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.
Technology Stocks : NewCom (NWCM)

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Billy Bob who wrote (583)8/19/1998 10:38:00 AM
From: Cool Hand Luke  Read Replies (1) of 662
 
Cossack, Billy Bob, or whatever your handle de jour might be - we all share your frustration - and some of the longs have BIG positions that have been the subject of the unbelievable manipulations of NWCM by the market makers. I hope your long position is more resolute than your monikers on this thread!

We can be thankful that the company's fundamentals are as strong as they are, or the share price could have been forced much lower. As has been posted here earlier, we have identified some of those manipulators. Dreyfus, as we have seen, is not so much a manipulator as a vanilla-flavored seller ... not on fundamentals, but pure politics. If you sell half the float in a company, is it not logical the stock will drop in half? And how many longs were frightened out of the stock in the process?

This is about to end. Investor shareholders like myself are becoming more vocal about having our shares toyed with. Why is it one prominent money manager whose trader clears through Bear Sterns, cannot get delivery of his NWCM shares? It is not because Bear Sterns does not have the stock (they don't) - it is because they refuse to buy it in. They are cow-towing to their powerful clients who are short the stock.

Why is it another prominent broker has over 300,000 shares of NWCM long on his book, but his clearing firm shows less than 100,000? Why is it stories abound today - as we speak - of people still able to short the stock, when no shares have been available to borrow on the street for months?

This is manipulation, pure and simple - and manipulation is illegal. There is nothing illegal about selling a stock short. But the refusal to buy in stock to make good a delivery against a bona fide purchase is illegal.

It was very nice that Dreyfus had all those shares to feed the shorts who needed to cover - but the fact is most of the shorts were too stupid to take advantage of it. Look for the open short position for July 31 next week (Dreyfus long 478,000) and then the August 31 position on September 25 (Dreyfus long less than 200,000) and see if the open short positions have dropped in half. I doubt it. The more desperate they become, the more hanky panky we'll see.

And then we'll get our attorneys involved - and the press.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext