News Focus
News Focus
Followers 236
Posts 15419
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 03/29/2014

Re: Doktornolittle post# 11186

Sunday, 05/25/2014 6:15:27 PM

Sunday, May 25, 2014 6:15:27 PM

Post# of 818033
For Dok (you probably don’t want to bother reading this post if you’re not Dok) - my goal in posting about shorting was only to protect all of us:

1. From a possibly useless endeavor (limit order at some price that might achieve nothing)

2. From actually selling at a limit price of $50 or a figure such as that because one day what we hope might happen actually happens. And then we’ve sold out at $50 while the stock continues to go up to, for example, $100. All wild speculation, but we all would agree, possible. And since we are all in this stock together - and have been subject to a pretty severe beating this past month and a half, my goal is only to aid us all as best I can. I think that is hopefully, the intent of most of us.

3. If we do put in orders to limit sell at $50 or $75 - depending upon the number of us doing just that, we could end up “shorting ourselves” by inadvertently placing the trades in that take us down. Perhaps our numbers would have little effect, but I certainly wouldn’t want to aid the shorts in this process - nor lessen my chance to make more with this stock. That is one of the reasons we are all in it.

4. To explain the process of shorting as it’s been explained to me by Charles Schwab. I myself have never shorted a stock.

I think most of the Yahoo posters know that is my intent as they’ve been more than familiar with me over there.

Over the past several months, I’ve spent some time on the phone with CS inquiring about how shorting is done, how the shorts can borrow our stocks, short squeezes, etc. I can say I have enjoyed a few cathartic moments when discussing short squeezes with them.

When Chiugray posted his plan on yahoo, I called once again to CS to see if this plan was possible - with the full intent of moving forward if it would do any good. It was from there that I learned what a margin account meant at CS.

If you have a margin account there, they (the brokerage) cannot borrow your stocks unless you borrow from them. The moment you borrow from them, they can borrow from you. I haven’t yet gotten an answer as to what happens if you have borrowed from them, then they borrowed your stock, then you paid back what you borrowed and are no longer borrowing from them. They will get back to me on Tuesday (margin dept. gone right now).

Now if you do borrow from your brokerage, if you want to protect your NWBO shares from being borrowed, you can set up a separate account, move your NWBO shares into it, and don’t borrow to buy more from that account. You can set it up as a non-margin account or a margin account - the point is to just not borrow in it. Then you’ve protected your stocks from being borrowed.

Now as you can see from the video Pyrr posted, there are millions of shares being bought and sold that don’t even exist. Some are done for the purpose of shorting, some are done simply for the purpose of making money, whether the stock goes up or down.

From Flash Boys (page 108):

From 2006 to 2008, high-frequency traders’ share of total U.S. stock market trading doubled, from 26 percent to 52 percent - and it has never fallen below 50 percent since then. The total number of trades made in the stock market also spike dramatically, from roughly 10 million per day in 2006 to just over 20 million per day in 2009.



HFT front run many stock purchases every day. Their computers identify a large purchase “order” for a stock, and with their superior fiber cable routes, they can run in front of that order, buy the stock on the market first for say $60, and then turn around and sell it for $60.01 in faster time than a second. The HFT really never owned the stock. They just were a go between - and made .01cent per share in the process. This is all legal - made possible and legal by Reg NMS established in 2007. But consider that the original intended transaction has now doubled the number of shares bought and sold - twice as much as intended.

I have had my moments of intensely disliking Adam Feuerstein, so I guess according to your rules, there is nothing wrong with me.

While I’m nowhere near as informed as some of the other posters on this board, I do know most of the differences between Direct and L. I assume you are referring to my question regarding how the vaccine was made for Direct - whether from a tumor sample or blood. The fact that I didn’t know that does not categorize me as not knowing the overall difference between the two. And as you well know, I invested in this stock for Direct, not L (one for non operable tumors and the other for brain cancer), as I believed it might have made the difference between ten year old Colby Curtin, who’s tumor was wrapped around all of her internal organs and thus rendered inoperable). This was a little girl I’d known since birth, whom I picked up from school once a week, who was my daughter’s best friend, who was a dear little friend of mine, we spent every Christmas Eve with her family, and I thought D might have made the difference between her living or dying. Unfortunately, D was not available at that time, and she died. It is, however, my hope that many others like her will be saved in the future and I am just doing my part. Many of us have these types of personal reasons for being in the stock.

I would love interfere with a short squeeze effort - I just don’t want us all to make this valiant effort that might actually hurt us all in the end. Insulting me doesn’t help... if I’m wrong in my shorting assessment, please tell me how - no need to get nasty.

Those of us who are being stymied by the inability to put in a really high limit order (as I am - I can only put the sell in at $30 - which I am certainly not going to do), can have the broker override that and put it in for you. I found out that today. However, my shares are not being borrowed in my margin account as I have not borrowed from Charles Schwab.

Your ad hominem attack on Pyrr is rendered irrelevant - by it’s very nature. If you don’t like his theories, why not stick to attacking those theories rather than discounting what he offers because of what he does for a living. I’d call that throwing mud, and it’s not helping your IQ to rise either.

No real hard feelings... I’m sure we can all just move past this. On that note, think next week will bring the stock price up, decent to fantastic news, and all of us will feel much better. And one of these days, we’ll be entertained by watching a short (or long) squeeze on NWBO.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News