InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 11
Posts 2273
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/07/2008

Re: Arrow335 post# 7785

Tuesday, 05/06/2008 7:57:49 PM

Tuesday, May 06, 2008 7:57:49 PM

Post# of 154387
Humm. I doubt there is a legitimate problem in obtaining HFBV that would cause a fail to deliver, but I'm sure that those who shorted it did not want to cover at a few hundred percent higher than where they had shorted it.

"One or more broker-dealers may have temporary but legitimate problems in obtaining the stock they borrowed in time for delivery"

For your information, there are no paid people blaming the drop in SP on the naked shorting, or being listed under rule 3210. I'm sure there are more than one reason for the drop. However, the fact that we are on the list seems to suggest that somebody would need to cover, and it also means that there could be at least an extra 12.5M shares in the float that should not be there. The are fake and HFBV did not receive proceeds from the sale of those shares.

The above in answer to your quote that you felt necessary to underline:
"There also may be instances where a company insider or paid promoter provides false and misleading excuses for why a company's stock price has recently decreased. For instance, these individuals may claim that the price decrease is a temporary condition resulting from the activities of naked short sellers. The insiders or promoters may hope to use this misinformation to move the price back up so they can dump their own stock at higher prices. Often, the price decrease is a result of the company's poor financial situation rather than the reasons provided by the insiders or promoters."

This is not the case w/ HFBV IMO.