InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 19
Posts 2235
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/06/2006

Re: Ripnrob post# 307403

Friday, 02/20/2015 10:59:45 AM

Friday, February 20, 2015 10:59:45 AM

Post# of 311068
It is what it is. For years and years on this board and others, it has been stated "as fact" that there can be no naked shorts as there are too many safeguards in place and that it would be too cost effective to do so.

The link I provided, http://www.thinkadvisor.com/2015/02/06/sec-finra-enforcement-ex-barclays-analyst-3-others, merely shows how it is possible for it to happen. Brokers looking to profit from ill gotten gains can short the bejeses out of a stock into oblivion and never report the position. As for the 2.50 per share cost? I don't think a crooked broker is going to impose that cost on themselves now would they?
Can I provide a link that proves this is just part of what happened to SLJB? No of course not, no more than you can produce one that shows it didn't! The jury is still out but I can tell you this, there is a paper trail.

634 followers of this board won't be satisfied until the whole story is told. We've heard part of it.

I look forward to the day when I can provide you the document that shows SLJB was subject to this kind of manipulation.
However, the link I did provide shows how this can be done.
For now, it is what it is.
We shall see.

Count

As you slide down the banister of life, may
the splinters never point the wrong way...