Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mr. Pink's Picks: selected event-driven value investments -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arcane Lore who wrote (14207)	9/30/2000 6:37:24 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18998

Right on...! Finally, the SEC turns to remove one vast inequality: You can buy Yahoo (fill in your preferred stock symbol) puts without uptick You can short Yahoo calls without uptick (take that together and you have one synthetic short position) You can short a company on the Nasdaq Small Cap without uptick (maybe one acquired by yahoo for stock) You can short the same company on the OTC BB without uptick Finally you can short Yahoo in Germany without any uptick... But you have to wait for one silly uptick to short Yahoo on the Nasdaq....!

To: Arcane Lore who wrote (14207)	9/30/2000 10:06:58 PM
From: Gotham Guru	Respond to of 18998

Let the "Long Squeeze" begin!

To: Arcane Lore who wrote (14207)	9/30/2000 10:30:49 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Respond to of 18998

Ironically, if the ban on stock futures is lifted, the short-sale rule could become moot. Not only are there no ticks in futures, but also short-sellers would not have to borrow shares to short them. Thus, they wouldn't face having their shares "bought in," which is what happens in a short squeeze, a form of market manipulation. This argument, as true as it is in theory, is a big fallacy in real life. As a proxy in terms of liquidity take Nasdaq index futures between Nov 1999 and March 2000, or even worse, German Bund Futures from August 1998 onwards. German Bunds which are usually not susceptible to squeezes, thanks to their easy exchangeability to equally ranked Euros as well as their Jumbo size, got scarce during end of 1998. It ended up that more than 5 times the amount of deliverables (and that have been several Billions) got tied up in Futures which topped out at 119 in early 1999. Traders speculated whether the German mortgages could hit zero interest..., providing every German with cheap mortgage loans over the next 10 years. One of the reasons was not the liquidity (or lack thereof) but the onesided delivery duty: Future sellers have to come up with the underlying on demand, not the future buyers with the cash to invest. The squeeze occured when future sellers witnessed steep discounts in subsequent futures making positions impossible to roll over.

To: Arcane Lore who wrote (14207)	10/1/2000 3:29:48 AM
From: Mr. Pink	Respond to of 18998

This one comment seems particularly insightful and delivered in a most handsome manner. <<Dan Loeb, a New York hedge-fund manager, would like to see the uptick restriction abolished because it increases the difficulty of implementing short sales. Besides, he notes, "Shortsellers provide a service to the market by increasing liquidity and providing a cap on speculative stocks." While the evidence in recent years suggests the last is merely wishful thinking, in fact short-sellers' skepticism sometimes does inject a sorely lacking dose of reality into phantasmic situations.>> Mr. P$nk