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.
very easily. you realize that 100 million shares is a paltry $10K
No. i am telling you that you have been misled on what short volume is. EVERY trade that is made by a LONG seller that is routed to NITE for execution will be marked as a short exempt trade and will be included in short volume.
Short volume does NOT equal short sale because of how trades are marked. The laws and requirements of how a trade is marked, routed trades, and riskless principle trades has been discussed repeatedly but some choose to deny what it is. The SEC/FINRA responded to this misinterpretation by adding a new metric (short exempt volume) but it has not yet initiated and it will not in pinks.
I suggest you choose better how you educate yourself.
paula, let me help you.
NITE does not have many retail investors but they are the largest penny stock marker maker. Most if not ALL trades they execute on the sell side would be "shorty exempt" routed trades. Same goes for AUTO and several others.
if you want answers I suggest you provide substantial information so that a valid discussion can take place.
now...Do YOU know who the market makers were on the day YOU cite? to ask for an answer without that information would be simply guessing and i am not here to make speculative conspiracy theories. i leave that to.....
buying a garbage stock and trying to pass along the failures of management as some sort of conspiracy is a cop out.
My bet, most market makers in this stock do not have clients that are shareholders. The ones that do, like ETRADE, are accused of other things.
How many market makers were executing trades that day?
I doubt it...(RE: get it yet)
very easy - the seller who sold shares had an account in a firm that did not make a market in the stock. stop wasting time looking at volume and pay attention to dollar value of traded shares. 10 million shares is peanuts at $0.0001
fourkids, how do you think such large short sale volume fails to yield fails to deliver or short interest?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=59065802
when the short volume report starts presenting short exempt numbers and we see that those trades make up much of the short sales executed, how will you then discuss this non-existent manipulation scheme?
I suggest you call and ask them since you seem so concerned about it.
has this document been authenticated? As we have seen just recently, companies have now been engaging in forging these documents to confuse shareholders. Has this pone here been authenticated?
interesting questions but I do not have the answers. I believe the O/S is near 5 billion. the investors can fill in the rest.
What will you do when FINRA changes reporting to this new format. no more confusion on what the short volume is.
http://regsho.finra.org/DailyShortSaleVolumeFileLayout.pdf
I am sorry for the confusion.
Lets leave it as this. If short exempts were zero as you claim, it would be posted as a zero in the short volume report. Please provide the link that shows it as zero (include a highlight that shows the zero)
Please show me where the new layout you posted is being used as well to avoid confusion.
Like I said, to date, not a single short exempt share listed for NWTT, or any other pinkie stock for that matter.
Look at the heading for the reports you are looking for and show me the added column. While that link you provide shows what will be reported, you have to look at the REPORTS itself to see if that column was added and filled. Clearly it has not yet been filled. It is not that NWTT has none, it is that FINRA has not updated their reporting to add that data into their public report.
Now if you disagree, I would ask that you show where they do report it in actual numbers - unless you do not think any short exempt trades have occurred since November.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=47551461
Actually, if you look at the links, it is clear that they have not added this additional metric into the reports.
http://www.finra.org/Industry/Compliance/MarketTransparency/ADF/RegulationSHO/
Show me where it is reported anywhere by a FINRA matrix..
if you ask Sterling or look up my past posts, you will know that I initiated this extra metric to be reported because of the misuse of this data. I reported it here and to Sterling after speaking with a senior FINRA executive about this issue.
Section 302: Reporting Riskless Principal Transactions
Q302.1: What is a "riskless principal" transaction?
A302.1: For purposes of OTC transaction reporting requirements applicable to equity securities, a "riskless principal" transaction is a transaction in which a member, after having received an order to buy (sell) a security, purchases (sells) the security as principal and satisfies the original order by selling (buying) as principal at the same price (the offsetting "riskless" leg). Generally, a riskless principal transaction involves two orders, the execution of one being dependent upon the receipt or execution of the other; hence, there is no "risk" in the interdependent transactions when completed. See NTM 99-65 (August 1999). What this means is that the Market Maker will not buy the shares for delivery from the selling broker dealer until AFTER they have sold the shares to the market and since they do not own these shares they are technically selling short. this trade, originated by a long seller is marked short to the market since the second leg of the trade (market maker buying) is not a reported trade.
Q302.2: How are OTC riskless principal transactions reported to FINRA?
A302.2: Members can report OTC riskless principal transactions by submitting a single tape report to a FINRA Facility in the same manner as an agency transaction, marked with a "riskless principal" capacity indicator, excluding the mark-up or mark-down, commission-equivalent or other fee. Alternatively, members can report an OTC riskless principal transaction by submitting two (or more, as necessary) reports: (1) a tape report to reflect the initial leg of the transaction with a capacity of principal; and (2) a non-tape (regulatory or clearing-only) report to reflect the offsetting "riskless" leg of the transaction with a capacity of riskless principal. See Rules 6282(e)(1)(C)(ii), 6380A(d)(3)(B), 6380B(d)(3)(B) and 6622(d)(3)(B); NTMs 99-65 (August 1999), 99-66 (August 1999) and 00-79 (November 2000). Where the tape report for an OTC riskless principal trade incorrectly reflects a capacity of "principal," the non-tape report is required under the trade reporting rules.
