**** you, method of characteristics

[notyoueither]

BTW, care to address the effect on share values for legitimate investors of having counterfeits floating around?

[KrazyHorse]

So now it's not Lehman's fault that it went under?

[KrazyHorse]

BTW, care to address the effect on share values for legitimate investors of having counterfeits floating around?

Absolutely nil

[KrazyHorse]

I'd like to see some estimate from you of how many (at one time) naked shorts are in process.

Shorts must by law be covered within 3 days, and virtually all shorts ARE covered within that timeframe. Your silly little article doesn't even go into how many shares were involved in the JP Morgan case because it was likely minute.

[notyoueither]

Absolutely nil

Are you this seriously delusional?

What effect does a greater supply have on prices?

[notyoueither]

I'd like to see some estimate from you of how many (at one time) naked shorts are in process.

Shorts must by law be covered within 3 days, and virtually all shorts ARE covered within that timeframe. Your silly little article doesn't even go into how many shares were involved in the JP Morgan case because it was likely minute.

The current rules don't require the brokers to fix the trades by buying shares to cover their short positions after 13 days, they merely say that if the trades aren't fixed, the broker can't do any more short-sales in that security without borrowing or arranging to borrow the stock.

The Depository Trust & Clearing Corp., the New York clearing house that is owned by the big brokerage houses and whose mission is to settle and clear the lion's share of the daily stock transactions that occur in the markets, says it has no power to force brokers to fix the trades either, a fact that also frustrates critics of the current system.

[notyoueither]

We have before us a perfect example of what 'capture' means.

[KrazyHorse]

Are you this seriously delusional?

What effect does a greater supply have on prices?

The supply is transitory.

[KrazyHorse]

The current rules don't require the brokers to fix the trades by buying shares to cover their short positions after 13 days, they merely say that if the trades aren't fixed, the broker can't do any more short-sales in that security without borrowing or arranging to borrow the stock.

Oh, my ****ing god. That's an ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM for shorts which are already IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW, namely the SEC act of 193X (3 day settlement)

[notyoueither]

The supply is transitory.

Research Capital says this has been going on since February 2006. "The failed deliver has simply been replaced with another delivery commitment which also fails," the brokerage says.

[KrazyHorse]

I fail to see how that would be possible GIVEN THE REGULATION YOU YOURSELF POSTED

[notyoueither]

The current rules don't require the brokers to fix the trades by buying shares to cover their short positions after 13 days, they merely say that if the trades aren't fixed, the broker can't do any more short-sales in that security without borrowing or arranging to borrow the stock.

Oh, my ****ing god. That's an ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM for shorts which are already IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW, namely the SEC act of 193X (3 day settlement)

You keep floating the BS about 3 days.

It is clearly BS, since the main traffic controller for the system throws up their hands.

[notyoueither]

And when the regulator gets involved, they fine a bank 400K when they realise $1.7 billion from related activity.

[KrazyHorse]

You keep floating the BS about 3 days.

It is clearly BS, since the main traffic controller for the system throws up their hands.

God, I wish I could put you on ignore, you ****.

[KrazyHorse]

when they realise $1.7 billion from related activity

So now JP Morgan's 1.7 billion from equities is due to some minor amount of naked shorting they got caught in?