Nymet Holdings Inc. (fka NYMH)

[rrufff]

Hi Juanly - the questions you raise about naked shorting are very complicated and there are no hard and fast answers. That's why you see so many arguments on the boards.

It's a topic about which I've written a lot and I have a board dedicated to it and other manipulative tactics used by short sellers, MM's and hedge funds on SI. You are welcome to learn about the topic there and add to the discussion. (To those who lie about my posts, this discussion in no way is intended to preclude or excuse manipulation on the long side or wrongful acts of managements or insiders.)

http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/subject.aspx?subjectid=55464

I do want to specifically state that I believe that most pinkie penny stock companies use the issue of naked shorting to hide their own dilution and dumping. Beebe says that his team is not doing this and all we have is his word and reputation. We have no proof one way or another. We know that the outstanding share count has grown, but as PQL suggests that has been arguably to acquire assets. As critics state, without full transparency, we don't know the answers and are stuck arguing, with all our biassses exposed, so to speak.

It is true, and clearly a good thing, that the AUTHORIZED and OUTSTANDING share count recently has been reduced and that there has been INSIDER PURCHASES. However, as the other side points out the float and outstanding share count has increased over time. The key issue is whether or not the company has gotten VALUE for those shares. That is the issue. We all want the answers. We have evidence of asset transactions and development in public documents and filings. However, the market is saying it is uncertain or distrustful and the share price shows this.

I only have time to get into some generalities here. First of all, the information is controlled by the industry. The industry is set up to take money from those who do not have information and give it to those who do have information. Information and money trails typically coincide. The monthly "short" list and even the Reg Sho list does not tell the full story. Concepts, such as how ECN's work, desking often through overseas offices, arbitrage, ex-clearing, etc., make the issue one that has inherent obfuscation. Why is it not made more simple and transparent? I believe it is because "they" want us to remain ignorant of the process, waste time arguing with each other. We should know the answers and we should be able to make our investment decisions as the big money players do, with full access to information. The so-called "crusaders" who argue about penny scams, I believe, miss the big picture and then get upset when they are exposed as being shills for the industry. Bring the issue up on boards where shorts congregate (e.g., the Anthony board on SI) and you will instantly be attacked.

As the definitions and exclusions often become interpretation, it's probably better to discuss "manipulative" shorting, rather than "naked" shorting. The basic rule is that you are supposed to borrow shares before you sell them or within a finite time thereafter. The interpretive problem arises because there are exceptions to that rule, definitional exceptions and devices that make enforcement problematic and seemingly random and sampled.

MM's are probably the biggest exception. MM's, under the guise of providing liquidity, can naked short. However, this is supposed to be a fleeting thing. Those of us who want real reform argue that with the technology available today, this exception should be minutes or seconds and not weeks and months. Other nations are ahead of us in eliminating the abuses that take place so it is possible to cure the problem and provide enough information so that we all can make decisions instead of fighting over theory. Furthermore, those of us who trade daily laugh at the arguments made by MM defenders that they are only there to serve and not to line their pockets. Take a look at the liquidity provided in stocks that you watch. You will see wide spreads, no trades, and panic one way or the other. This is hardly orderly market making. I respectfully suggest MM's are there to make as much money as possible off of you and me, period, end of sentence. Again, in response to larvae who lie about my posts, there is no evidence that this has happened here. We simply do not have the answers as I have stated over and over for emphasis.

Again, the industry fights change and dissemination of information and I always urge people to get active, write your representatives and regulators. And read about the issues.

There is a lot at stake and it affects each and every one of us. I have a lot of enemies online who get frustrated when I write about this and immediately come out of the woodwork and lie about my posts, particularly with respect to the abuses in the penny stock area. I only ask others to read my posts and not make judgments based on out of context discussion on blogs that are populated by those with troubled pasts, both online and in the real world and who may be shilling for the industry.

The issue of hedge funds also comes into play because they now control over 1/2 of the US equity trades and a higher percentage in other markets. If you look at the list of Forbes richest people out today I believe, you will see that hedge fund managers now make up a large percentage of the newest richest list.

Again, because of lies by larvae type bloggers, I want to emphasize that this discussion is abused by penny stock CEO's so I have no opinion as to whether or not it is material here. Beebe has suggested that some of the dilution was the result of the Astrom history. Again, I'd like to see proof and full transparency before I express any opinion.

As I've posted here before, I believe the uncertainty and the history cause the low share price. Whether or not it is aided by MM games, naked shorting, Astrom dumping or just plain pinky insiders doing what they often do, I don't know. There are a surplus of opinions expressed on this and every other penny stock board and you can pretty much put them all in a few categories, based on bias, and they all start to sound like recycled posturing, irrespective of the side of the argument.

Hope that answers some of your questions. The real answers are for YOU to find. If you educate yourself, it is less likely that you will lose money, even in this area of the market. This post is my opinion and I welcome others to come to their own opinions in a fair, objective and thorough fashion.

Personally, I'm long because Beebe is at least saying the right things and has taken steps that at least appear to make this different from most pinkies. Whether or not that is enough, I don't know. I'd like to think it's first baby steps that will lead to full transparency so that the value in this company is clear for all to see.