quote:Originally posted by T e x: Hank Greenberg says he and his attorneys were rebuffed...
Charlie Rose
Hank lost 6 billion$ he's invested even after stepping down as CEO...
AIG is not broke, they are just illiquid and the short-sellers whacked them...
He lost more then $6billion... on paper at least...from $24 billion to $1.3 billion the NY Post has said... the short sellers/trend followers gained though...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Oh really... when you go long on a losing stock and i go short on one... money is being transferred from you to me... it is not lost and destroyed... someone wins and someone loses but the money still exists... just in someone else's pocket... yes the dollar or whatever currency fluctuates in value versus another currency.. but think of that as a trade itself... one currency loses value and one gains... money is transferred from one to the other.. it always exists...
if you have 10$ and you place 400$ on a stock and it drops 100$? you just lost 100$ ... but you only had 10$... that's how all these "Investment Banks" are failing...
and that is what the Fed is now supporting with our tax dollars...
so where did the money go?
it would be nice if your explanation was "adequate", but it doesn't even come close to explaining where all the friggin money went...
You still owe that money whether you win or lose... that stok is still worth $400 in the beginning whether you got it on margin or cash... you took the loss and the other side of the trade took the gain...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Mach you are trying to explain micro-economics to me when we were talking macro-economics..
i know where the retail traders money went.
that's not what's missing here...
what's missing is all the money actaully deposited in the brokers (Invesment banks) and other places...
i'm not against shorting, but it is not INVESTING and INVESTORS look for value added..
there' about 500 billion$ already MISSING form the system and (easily) another trillion at risk right now.. that's what we were talking about...
you didn't say deposits.. we were talking about investing and trading... since all my quotes from Wall Street are about that and not "deposits"... but if you mean deposits then i would have to assume it was "borrowed" to keep the companies afloat and it ran out... now they can't pay it back and that is why the bankrupcties, bailouts etc... and some of that money i will assume is insured... but that is just speculation lol
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
we were talking about investing and trading
dude, go back and reread... you are talking about joe blow trading. we WERE talking about missing money...gone ... lost.. as in taxpayers have to pick up the tab...
who won it?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
It's not about how you trade Machiavelli and your strategies, it's about why these companies are failing and rules that might be enforced by the sec and more.
Do you think that the fed would ever think about enforcing rules of shorting if there was not major damage being done by this?
IP: Logged |
posted
this is what has happened to our whole damn country.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Subject: File No. S7-08-08 From: Mugabe Abu, Esquire Affiliation: International Entrepeneur
May 20, 2008
sub.: Permit for selling self printed stock shares of different companies.
Dear SEC authority,
My Name is Mugabe Abu. I am Nigerian investor and I am very interested for getting the permit for selling self printed shares of different, on the Wall Street noticed, companies.
Since this practice to sell something what you do not have is legal in US I would like also to participate in this program.
We Nigerians know very well this practice of selling something what we do not have, but we did not make it with the securities, so far.
Since printing of US dollars is illegal, I will be really interested for printing and selling fake securities as many make it in US. You call it very nice naked (fake) shorts. Your explanation of this procedure is very nice and I appreciate it very much and I am your admirer.
I see that some people who get permit from you have printed so many fake securities that such company like CALM has even over 100% shorts. Others like DNDN, CORS, CCRT (only few samples) are also extremely diluted. I would like to help you to make it even more. I see still big opportunity to print more fake shares of big companies.
It is almost so easy business like printing fake US dollars but I see, in opposite to printing fake dollar, this business is full legal and you can sell these fake securities for anybody in the world and you do not need to ask the applicable company, to print their shares It is excellent business
I always believed on your ideas of collecting money from all the world and I would be happy to participate in this huge idea of printing fake shares.
Therefore, please send me the application form for this permit and also needed information how I can start this easy business. Please inform me if I will need to contribute any amount to get this permit and whom shall I forward this money.
I can also promise you that I will donate some earned money for your agency.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: we were talking about investing and trading
dude, go back and reread... you are talking about joe blow trading. we WERE talking about missing money...gone ... lost.. as in taxpayers have to pick up the tab...
who won it?
