Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I do too!
Why do I have no idea what point you are trying to make?
You are saying that MMs (or others) short all month long and then cover at the end of the month or something? I came into this discussion late... bear with me!
Whatever.
Was anything that I just posted incorrect? Please enlighten me...
You lost me there...
"SEEMS SOME ARE suggesting that all the short volume in the daily reports ARE MM shorts"
Suggesting? In MOST cases, virtually all of the FINRA daily *short* volume is MMs doing their jobs... filling orders for people wishing to buy and sell shares! Are you afraid to call them? FINRA will tell you exactly that. Sure, there are exceptions... but unless a short position shows up in the monthly numbers or there are FTDs... NO ONE IS SHORTING!
FINRA publishes these numbers.
FINRA will tell you these are not actual shorts.
So your hypothesis is that FINRA is telling the truth when they publish the numbers, but lying when they tell you what they mean?
What is gained by spreading false information about these FINRA numbers?
FINRA Daily Short Numbers - Defined by FINRA
I just spoke with FINRA to *officially* confirm what some of us had posted before regarding the Daily Short Sale Volume File that is thrown about here as evidence of shorting and/or naked shorting.
In a nutshell, the daily short numbers represent only one leg of a transaction. As I've stated before, MM's want to be flat or net neutral (i.e. not long or short). If you place an order for 1M shares, they generally don't have 1M shares in their account. So they will then sell you 1M shares to fill your order (which shows as 1M short), and then buy 1M to offset it. However, the 1M short report is not negated. So, in theory, seeing 50% of the daily trading volume reported as short in a pinkie should be no surprise and is of no consequence... just MMs doing their job and providing liquidity.
Additionally, if the Monthly Short Sale Transaction File does not show an increase in the short position... there isn't one... period!
We also discussed the FTD numbers. With no reported FTDs, and no increase in FINRA's published Monthly Short Sale Transaction File ... THERE IS MINIMAL (IF ANY) SHORTING GOING ON... PERIOD!
The EXPH short selling myth (including NSS) is officially BUSTED...
I invite anyone to call FINRA and confirm what I have presenting here.
"LT shareholders have choices .. i choose
to file complaints and call compliance
officers of every MM i see collude with
Knight securities and put them on notice "
So we are approaching the 6 month anniversary of this post. What has been the result of those complaints, phone calls, and the *notice* that you put Knight on? All I've seen is a 90+% reduction in price and 2 brokerages refusing to accept buys...
Seems that that would have been an easy clarification and not have resulted in today's massacre... no? What happened to the shareprice today was appropriate based on the news... IMHO!
So what do we learn from that info everyday? How do you suggest an investor use it?
I can think of a positive explanation for today's news...
Let's say JD signed an exclusive with a national retailer yesterday? I'm not saying that that is the case... but it is a *possible* explanation for the reversal...
"Based on todays PR, we will in the next few months be sitting on a holding company that will be the parent company of FIVE revenue generating, profitable entities that is uplisting to the BB. A company that by the end of the year that should be generating revenues in excess of 30MM a year and 40MM in 2009."
Wow! $40M in 2009! Wait... That is off by an order of magnitude! Where did these numbers come from?
And I have to admit confusion on these other 4 companies... there is D&D, and ????
"oh my .. anyone really believe they hold shares"
Why would AUTO hold shares, they are a MM? Do you understand who ATD is and how they work?
"The start of a new business venture with a nation retailer"
Would you really call WW a retailer?
"I recently remodled my bathroom and the cabinets Menards had were crap."
They do have crap cabinets, but they have several different stock lines, some of which are much better. The larger Menards stores have a wider selection. Additionally, they have some really nice special order cabinets if you don't need it that day. The retailers sell what the customers want and actually buy. It is hard to make a comparison to etc cabinets since we know almost nothing about construction, quality, or price.
From the recent website update I read this line: "Additionally, a continued results driven B2B relationship with Thorsport racing is expected into the foreseeable future."
Can anyone explain what that means?
Anyone have any idea what that is on the webcam?
"there just arent many shares available at these prices.... "
Really? 2,130,000 traded so far today at $.0022. Seems to me like there are plenty... What am I missing?
