SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : Shorting stocks: Broken stocks - Analysis

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Mark Marcellus who wrote (1087)7/24/1998 11:40:00 PM
From: Mark Marcellus  Read Replies (1) of 2506
 
I finally covered my SWSH short today. That alone probably isn't of much interest to anyone, since I think everyone else covered a while ago. The way it happened was kind of interesting though. For those who don't recall, SWSH was an "E" stock that was actually delisted by the Nasdaq and became a Pink Sheet, making it very difficult to get quotes or trade the thing.

Anyway, I've had a GTC order to cover at 2 1/2 since early June (I'm stubborn, and my price is my price). I've seen it trade below that price a few times, but never got an execution. Each time I questioned it I was given a bunch of phoney excuses until we got to the one I couldn't refute, that all the trades were on the bid and the ask was higher. Then today, I'd finally had it. I saw that 5500 shares had traded in a range between 1 3/4 and 2 3/8. That looked suspiciously like a bid/ask spread to me, so I called Fidelity to ask why I hadn't gotten an execution. After 15 minutes of the usual excuses (someone was in line in front of you - on a 1 1/2 month old order; they didn't have enough shares to fill the whole order - but it wasn't an all or none; etc., etc.) and after several huddles between the phone rep and the trading desk, I finally got an explanation relayed to me from the market maker. It seems he was concerned because the company was late on their filings and "he didn't want to sell me potentially worthless stock". I was deeply touched by his concern, but pointed out to the phone rep that I'd probably be okay since this was a buy to cover order. The rep said they were aware of that, and the market maker had agreed to try and fill it. Sure enough, the order filled even as we spoke.

I must say that the public servants trading this stock are doing yeoman's work to protect us. Besides actively refusing to make trades, they've had a markup between the bid and the ask that's been averaging in the neighborhood of 50%. I'm sure this is done to further discourage the public from buying it. Furthermore, if Fidelity is to be believed, the market makers have taken thousands of shares of this "potentially worthless stock" off the public's hands, and have put nary a one back into circulation. Most likely they've done this out of the goodness of their hearts ;-).

I agree with Drakes that this one could go all the way, but I've a feeling that even if that does happen, there will be a couple of interesting twists and turns before we get there.

FWIW,

Mark
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext