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: rrufff who wrote (4414)	5/9/2009 8:56:17 AM
From: kknightmcc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5034

That is correct. The owners of stock loans that are individual investors are not compensated for the loan out of their stock. I wrote about that to the SEC nearly three years ago and nothing has been changed to date: Subject: File No. S7-12-06 From: Kathy Knight-McConnell Affiliation: investor July 19, 2006 In addition to the revocation of the "grandfather clause" in Regulation SHO, which I believe to be a necessary amendment, I also propose another rule which should be enacted by the SEC in that all brokerage accounts should have a place in every account where the party who owns the account can choose to request that none of their stock can be borrowed for the purpose of lending for a short sale and that person's stock should be removed from the lending pool if they so choose. We, the small non-institutional investors, have no such choice at the moment other than to take physical delivery of our stock, which is inconvenient for various reasons. It is not right that a person who buys stock long should have their stock shorted against their will. Let the short sellers borrow stock from parties who are willing to lend their stock for the purpose of facilitating a short sale. In the event that a borrow is allowed by the party who owns the stock (even in street name), the party allowing the borrow should be compensated by the party who is borrowing the stock for the loan. The large companies that loan their stock always get a percentage of the value of the stock loaned, so it is only fair that the non-institutional investors be given the same consideration. I know this because I once had a position, many years ago, working in a stock loan firm on Broad Street where we located stock for institutional investors for short term trades, usually three days, and took a small percentage commission to do so. Put the small investor and the institutional investor on the same footing. It is only fair. We take the same risk, we should get the same rewards or have the choice not to allow our stock to be used for the purpose of facilitating a short sale. sec.gov

To: rrufff who wrote (4414)	5/9/2009 12:00:28 PM
From: gregor	2 Recommendations Respond to of 5034

rruff": Pardon the expression but heck no the fees don't go to the investors, the fund family keeps them and Fidelity is one of the worst offenders. Why do you think that in downturns they stay fully invested, always have , always will. Don't you wish they were a public company and you could see a profit and loss on them. Believe me they are just crooks that are using a lot of K Y applicant. They are the ones lobbying the SEC not to change one thing. Officially they want the restrictions to kick in after a 10% decline. How many shares do you think that will restrict.? Gregor