"the info of the short volume done daily
can be confirmed by calling finra directly"
Sure, but that is not *real* and is only *technically* a short position...
And the ACTUAL short position (from pinksheets.com) as of January 29th is only 181,131 shares... or less than $500 worth...
There is no current naked position as of the end of January as is easily found on the SEC's FTD site.
http://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/failsdata.htm
This is not a gray area open to interpretation...
"there will be and will always be a difference of opinion on this "short position" topic but by the now reported FINRA numbers we know it exists...... "
It really is not about opinions at all. It is about interpretation of published facts... correctly and incorrectly...
Are you saying that JD now is telling investors that he believes that there is a substantial short position in EXPH???
"and from the level you mentioned to todays pps, that is almost 100% gain. "
Uh...no! That is called a 95% loss!
I'm long EXPH shares and want to see the price go UP... but I won't distort the facts to accomplish that...
"but a great buying opp for those not in yet."
It was posted that EXPH was a great buying opportunity at .03+... and .02... and .0125... and .01... and .007... and .005... and .004... and .003...
EXPH traded at $.0015 yesterday do you realize that? I do... and I'm POed! The Good Ship Lollipop has set sail...
"said he will be in silent mode for awhile."
When did he say that? You are mistaken.
"For example, bona-fide market making does not include activity that is related to speculative selling strategies or investment purposes of the broker-dealer"
And what evidence do you have that this is occuring? None!
Because it isn't occuring...
Keep spooking potential investors by spreading short attack rumors and see how low the shareprice goes...
"talk about zero credibility"
Zero? You are generous... I'd use negative numbers in my assessment.
I am also surprised to see the cratering that occured today on relatively low volume. I'd bet the MMs are "net long" today!
"Personally, SB, I feel 4k9p has supplied you with enough due D"
LMAO! You must be reading BETWEEN the lines or something.
"There is so much info available on this board and on the web that you should be able to find your own answers about EXPH."
What are you talking about? I only asked her to explain her FALSE statement that SR's discussion with JD brought no new info to this board. Still waiting for a link... Would you care to provide one? Please?
"I really can't see the point in all this negativism ."
Negativism is in the eye of the beholder...
"So my question to you and the board is what does anyone hope to achieve by constantly criticizing the stock and its management?"
Can't answer that... I have not been criticizing the company.
"So the market makers can by rule short a stock for up to 10 days with shares they don't have..Seems we are now back to talking about MS's manipulating the pps..."
On the contrary... they are providing liquidity! Imagine if there were no MMs... on a great news story, if there were few shares available to buy because there were no sellers. What would happen? Huge volatility, and buyers may have to pay 2x or even 10x what is reasonable, and the shareprice would drop right back down shortly. Buyers on the news would get totally screwed... or maybe not be able to get shares at all... And on a day where bad news is issued... with no buyers... sellers would get raped. This is one of the functions of MMs... to level this out by providing liquidity. But to do so requires them (generally) to go long when the stock is declining and short when it is spiking.
"I would like to see that rule.."
Try google... look up Market Maker...
Here's Wiki on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_maker
"I would also like to know why whenever I see a short position listed it says days to cover..(1)?? How is it that the MMs get 10 days??"
You do not understand the meaning of "days to cover".
Days to cover = current short position / average daily volume.
"it's happened previously and i have zero doubts
it will happen again"
Really? When did it happen previously?
Any answers for the board yet?
I'm confused .4K...
You said:
"all he [SR] did was confirm that which was previously posted"
And I said that this statement is indisputably wrong. I asked you to resolve this by just posting a link to where certain parts of this information has been posted here before... remember?
Maybe you didn't read my post, or couldn't provide such a link? If you wish to recant your statement, no one will hold it against you. If you wish to stand behind it, I request that you provide a link to back it up. Here is another factoid that SR posted after talking to JD. Can you provide us a link to this one, maybe?
_________________________________________________________
"Question" #8
The California Closets pictures. Were these just an accident made by
the web designer getting carried away?
California Closets was a competitor when we focused on the 1st
choice brand. We also manufactured displays, and yes a photo was out
there that had our display, and a California closet "program" on it.
The person responsible for making the document has moved on a very long time ago, and quite frankly it wasn’t brought to my attention until some emailed me that that you (or maybe someone else) had found it. I removed it promptly and apologized formally to California Closets Corporate.