Q302.3: If the tape report for the initial leg of a riskless principal transaction is submitted to a FINRA Facility, must the non-tape report for the offsetting "riskless" leg be submitted to that same FINRA Facility?
A302.3: No. The trade reporting rules require that where the tape report for the initial leg of a riskless principal transaction is reported to FINRA, the non-tape report for the offsetting "riskless" leg must also be reported to FINRA; however, in such instance, members are not required to report both legs of the transaction to the same FINRA Facility. See Rules 6282(e)(1)(C)(ii), 6380A(d)(3)(B), 6380B(d)(3)(B) and 6622(d)(3)(B).
FINRA amended the trade reporting rules to avoid the unintended consequence of requiring members to be participants in all TRFs in order to comply with the trade reporting rules. See FINRA Regulatory Notice 07-38 (August 2007). For example, members BD1 and BD2 execute an OTC trade, and BD2 is acting as riskless principal for its customer. BD1 submits a tape report to TRF A reflecting BD2's capacity as principal. BD2 would be required to submit a non-tape report reflecting the offsetting customer leg of the transaction and its correct capacity as riskless principal. However, BD2 would not be required to submit the non-tape report to TRF A; BD2 could submit the non-tape report to TRF B. (Where the tape report is properly marked "riskless principal," a non-tape report is not required under the trade reporting rules. See FAQ 302.2.)
FINRA expects that, where possible, members will report both legs of a riskless principal transaction to the same FINRA Facility. See FINRA Regulatory Notice 07-38 (August 2007). Thus, if one member is reporting both legs of the transaction, FINRA expects that the member will report both legs to the same FINRA Facility.
they would report to regulators but that does not say that they will report those numbers to the public.
As for what I speak of, I suggest you read up on how a trade is reported to the "media market" which is the market you see, how routed trades work, and what is a riskless principle trade and how it is reported.
Really? What makes this a good buy? Could it be the history of this executive team with regards to start-ups? Maybe it is the self-serving contracts they engage in where their only contractual client comes from a company they also own. Or is it the fact that this company has no employees and all the officers are consultants who are paid their full consulting fees up front and by selling shares.
It shows more shares now owned then at the peak of Novembers run
these are not financials.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/EXPH/financials
i talked to an SEC enforcement attorney the other day after he called about another company I reported and I asked specifically about the issue with state registration. He said it was a lower priority dealing with accuracy there.
how does a company in default at a state level trade in the public markets? When in default you are technically not registered in any state.
The state SOS reports and TA share releases have no relevancy to each other. Many companies that issue shares are in default at the state SOS level.
Have you asked the TA whether they check with the SOS for the A/S before they issue new shares?
what happened to all those revenues?
Yea, quite the impressive company.
what do they do? The company's last 10K claims they don't do anything. no revenues, no operations, no license agreements, no employees. It is easy to repeat doing that.
This is opinion and not fact correct RE:$0.0093 value per well?
just so that all clear on this:
If for some reason such continues to be the case with the FTD situation, then that would be an added plus in my opinion.
actually, the 1 million FTD's failed for 1 day. It could have been a delay in settlement from a long seller holding a cert or it could have been bona-fide market making where the market maker did not close out their position that day but the day after. either way, unless those 1 Million shares on that trade day represented majority of volume and had an impact on price that day it was extremely benign.
If you wish to read more on how trades fail settlement the SEC has a primer on their site detailing the many ways a trade could fail settlement.
Bottom line, if there is an "official" confirmation of an FTD existing, then such means that the entire Float has been bought up and that there are no more shares in the remaining inventory of shares within the NWTT Float to be bought. That means that people are buying shares above the number of shares in the ”actual” Float per the SEC link you posted.
Issued shares can come with 6-month restrictions. these could be new shares issued when old shares are available to sell for all you know.
Unless you can *prove* that short sales were taking place using about to be issued shares, all you have is unsubstantiated speculation.
they were shorted in *anticipation*
of being *issued* and it *worked* for months
metric means nothing as short volume numbers include every long sale that is routed to a market maker outside of the long sellers primary broker-dealer.
Longs who sell, and their broker is not a market maker in that stock, must have their trades routed to a market maker in that stock. when that market maker executes that trade they do so under riskless principle and are required to mark it "short exempt".
i stand corrected, - wow $800.00 in trades OMG.
Are you saying we may have another fake NI43-101?
hence the $400.00 trade value today.
Today's trade value ---- $400.00
Interesting that on the national news level, furniture makers are talking about how all but the biggest companies are going under due to China and yet this pennystock POS that has no clients has investors that think this is the real deal.
38 million * .004 = approx $160K. Considering the early spike, could have been lots of flippers that came in ran it and sold into the run.
According to the SEC files, the fails to deliver in NWTT for the second half of December 2010 consisted of fails for a single day.
http://sec.gov/foia/foiadocs.htm
20101221|62948J103|NWTT|1000000|NW Tech Capital, Inc. Common S|.
1 million fails in a company with 5 Billion shares. Hardly a massive naked short.