We were talking about short sellers.. they did not make these companies fail... the companies themselves did that... the short sellers are just reacting to it but they get the blame for it...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:Originally posted by IWISHIHAD: It's not about how you trade Machiavelli and your strategies, it's about why these companies are failing and rules that might be enforced by the sec and more.
Do you think that the fed would ever think about enforcing rules of shorting if there was not major damage being done by this?
read my post just above urs to Glass...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
even the banks know that this is what they have been doing, that's why they won't loan each other money anymore, they KNOW the colateral on the books is worthless...
because they diluted all their assets with crap to make the books look good.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: even the banks know that this is what they have been doing, that's why they won't loan each other money anymore, they KNOW the colateral on the books is worthless...
because they diluted all their assets with crap to make the books look good.
are u suggesting Fraud from all these companies?
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: even the banks know that this is what they have been doing, that's why they won't loan each other money anymore, they KNOW the colateral on the books is worthless...
because they diluted all their assets with crap to make the books look good.
are u suggesting Fraud from all these companies?
i'm not suggesting? it's FACT.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
I don't need to re-read my recent posts to remember where the conversation was with glassman or you.
Somehow you got off on your trading strategies and i made a few comments without really going into much detail because i did not think that's where the main discussion was at the time.
Not that there anything wrong with a trading discussion, just was not where my main train of thought was and everyone has a strategy... good or bad.
IP: Logged |
posted
the ONLY problem i have with shorting stock is when there's 1 billion shares on the market and the OS is under 500,000,000... thats what causes crashes.. short-sellers should have to legally borrow shares to sell them... otherwise they are a share-issuer,
a co' spends tens of thousands of dollars to ISSUE shares.. a naked shorter makes all that money spent a total waste...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Couple of things, first: How is a stock that is daytraded delivered when it in essence is bought and then sold or shorted and then covered? In the T+3 system how is it possible to be delivered to 2 different accounts at the same time.
Doesn't this in and of itself, create more shares than are actually issued?
Secondly: I understand what Glass is saying. It happens in retail too. I was reading some posts on a .0001 stock that has been dormant for about a year. One person posted how he buys a $100 of the stock every week if there has been no activity too make sure it still shows value. Scottrade places the value at zero if it hasn't traded in a week. Why does he do it? To make sure he stays over the $25 mark to be able to daytrade. In essence the stock is worthless but by buying it shows on the books.
Ah creative book keeping, if a little retail guy can figure it out, I'm sure the big boys have been doing it for years.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: even the banks know that this is what they have been doing, that's why they won't loan each other money anymore, they KNOW the colateral on the books is worthless...
because they diluted all their assets with crap to make the books look good.
are u suggesting Fraud from all these companies?
i'm not suggesting? it's FACT.
care to show proof it is actual fraud because then you must be the only one who knows it for sure and if its true then its the biggest coverup there ever was after Kennedy's assassination...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:Originally posted by glassman: otherwise they are a share-issuer,
a co' spends tens of thousands of dollars to ISSUE shares.. a naked shorter makes all that money spent a total waste...
Gordon Gekko (and short sellers): I create nothing. I own.
The company issues those stocks 1 time and 1 time only.. what you see in the market is really a secondary market... the short sellers DO NOT CAUSE the crashes... they may contribute to it but they do not cause it... their actions are REACTIVE...
Anyways you are getting off topic again.... one minute you are talking about CEO's and the companies books.. the next short sellers... stick to one topic so then when i post to one post of yours you can't say im getting off topic...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
the short sellers DO NOT CAUSE the crashes... they may contribute to it but they do not cause it... their actions are REACTIVE...
yawn, you say chicken i say egg...
they are banning NSin' right now to keep another crash from actually happening... because people are scared. 90% of people don't even know what they are scared of, other then losing money... and short sellers only make money when somebody is losing money...
think about that for awhile...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
they are banning NSin' right now to keep another crash from actually happening... because people are scared. 90% of people don't even know what they are scared of, other then losing money... and short sellers only make money when somebody is losing money...
think about that for awhile...
People only lose or transfer money when a company fails or is in financial problems... that is when a stock goes down... short sellers do not do that to the companies.. they do that to themselves.. SS's just jump on to the sinking ship when it's obvious that is where the stock is heading...
Do you think that if short sellers were totally banned that stocks of financially distressed companies wouldn't go down and stockholders wouldn't lose still?
