I know you have been bearish bald man. But you are partly blaming the fall on the MM's. It is not some kind of MM conspiracy to load up on shares.
This is a minor digression (though more on point than discussions of male pattern baldness), but:
I see repeated references to market makers driving the price of a stock up or down to generate profits. Some disgruntled investor always seems to blame a big move on an MM conspiracy. For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal recently had an article discussing how difficult it has become for institutional investors to buy or sell medium-size blocks without moving the price of a stock, on even the most liquid NASDAQ stocks. In essence, the article said the MM's are too passive, unwilling to stick their necks out and act as a buffer, and therefore increasing the volatility of NASDAQ stocks.
If that explanation is correct, then ASND's sharp downward move is not caused by MM's driving the price down and loading up on ASND so that they can sell it back to us later, at a higher price; rather, it's due to MM's not stepping in to load up on ASND when various large investors want to lighten their positions a bit, instead leaving their hands off and letting the price "flap".
I'd certainly be interested in hearing what others think of this.
(btw, count me among those who isn't too concerned about this move. I picked up more CSCC today, at 28 3/4. I'll bet that before the end of the calendar year, we'll see an irrational runup that is the mirror image of this irrational selloff. That will be a good time to lighten back up a little.) |
