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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Naked Shorting-Hedge Fund & Market Maker manipulation? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shortsinthesand who wrote (3519)	7/15/2008 1:40:54 PM
From: The Ox	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 5034

Maybe you should read a little more of this thread. If you did, you'd see how your post comes across as having almost zero value. It looks as though you only want to "stir the pot". While we all agree that if you are trading, you have to "deal with" the manipulation and illegal activities of "others", there are some who do nothing but sit around and cry about it and there are some who attempt to change the future so that illegal activities are curtailed. Attempting to discuss future changes may appear to some that the thread is "chasing windmills", to others it is a place to gather information in an attempt to shed some light onto the currently dark places. As you know, there is a HUGE difference between the thread's header: NAKED SHORTING, and those who legally short stocks. Your comments imply that traders should accept those who do things illegally and this thread is about the exact opposite of that approach. I acknowledge that illegal activities exist but I don't have to look the other way. Most of the people who contribute to this thread would like to see the market's rules changed to reduce the amount of illegal activity. If you short legally, good for you. If you are one of the many people involved in illegal naked shorting and illegal market manipulation, then there will come a time when the light will be shown on you and your illegal activities. If you are profiting from illegal activities, I hope they throw the book at you! jmo TO

To: shortsinthesand who wrote (3519)	7/15/2008 2:51:37 PM
From: rrufff	Respond to of 5034

Shortsie - let's examine your post. You start off by claiming I made some type of assumption. Yet, looking at your posts here, and likely elsewhere, we see that you have assumed without valid basis. Then you say that you "could care less what others do in the market.. longs, shorts, hedgies or whomever," but you come over here and comment on my own trading and make assumptions about it. Clearly, you display a lack of consistency at the very least. Next you state, "For the most part anyone that participates in stock trading is an inherent gambler and as such has to accept the nature of the game. It includes these illegal activites that come along with speculation that you talk about.." It seems that you are stating that those in the market trading are gamblers. I can agree with that and, in particular, often post that trading penny stocks is gambling. I do disagree with the latter quoted passage from your posts. You indicate that traders need to accept illegal activities. However, this seems to fly in the face of your posting history. You often post your perceptions of stock scams. In essence, you seem to be saying that the alleged scams about which you post are no good (and I have no problem with your posting as such,) but other scams, particularly on the short side, should be "accepted." It's a variant of short-sightedness. It's an example of someone looking and posting in only one direction. As far as whether or not I trade for a profit, it's really none of your business whether I trade or not, whether I invest or not, and whether or not I make a profit. I've seen you often get upset when others ask you these questions. Why is it that you feel the need to ask me? Assuming I do trade for profit and that I post on message boards, is there anything wrong with that? If I am an ordinary trader and I post my opinion on stocks, is there something wrong with that? If that were the case, I doubt these message boards would exist for long. It really seems to come down to your advocating free wheeling discussion on negative claims, but you would seemingly restrict positive claims. If so, it's an interesting concept, a bit silly in the message board world, pretty illogical, and, as I've suggested before to you, inconsistent. Have fun.

To: shortsinthesand who wrote (3519)	7/15/2008 3:01:24 PM
From: rrufff	Respond to of 5034

