You dramatically understate the likelihood of large-scale synthetic shorting, relying on the wrong indicators while ignoring the structural realities of OTC trading, derivative hedging, and NWBO’s unique float dynamics.
First, high-level synthetic shorting does not require persistent FTDS. Why?
1. Because market-makers have an exemption and can legally short without borrowed shares.
2. Equity swaps and CDFs create synthetic short exposure that NEVER shows up in FINRA short interest.
3. Dealers can easily reset FTD through buy-ins, internalization, ex-clearing arrangements, and rolling swaps.
FTDs, because of a lack of transparency regarding all of the above, are not a reliable indicator of synthetic short positions.
Second, your post totally ignores the role of OTC derivative hedging, a huge flaw in your position. OTC stocks are routinely used in total return swaps and CFDs, which create synthetic short exposure, require dealers to short the underlying stock, do not appear in short interest, can exceed the float, and can be rolled indefinitely. This is exactly how Archegos built hidden positions regulators never saw until the collapse. NWBO’s retail-heavy float + low borrow availability = textbook conditions for synthetic hedging.
Third, your post misattributes dilution as the primary driver of price pressure. This position is factually weak. Dilution explains some pressure, but not the persistent, patterned behavior consistent with algorithmic control. NWBO’s dilution has been predictable, disclosed, and modest relative to OTC biotech norms—insufficient to explain multi-year price suppression. Meanwhile, the trading behavior shows walk-downs on tiny volume, instant counter-prints on every uptick, identical intraday patterns, and bid/ask walls appearing and disappearing in an algorithmic fashion. Dilution does not produce these patterns. Algorithmic short-side control does.
Fourth, your post assumes “no regulatory action = no naked shorting,” which, in light of AMC, GME, and a host of other companies on Wall Street (which have been engaging in naked shorting since forever), is absolutely absurd. You lost all credibility with this point, IMHO. Regulators rarely detect synthetic shorting until a collapse (Archegos), a whistleblower comes forward, a forced unwind, or a lawsuit with discovery. NWBO’s 2022 lawsuit already revealed millions of spoof orders by market makers — a form of illegal price suppression. If they were spoofing, the probability that they were also synthetically shorting is not low. Spoofing is almost never done in isolation. While spoofing does not prove synthetic shorting, it demonstrates a willingness to use illegal tools to control prices, thereby materially increasing the likelihood that other forms of manipulation—including synthetic shorting—are also at play.
Fifth, your post ignores NWBO’s float structure, which is the key. NWBO has a tightly held float, long-term, diamond-handed retail holders, low borrow availability, and minimal institutional lending supply. When borrow is scarce, shorts must use synthetic exposure. Even if you cite NWBO’s dilution as a counterargument here, it fails because many of these shares are going to long-term NWBO holders- retail, insiders (gifts to their children, etc.), and non-lending accounts- not into the lending pool, resulting in the float expanding but NOT the ‘borrowable’ float. This keeps the tradable float tighter (which is why NWBO still shows thin order books, low borrow availability, and persistent market-maker dominance). If dilution had meaningfully increased the tradable float, you would see deeper books, more liquidity, and more natural price discovery. You don’t.
Sixth, your post’s conclusion (“unlikely”) is not supported by its own logic. You claim: OTC = opaque, market makers have exemptions, dilution exists, short interest is low, and there are no obvious FTD spikes. Then you jump to: “Therefore, extreme naked shorting is unlikely.”
But none of those premises logically rule out synthetic shorting. In fact, they describe the exact environment where synthetic shorting thrives!
I may be nuts, but I think the ‘arc of the universe’ is about to bend toward justice!!!
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