Think about that for awhile...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
LONDON (AFP) - Britain's Financial Services Authority announced Thursday it would ban short-selling -- when investors borrow stock in a company to sell it -- in financial shares from midnight (2300 GMT).
"While we still regard short-selling as a legitimate investment technique in normal market conditions, the current extreme circumstances have given rise to disorderly markets," FSA chief executive Hector Sants said in a statement.
"As a result, we have taken this decisive action, after careful consideration, to protect the fundamental integrity and quality of markets and to guard against further instability in the financial sector."
The announcement came hours after Bank Lloyds TSB agreed to buy rival HBOS for 12.2 billion pounds (15.4 billion euros, 21.8 billion dollars) in a rescue takeover.
HBOS, or Halifax Bank of Scotland, is the latest global bank to fall foul of the ongoing credit crunch following the collapse of US group Lehman Brothers, the sale of Merrill Lynch and the rescue of insurer AIG earlier this week.
Chancellor of Exchequer Alistair Darling said he had discussed the decision with the FSA regulatory body and welcomed "their decisive action on short-selling."
"I believe it is the right thing to do in the current market conditions and in the interests of financial stability."
IP: Logged |
posted
Do you think that if short sellers were totally banned that stocks of financially distressed companies wouldn't go down and stockholders wouldn't lose still?
you are going to find out:
FSA to ban short-selling of financial stocks
By Peter Thal Larsen, Banking Editor
Published: September 18 2008 17:44 | Last updated: September 18 2008 19:18
Short-selling of financial stocks is to be banned in the United Kingdom from midnight on Thursday night under rules drawn up by the Financial Services Authority. The ban will remain in force until January 16, 2009, when the FSA plans to publish a comprehensive review of short-selling rules
i will say i toldja so in this case Mach.
they at least have some common sense and understand what the word INVESTING means... you obviously have no clue.
it's not a question of whether people will lose money; it's question of whether there will even be a stock market next year.
watch the markets return to some normalcy now.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
gee, common sense prevails? whatashock, too bad our own US Government doesn't have this type of brains:
California Public Employees Retirement System (CALPERS) is “no longer lending out shares” of Goldman Sachs (GS) and Morgan Stanley (MS), hoping to “limit short-selling” of the stocks.
it's not a question of whether people will lose money; it's question of whether there will even be a stock market next year.
watch the markets return to some normalcy now.
What's normalcy? Artificially high prices on stocks like with real estate and with no liquidity?? that is what will happen by messing with a free market... that is what you do not get... short side trades along with buy/long side trades provide liquidity in order for the market to have "normalcy"... when only one side of a trade is allowed but not the other ,that market will not be "balanced"... it will tilt to one side more then the other and when needed you will not find someone that easily on the other side anymore... it would be like real estate now... alot of sellers but no buyers... in other words such a ban is created a one sided market only with artificial prices for those stocks that should not be that high... companies that should fail because they are in financial trouble won't because of the false sense that they are ok due to artificially higher stock prices... that is what will happen and that is not "normalcy"...
What is happening with the market right now is "normalcy"... it's correcting itself like it should be... much like the crash of '29 , 87'and the late 90's... those companies failed or crashed because they should of and not because SS's caused it... SS's simply took advantage of the situations & profited from it...
Oddly enough speculators and SS's are always blamed... right now it's banning short sellers... then you will see restrictions on the long side because the speculators are blamed for high oil prices... no one is manipulating the market... it's working like it's suppose to... it's tragic of major declines but what goes up someday will go down...
Do me a favor Glass... go to www.activetradermag.com and click on "Current Issue" on the left side... then click on the article: Speculators in Crude Oil? Where?
For some reason the articles on that site do not appear on my computer... but anyways read that article if you can... to me it applies somewhat to short sellers as well...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
much like the crash of '29 , 87'and the late 90's... those companies failed or crashed because they should of and not because SS's caused it... SS's simply took advantage of the situations & profited from it...
this just proves you have no clue how the crash of 29 happened, or why, and what the real impact of it was...
i've actually never heard anybody that supposedly knows the market say anything so naive.
the crash of 29 at it's roots was casued by bad lending practices, just as this one has been...
and shorting by it's very definition is part of the bad lending practices.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
