InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 2
Posts 41
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/06/2002

Re: None

Monday, 09/10/2007 11:19:40 AM

Monday, September 10, 2007 11:19:40 AM

Post# of 473
A few thoughts

(A) I've suspected they've reacted to our posts for years. Just recently for example, I noticed after the post on yahoo why 64 should be the bottom that the market makers IMMEDIATELY firmed up the bid up from 61 to 64 after comparing time stamps on trades and how the bids moved.

(B) I do not trust the "official" posted short interest data for this stock, and the reason is because only the "legitimate" short interest shows up there. That means trades that were settled through the DTCC (and likely involved the DTCC's stock borrow program). The short interest would not include all the previously "grandfathered" short sales that MMs and shorters have parked in overseas accounts and it would not include trades that are settled inter-MM without involving the DTCC directly, in my opinion. On the other hand, I have also been told that all trades posted on the OTC require broker reporting, and that this reporting mechanism is how the system gains a "net" (aggregate) short interest picture, so in theory this should capture any trades of the "grandfathered" naked short sales, but I have my suspicions about that as well. In the meantime, market makers and shorters can also hold an inventory of legitimate shares that they can use to trade back and forth without increasing the overall short position but which can be used to manipulate the share price in the absence of any real buying pressure.