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.
Amusing, indeed. At first glance this Notice to Show Cause appeared to have no teeth. But, there is actual constituional law that supports the claim.
S/B interesting to see how this plays out.
Yeah, it's listed here: Symbol Price Change % Change
LEHMQ.PK
Penny stock.
Uh, Lehman is a penny stock. And it just went up over 300% today! LOL!
LOL! While you may be right Janice, I sure did enjoy making money off of GS on the ride up today.
On the other hand, MS could have gone by the way side like lehman if the shorting was allowed to continue at least with respect to finding a "merging" partner. This buys them sufficient time to find a buyer without it being a fire sale. Although, they are a strong company, there is no way they could have ridden out the volatility of this market without some kind of intervention.
The new rule only covers 799 financial insitutions.
SEC bans short-selling for financials
Friday September 19, 7:07 am ET
By David Goldman, CNNMoney.com staff writer
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission took what it called "emergency action" on Friday and temporarily banned investors from short-selling 799 financial companies.
No Short sales until October 2.
Actually panther, this is where we agree 100%. I was convinced a long time ago that NSS was not what killed this company, so you're preaching to the choir there. I have no doubt whatsoever that UC and gang stole everything. And, unlike most, I personally think this scam continues under the guise of "new" management.
I don't attempt to sway anyone to believe anything other than the fact that CMKM is a SCAM. That said, "PROOF" of anything else is really irrelevant, which brings me back to my earlier post that we have more important issues to discuss.
So what if a brokerage got caught up in this! WTH do you care? I don't, and it most certainly had nothing to do with the collapse of CMKM. So, again, quit sounding like some ignorant, paltalking, nutcase "demanding" proof of some minute, meaningless issue.
Now, go change your diaper, wipe the tears from your eyes, and go sit in the corner and color us a pretty picture to hang on the fridge...
Wow, for someone that presents him/herself as intelligent, I can't believe you would ask such an ignorant question. Deterioration on stock value = reduced market cap = less capital to grow a company. And, that's only one simplistic example.
Are you related to pontalba? You seem to share the same brain.
UK Regulators temporarily bar Short Sales in Financial stocks. Just announced on CNBC.
What panther, you want a "linky?" LOL! Your sounding just like the cracktalkers too!
Sure Patrick was right, and it's good to see his dad giving him credit for it now.
Actually, I'm not a believer of the huge trillion share NSS BS. Proof that a short did occur has been proven, and provided many times. I think we can all agree that it didn't amount to much of anything $$$ wise.
As for the brokerage firm purchasing post rev. I no longer speculate as to why they did it. The fact remains, they did, and all the dirty details would not change the opinions of those too ignorant to see it for what it is.
six posts left...
ponta, continue to believe as you wish. By doing so, you prove yourself as ignorant as the Paltalking nutjobs we have to deal with daily.
In the normal course of business, you would be correct ponta.
Not BS, but yes you are correct in that a board loon made the claim. Coincidently, they got it right. But enough about that for now. There are greater issues that could be discussed here with my nine remaining posts.
nufced, it's hard to read when one's head is up...
Well, you get the picture.
Yes, Nufced.
ponta, did you actually post that?! LMAO! "Ever heard of the DTCC"... ROFLMAO!!! Yes, I believe I have. As for the details, just wait for it or discover it for yourself.
ponta, call the TA maybe that scumbag Helen will tell you all about it. You can continue to deny it's existance all you like, but it won't change the fact that it did occurred. And, that I do know for a fact, not that it will ever amount to much.
ponta, "bulk" meaning large.
Actually Ponta, it isn't a myth. The bulk cert was sold post rev and hit the TA's office. The transfer was halted as the stock powers were forged.
Ponta, in reply to your private message, this is what my broker did:
Transaction
Time/Date Security Explanation Quantity Price Amount
15:20 GS ID Sell (3) 5.000 1,499.99
CALL GS ID 0120 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC EXP 09-20-08 OPEN TRAN
15:08 GS Buy 300 109.900 (32,970.00)
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC
My account cannot short unless it is a purchase of an ultrashort ETF or equivalant. I cannot even do option trades without owning the stock as well.
Idiot was a nice touch though...
Don't forget Delidog... That POS was one heck of a FA.
Quite true. Fortunately for me, mine is for real, and he gets paid DEARLY.
He doesn't. CMKM was my dumas mistake.
Yes, Janice they should expect to be shorted.
lol! Clearly. That's why I use a financial advisor.
Ponta, good question. Based on all the news today with MS and GS claiming their share value is being unjustly deteriorated by the short selling, silly me just assumed there might be some credibility to the claim. Oh, and that the SEC was in meetings with both discussing that very problem probably lead me to believe it might be going on as well.
But, finding the "data" I'll leave up to you professional dd'ers.
It might, here's how:
If a short sale violates this close out requirement, then any broker-dealer acting on the short seller’s behalf will be prohibited from further short sales in the same security unless the shares are not only located but also pre-borrowed. The prohibition on the broker-dealer’s activity applies not only to short sales for the particular naked short seller, but to all short sales for any customer.
ponta, inforcement will be the determining factor. If no inforcement then Cox proves to be as lame as he always has been.
ponta, I am specifically referring to the legal short sales, and that they will be effected by this rule as well. The timing of this rule may be more preventive in an effort to curb further market deterioration in the financials, not to mention to protect all those assets the FED has now aquired.
ponta, it's not about the SHO list. It's this comment by the SEC that may tie the two together:
"The prohibition on the broker-dealer’s activity applies not only to short sales for the particular naked short seller, but to all short sales for any customer."
True enough nufced. But, I think the timing of the rule change coinciding with the 70% equity stake the FED now has in AIG might give this more teeth you most think.
The two loans were already repaid. They were need in order to settle securities transactions with customers of Lehman and its clearance parties.
Howdy Nufced!
That's insanity! ROTFL!!
LMAO! Wait... you're not serious are you?
Yeah, he sure did hit the gate running.
If the note and Letter of Understanding were signed on March 29, 2007 as Kevin states, then a definitive plan to convert out of Nevada and into Texas had to be in motion some time prior to Kevin actually being handed the company.
Looks like this is my last post today. LOL! Newbie rules...