Bill Wexler's Dog Pound Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Bill Wexler's Dog Pound

REFR 1.655

+2.8%

3:58 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Kevin Podsiadlik who wrote (9193)	2/24/2003 1:16:29 AM
From: Mike M	Read Replies (1) of 10293

Re:<<Well then how do you explain the fact that, particularly during the bubble era, that these Canadian brokerages were frequently subject to "buy-ins" on heavily shorted stocks? If they never borrowed the stock to begin with, how could that have happened?>> I'll take your word for it that there were "buy-ins". If that happened when stocks were not borrowed then perhaps the "buy-in" was margin related. Re:<<On related issue, certain companies now have "single stock futures" that trade on their common stock, effectively permitting the taking of as large a negative position as one wants, without the need to borrow stock. How come these companies' shares don't implode as a result of unlimited supply?>> That's a canard Kevin. Not related to the discussion of small cap thinly traded stocks. You may want to look into what percentage of these large cap stocks is represented by the futures...

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next