, it's because they've been naked shorted. Source: www.businessinsider.com/goldman-settles-a-naked-short-selling-lawsuit-2010-5Other recent naked short selling lawsuits: www.courthousenews.com/virnetx-class-accuses-big-brokers-of-naked-short-sales/theintercept.com/2016/12/15/whistleblower-vindicated-massive-trading-firm-knight-capital-charged-with-abusing-naked-shorts/Here how one company (Overstock) fought back against naked short selling and saw their share prices climb: www.coindesk.com/overstocks-blockchain-war-naked-shorting/...and one of my absolute favorites: www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-02-17/dole-food-had-too-many-shares
|
|
|
Post by dreamboatcruise on Oct 19, 2017 16:43:16 GMT -5
Actually this article has nothing to do with short manipulation of the underlying stock. It is about the brokers/banks overcharging shorters on interest or underpaying those of us that lend. It's interesting you read it and see in it some noion of short manipulation. I guess that is a form of confirmation bias. Personally I believe shorts and longs manipulate this stock, and there are likely many that play both sides. That creates short term volatility and over sized swings. True, but there have been plenty of suits and SEC fines/settlements related to illegal naked short selling, such as this one from 2010: Goldman will pay the SEC $450,000 to settle a naked-short selling penalties claim, according to the AP.
(The claim is wholly unrelated to the SEC's fraud case against Goldman and the rumored criminal investigation being brought by the Manhattan DA)
Goldman hasn't denied or admitted guilt, but the penalty is based on Goldman's not providing shares it shorted within three days. Usually when shares lapse the three days, it's because they've been naked shorted. Source: www.businessinsider.com/goldman-settles-a-naked-short-selling-lawsuit-2010-5Other naked short selling lawsuits: www.courthousenews.com/virnetx-class-accuses-big-brokers-of-naked-short-sales/theintercept.com/2016/12/15/whistleblower-vindicated-massive-trading-firm-knight-capital-charged-with-abusing-naked-shorts/That is a problem and hopefully they will continue to be aggressive in going after those that abuse the system. As someone that loans my shares, this practice of not locating the shares in a timely manner probably means I'm getting paid somewhat less in interest than I should be.
|
|