BAGDAD BOB OBRIEN HAS A FUZZY MEMORY ALSO AS SEEN ON BALONEY WEB SITE. THESE POSTS CONTRADICTS TODAYS RANTINGS ON HIS BLOGG:
Re: Dr. Susanne Trimbath Comment Letter To SEC on Reg SHO By Benny on 8/29/2006 2:58 PM
Bob,
How many naked shorts are there in Global Links?
Do you think it was 5 or 10 million according to the FOIA data?
Dirty rotten scoundrals all of them.
Re: Dr. Susanne Trimbath Comment Letter To SEC on Reg SHO By BOBO on 8/29/2006 3:55 PM
Benny: 27 million FTDs in Global Links on as of Feb, 2005, decreased over the next two months to "only" 10 million
Re: Dr. Susanne Trimbath Comment Letter To SEC on Reg SHO By Benny on 8/29/2006 5:49 PM
Bob,
Is a FTD a naked short?
How many naked shorts are there in Global links? Does 10 million FTD's mean 10 million naked shorts?.
I am trying to understand the data like you Pros.
Re: Dr. Susanne Trimbath Comment Letter To SEC on Reg SHO By BOBO on 8/29/2006 7:34 PM
Benny. FTDs are Fail To Delivers, which are naked shorts. They sold shares, took the money, and failed to deliver the shares.
To: scionist who wrote (95086) 8/27/2006 8:16:44 PM
From: AsturiasPh.D/MBA Read Replies (1) of 95150
PATCHIE ADMITS SEN. BENNETT DUPED!! NO NAKED SHORTING IN GLOBAL LINKS STOCKFRAUD.
Dave Patch Exposes SEC Colluding With Wall Street To Defraud Investors
Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog
Posted by: BOBO 8/17/2006 9:45 PM
That doesn't happen every day - where FOIA data shows up for a company that was used as the poster boy for naked short selling by a Senator on the Senate Banking Committee, who directly tells the head of the SEC that he wants a full and complete accounting on what the hell happened with that company - and the data shows that Wall Street was trading up to 10 times the total authorized shares at the time of the controversy. That's quite a dilutive multiplier, huh?
"During this period, the SEC has been assuring us how Reg SHO has "worked," and has solved much of the naked short selling problem - at the same time that it knew that in Global Links, Wall Street had printed whole cloth multiples of the authorized shares as naked shorts, and then proceeded to cover it up, further victimizing investors in that company."
thesanitycheck.com
==============================================
Re: Forbes Again Breaks Story on SEC Cover-Up and NSS Fraud By Patchie on 8/27/2006 7:28 AM
Global links was not naked shorted..it was manipulated. By the definition of manipulation you must havean impact on teh stock price in a manner of illegal trading activities.
The Excessive FTD's was created by Wall Street's clerical error. They forgot to adjust shareholder accounts thus allowing shareholders to sell excessive amounts of shares post split. That in itself is not fraud.
Fraud comes into play when they realize teh mistake and do nothing about it. Then, they willfully decided to have an impact on teh market cap of Global links - definition of Fraud.
Consider you receiving a payroll check from your company. When you deposit the check $1,000, the clerk actually deposits $10,000 in your account. Clerical error. Soon the bank gets an acciounting error as deposits do not match checks. They identify the problem and correct the mistake. If the perdson has already spent the extra $9,000 they must pay it back. pretty simple.
In the case of Global Links, Wall Streets reaction would be the equivalent to the bank not addressing the extra $9,000 but instead debited your company an additional $9,000 to cover their mistake. And they did it many times over. They stole the money to protect the mistake.
thesanitycheck.com |