Here's a little piece which you should find interesting. No matter how some seem to whine about this, the issues are not going away. ================================================== Hedge Funds Subpoenaed in SEC Probe By KARA SCANNELL and JENNY STRASBURG July 15, 2008; Page C3 online.wsj.com The Securities and Exchange Commission has sent subpoenas to more than 50 hedge-fund advisers as part of its investigation into whether individuals spread false rumors to manipulate shares of two Wall Street firms, a person familiar with the matter said. The subpoenas, sent as recently as Monday, are seeking trading and communications data related to short-selling and options trading in Bear Stearns Cos. or Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., this person said. Some of the hedge-fund advisers have received subpoenas related to both probes, while others were contacted with respect to only one, this person said. A hedge-fund adviser can operate several different hedge funds. Among the firms that have received subpoenas are Citadel Investment Group LLC in Chicago and SAC Capital Advisors in Stamford, Conn. The subpoenas relate to trading in securities of the brokers, as well as correspondence between the hedge funds and other parties, according to people familiar with the inquiry. The subpoenas are part of a broad inquiry, and firms that have received subpoenas were told by the SEC that they aren't necessarily the focus of specific allegations. Representatives for the hedge funds declined to comment, as did the SEC. Some hedge funds received subpoenas Monday. Other subpoenas were sent within the past few weeks, and several firms already have turned over information to the SEC. The probe is still in its early stages, people familiar with the matter said. Bear Stearns almost collapsed in March, and the SEC has been investigating whether a combination of false rumors and manipulative short-selling combined to drive down the firm's share price. The probe comes as the SEC and other Wall Street regulators have launched examinations of investment banks and hedge-fund advisers' compliance programs to ensure that they have the right training and policies in place to detect market manipulation that can include rumor mongering. Monday, Wall Street law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz published a memo calling the new examinations into compliance programs "an important first step." But it said "the SEC needs to undertake additional bold measures to constrain abusive short-selling and rumor-mongering." Separately, NYSE Regulation Inc., the regulatory unit of stock-exchange parent NYSE Euronext, said it sent a letter1 Monday "to a number of our largest member firms" requesting details on how those securities firms monitor compliance with rules prohibiting circulation of false and misleading rumors that could roil stock prices. The letter said the review was being conducted jointly with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, a Wall Street self-regulatory agency. The securities firms were asked whether they had conducted internal probes related to unfounded rumors about "the impact of the subprime loan business on certain financial institutions, the use by financial institutions of the Federal Reserve discount window, and/or possible federal government bailout of certain financial institutions." The securities firms that received Monday's letter were given a July 28 deadline to provide the information, including any disciplinary actions taken against employees linked to false or misleading rumors. --Aaron Lucchetti contributed to this article. Write to Kara Scannell at kara.scannell@wsj.com2 and Jenny Strasburg at jenny.strasburg@wsj.com3 URL for this article: online.wsj.com Hyperlinks in this Article: (1) online.wsj.com (2) mailto:kara.scannell@wsj.com (3) mailto:jenny.strasburg@wsj.com

To: shortsinthesand who wrote (3519)	7/15/2008 3:04:02 PM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5034

SEC Curbs Shorting of GSE Stocks, Considers Limits for Wider Market By KARA SCANNELL July 15, 2008 1:33 p.m. WASHINGTON -- The Securities and Exchange Commission announced an emergency action aimed at reducing short-selling in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stock, and will immediately begin considering new rules to extend those trading limits to the rest of the market. SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said at a Senate Banking Cmmittee hearing that the SEC would institute an emergency order requiring any traders to pre-borrow stock before shorting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the embattled government-sponsored entities that own more than half the nation's mortgages. Mr. Cox said the SEC "will undertake a rulemaking to address the same issues" across the market. The move will likely limit short-selling for the two mortgage entities, which have seen their stock prices fall sharply in recent weeks. Wall Street has been calling for the SEC to address short-selling, which some believe is contributing to market volatility and could be used to manipulate shares of financial stocks. It comes as short-interest, or the amount of outstanding short positions, is at an all-time high for NYSE Euronext-listed stocks. Short-selling, a legitimate trading strategy geared to profit from falling stock prices, has long been a lightening rod issue, so changes that cover the entire market will likely be hotly debated. Companies have complained that short-sellers target their stocks with the purpose of driving them down, while short-sellers have been credited with identifying a company's true market value. Under current rules, a short-seller must locate shares to borrow, which are later replaced with stock bought at a lower price. Some market watchers have been concerned that traders were borrowing the same shares from the same lender over and over, and driving down stock prices. Under the emergency order, traders will be required to borrow the stock and the lender would then take it out of the market and not allow other traders to use it to satisfy requirements that they've located stock. Write to Kara Scannell at kara.scannell@wsj.com