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 : Rocky Mountain Int'l (OTC:RMIL former OTC:OVIS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Riley G who wrote (42375)	2/23/1998 5:54:00 PM
From: Sajjad S. Hashimi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

Mr. Riley When is RMIL going to start trading again? Any ideas? Thanx sajjad

To: Riley G who wrote (42375)	2/23/1998 9:03:00 PM
From: Angel D	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 55532

riley, can you explain something for me and maybe some of the other novices. if naked shorting can occur on the nyse, why couldn't it happen on the bb/otc. the nays keep implying that it can't on the bb. i would think the nyse is even more highly regulated than the bb, yet naked shorting happens there. maybe one of the nays could explain this phenomenon. dd, it's starting to itch. do you have any knitting needles. long ones. tia, regards, ad

To: Riley G who wrote (42375)	2/23/1998 10:02:00 PM
From: Arcane Lore	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 55532

If that was intended as response to my earlier request for identification of an SEC* enforcement action against illegal naked short selling (particularly of the type/extent alleged to be taking place with RMIL - illegal naked short position greater than 2 times the supposed public float for 6 months), it doesn't fill the bill (the original posts are: #reply-40447, #reply-40449). Note first that the complaint alleges market manipulation and illegal profits stemming from the sale of "unregistered" stock, not illegal naked short selling (though certainly the short sales as well as the circular trading on the long side were part of the alleged manipulation). Second, assuming for purposes of the discussion that NASD Regulation's allegations are true, what we have here are individuals who shorted Interiors, Inc. stock while already having an agreement to repurchase covering shares at a fixed, lower price. Through an alleged market manipulation, they were able to drive the price upward well above the price in their prearranged purchase agreement at which time they began shorting. Effectively they were shorting against the box locking in a large, undeserved profit (again assuming NASD, Reg.'s allegations are true). For all practical purposes, the short sale was never naked since they always had the repurchase safety net. If these allegations are correct (and, as yet due process has not taken place concerning them) one can only wonder why the accused traders elected to embark on covering via "unregistered shares" (per NASD Regulation) rather than indulging in the apparently undetectable and never punished process of maintaining an illegal naked short position. Perhaps they didn't know how. BTW, does anyone know how? - Has anyone given a credible explanation as to how one could maintain large naked short positions for extended periods of time without borrowing shares? * I won't quibble about the fact that this is an NASD Regulation complaint rather than an SEC enforcement action. I've looked through the NASD Regulation site also and haven't seen any enforcement actions against illegal naked short sales by market makers there either.