___________________________________________________________
Shorting nonsense...
What posters are calling shorting is just market makers doing their jobs...
On a given day, MMs will either be net long, neutral, or net short... by definition!
The MMs have both a bid and an ask that they put out there to keep a stock liquid... that is what they do. If you want to sell, they will buy at their offer. If you want to buy, they will sell at their ask.
They do not need to have shares to fill the order. They are allowed, BY RULE , to sell shares that they don't have (i.e. naked shorting) to provide liquidity.
They do, however, have to cover these positions within, in memory serves, 10 days.
The fact that there are no FTDs shows that this is just normal MM activity.
Several here are trying to make this out to be some nefarious activity... or proof of some conspiracy... or MMs unfairly holding the price down... none of which is correct!
Published FTDs do not lie... the pink sheet short position is not wrong... people just need to educate themselves on how the system works and stop propagating misinformation...
Owgur... c'mon man... this is fact. The NSS theory is dead and buried.
Didn't even JD say this? Why keep beating a dead horse?
I'm confused .4K...
You said:
"all he [SR] did was confirm that which was previously posted"
And I said that this statement is indisputably wrong. I asked you to resolve this by just posting a link to where certain parts of this information has been posted here before... remember?
Maybe you didn't read my post, or couldn't provide such a link? If you wish to recant your statement, no one will hold it against you. If you wish to stand behind it, I request that you provide a link to back it up. Here is another factoid that SR posted after talking to JD. Can you provide us a link to this one, maybe?
_________________________________________________________
"Question" #8
The California Closets pictures. Were these just an accident made by
the web designer getting carried away?
California Closets was a competitor when we focused on the 1st
choice brand. We also manufactured displays, and yes a photo was out
there that had our display, and a California closet "program" on it.
The person responsible for making the document has moved on a very long time ago, and quite frankly it wasn’t brought to my attention until some emailed me that that you (or maybe someone else) had found it. I removed it promptly and apologized formally to California Closets Corporate.
___________________________________________________________
Yes, let's be very clear... You are absolutely incorrect with your statement...
I am correcting something that you posted that is positively wrong. You posted:
"all he did was confirm that which was previously posted"
And this statement is indisputably wrong. Should be simple to resolve this. Just post links to where this information has been posted here before! If your statement was correct... this should be a snap for you to confirm!
Start with this one:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q#5: The advances on the financials. These are listed as a current asset. This would mean that this is money owed to the company.
A: Yes, it is money owed to the corporation by myself and Glenn Harrs. However, it is important to note that GAP requires us to report this in this fashion. It does not show the other side of the "coin" where the company owes us significantly more in terms of gaurantees and loans.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please post a link to where this was posted here before, and we can move on to the next question...
"all he did was confirm that which was previously posted .. how does that impact anyone's respective DD .. "
I totally disagree! I'd say at least 20% of what SR posted has not been posted here before...
Would you like to take it point by point and you can provide us links to these previous postings?
Let's start with this one:
Q#5: The advances on the financials. These are listed as a current asset. This would mean that this is money owed to the company.
A: Yes, it is money owed to the corporation by myself and Glenn Harrs. However, it is important to note that GAP requires us to report this in this fashion. It does not show the other side of the "coin" where the company owes us significantly more in terms of gaurantees and loans.
"I have not released them yet."
Sure sounds like the 3Q fins are complete and being held for some reason...
Let me see if I follow your logic... trading manipulation on a stock upward for profit is legal and good... but manipulating it downward is bad and illegal?
Is that the point that you are making?
Does "smash" mean buy or sell?
Yes, but who sold them to them?
Some great posts here today!
Owgur, an email I have from JD has the exact same header content, I just looked...
It is no big deal... a $250 license and the issue goes away...
What evidence does someone have to justify an accusation of illegal shareprice manipulation of EXPH? That is a pretty serious accusation without some evidence, no?
There was an accusation here of NSS with no evidence... that was proven false by the SEC's FTD records!
There was an accusation of a certain MM's manipulation with no evidence... that was proven false here by two daytraders!
Now we have an accusation of illegal manipulation with no evidence! 0 for 3?