- Joined
- 27 December 2007
- Posts
- 274
- Reactions
- 0
Some back tracking already:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&refer=home&sid=aJ0LXWUmmLBg
D'oh!!!!!!!
MUPPETS .... IDIOTS
......but the above is nothing short (pardon the pun) of criminal behaviour......
What I want to know is what will they do once they realise banning short selling hasn't stopped prices going down and that there are now no short covering rallies to help support prices.
Remember prices can fall because there are no buyers (something that has been forgotten lately imo).
As soon as I saw what I describe below I closed them....When you see this sort of thing happening there's nothing you can do about it. You either get out and sit on the sidelines and take a small loss...or you sit and watch painfully....
.....The big orders on the sell dissappear and the shares have changed hands at very cheap prices...
Then big orders platform the bid and the reverse happens......that's when I bought back my positions....
Exactly, what people forget is that people are not going to short a company that is not a basket case. Stocks such as Lehman brothers, AIG etc were worth nothing
What I want to know is what will they do once they realise banning short selling hasn't stopped prices going down and that there are now no short covering rallies to help support prices.
Remember prices can fall because there are no buyers (something that has been forgotten lately imo).
Whiskers,
The short selling rogues is a massive straw man. Sure there were institutional short sellers, but only after doing their due diligence and deciding that banks had nuked their own value. That's not rogue behaviour, that's just legitimate investing.
The influence of the illegal naked shorts is marginal at best.
You will have to wait and see about the Ma & Pa stuff, but mark my words.
So how am I more selfish than you? After all you aparently rely heavily on shorting and profited from the wild swings both ways... thriving on the volatility. I've only been accumulating long positions lately.
Oh please!
I have only ever played by the accepted rules of the game. I only take markets, I don't make them. I am at the mercy of the market, I live or die by the choices I make, I don't move the goal posts when I'm losing. I don't change the rules.
Ergo, there is no lack of morality on my part. Short selling (covered) is legal, moral and necessary for proper market function and actually supports share prices as I and others have detailed a thousand times.
Most short positions are maintained by option houses and MMs to be delta neutral the market and are totally benign.
The rules will not stop institutions shorting the market anyway as they can still short via SSFs (single stock futures) and synthetic shorts via options. It's a piece of piss. Nothing will change except the perception that gu'mint is doing something and tinpot CFD traders won't be able to join the fun.
The immoral and stupid thing, is to blame short sellers for tanking share values. It's scapegoatism. Short sellers are not to blame for banks toxic activities which destroyed their own market value. They themselves are to blame.
But the truly toxic thing is banning ALL short selling. It is morally repugnant and anyone who supports it does not understand markets. Those that still support the ban after having it explained are just plain stupid and short sighted.
I can't go into LTSB/HBOS too much, but watch this space.
Fails to deliver from naked short selling account for only 1% of the daily volume according to the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation…. out of an average of 54 million new transactions processed every day, less than 20,000 are failed.
OMG this is truly getting ridiculous.
I've changed my mind ,I think long and short positions should be banned:https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif
and which type of short selling would that be? That's the whole point......I can't vote because I don't agree with banning covered shorts but I do agree with what the ASX is doing...banning naked shorts......
everyone seems to have missed that point....
I don't think everyone has missed that point. I haven't seen anyone object to banning naked short selling. However claims that naked shorts are responsiblefor large downward movements in stock prices are unfounded. As stated above, less than 1% of daily transaction volumes of short sales in the US fail to deliver.
I'm sorry but that doesn't make sense.....You state " I haven't seen anyone object to banning naked short selling" ,.....but that is what the ASX is doing and plenty of people on this thread are complaining about banning short selling....If they are not objecting to banning naked short selling what are they objecting to?
Clearly they don't understand the difference....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?