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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Solv Ex (SOLVD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gary L Schultz who wrote (5731)	7/2/1998 7:27:00 PM
From: leigh aulper	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6735

Gary, sometimes you should really should keep your mouth shut, then at best we would have the option of thinking you may know what you are talking about, but when you put it in writing you take all our doubt away!

To: Gary L Schultz who wrote (5731)	7/2/1998 7:37:00 PM
From: Gary L Schultz	Respond to of 6735

JJB, I realize, as do you, that naked shorting is legal. Covered shorting is when I own a stock and sell it short - but don't deliver the stock. This does affect the market, since my broker has to borrow the stock if he doesn't have some lying around, so he can sell it in the market. When I cover (ie deliver my stock) the contract is satisfied and the broker or the person who loaned the stock is replenished. The only affect on the market would be on first side (sell side) since I own the stock (in the box) I need not enter the market to cover my postion - all I have to do is deliver what I have already been paid for. I doubt that there are any (if ever) covered shorts in this stock. Naked shorting (which is perfectly legal BTW) is if I sell the stock but don't own it. My broker is supposed to (yea) either use his stock or borrow stock to sell in the open market. This affects price. When I cover (buy) my position, I enter the market and buy the stock. This affects the price. Now is the case of SOLV. If I had shorted at 18.00 last year - you better believe I would have covered by now!! What is there to be gained by waiting for bankruptcy (they changed the tax laws remember?) and the potential gain in SOLV (from the short side) is minor at best. The "naked shorts" that most people have been alluding to would fall under the scenario I put forth in my previous post. If this happened then there would be no effect on the market. Have A Happy 4th All, Gary

To: Gary L Schultz who wrote (5731)	7/6/1998 1:00:00 PM
From: R.Mark Lubchenco	Respond to of 6735

As near as I can tell the re org plan calls for one for one new stock plus a warrant for every 3 shares of old exchangable upon physical delvery.. Thus, according to re org doc's, the 21.5 (give or take 100 thou) shareholders that own stock in certificate form (note: as near as I can tell this does not take into account streetname, restricted or treasury shares) will request new stock and warrants. Streetname, restricted and treasury will do the same. Demand comes from failure to deliver streetname stock. When this is all said and done we should have a pretty good picture of who is short and who is long from transfer agent, which all will be used later. I have heard that the shorts( who we all know don't exist because this is a "non-marginal" stock) have no intent of covering at these levels. RML