I think that the numbers raised with respect to failures to deliver are enormous. I don't think I really trust those numbers as I suspect you don't trust the numbers for other reasons.
That's my opinion but it really doesn't matter. The reality is that there IS an answer. It just would take some policy change and some effort to get real information. Then we wouldn't have to waste time with this aspect of the debate.
Similarly, having a grandfathered exception to the Reg Sho listing really doesn't seem to help the quest for truth, now, does it?
I'm not really sure about the rest of your questions. I am not against shorting. I'm for having rules that are clear for all, that are equal for all. I don't see how the markets become more fair by having rules for only little people and having information only available to those who are big players.
When you leave "scam outing" to the whim of a hedge fund, by arguing that they are "exposing scams," as you seem to suggest, this amounts to be the noted "batman defense," that has been discredited, that is, they know better than we do, and perhaps better than the SEC and other regulators or SRO's, so therefore, we should let them be the ones who can do whatever they wish.
As we see in the news, these "heroes" aren't necessarily do-gooders. They are subject to the same human failings that scammers on the long side suffer. Forgive me if I am saying something that is not true, but you seem to argue that being "short" makes one more equipped to be honest, less subject to participation in manipulative behavior. I don't see it and the news supports my contention. |
