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.

Pastimes : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (8169)	4/21/2005 1:33:50 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12465

Re: 4/21/05 - Yet more replies from Mark Cuban's blog 32. Posted Apr 21, 2005, 10:26 AM ET by Bob O'Brien Jeff, you are being obtuse, or are dim. Does increasing supply in a limited demand market: A) increase prices; or B) decrease prices? For instance, I can create as many IOU's for stock as I want and hand them out with little or no cost associated with them. Do you think that virtually limitless supply of stock with a limited number of buyers will increase the stock price, or decrease it? If increase it, explain how oversupply in a finite market does that. ===== 33. Posted Apr 21, 2005, 10:56 AM ET by Jeff Mitchell Bob, it's your premise that selling stock that doesn't exist (aka naked shorting) depresses the share price. So, by your definition, purchasing stock that doesn't exist (aka naked buying) would inflate the share price. QED. - Jeff ===== 34. Posted Apr 21, 2005, 11:36 AM ET by Mark Cuban Bob O, I guess you cant read. Your list of reg sho companies. You dont know if the FTDs are longs or shorts. You have zero knowledge one way or the other. Nor do you know if the FTDs are problem FTDs or not. Its also quite possible that all parties are fine with it. The buyer of the longs that were FTD'd might be fine with it. There have been multiple times i have asked for delivery of stock i have purchased and it was FTDd for a period because it had been lent out. I didnt have a problem with it. Im sure other buyers might not as well So how bad are the naked shorts hurting NFI and OSTK these days ? And Im still waiting for the name of a new company whose CEO stands up and has a real case against naked shorts. You must be able to find a new mouthpiece beyond Byrne ? If not, why not ? ===== 35. Posted Apr 21, 2005, 12:36 PM ET by James Brownfield > Jag Media goes so far as to identify "naked short selling" as an ongoing risk in a number of their SEC filings. Of course, there is no mention of the $40+ million that Jag Media management has squandered over the years in any of their risk factor disclosures, but it does stick out on their balance sheet. blogmaverick.com