AI
Thursday, July 24, 2008 11:38:51 PM
for all we know dahlman rose may have been behind the major shorting that took us down from 2.35 to .35... i'm not saying it's true, just that it could be. they certainly would have had a lot to gain by shaking out the .10 shares from the first private placement (at the time of the r/m).
i don't want to single out DR because anyone can operate in this fashion, but let's think in terms of big money's long term goals, and how it might serve their best interests to short the stock down from a short term top, and then accumulate a lot of shares from freaked out retailers who have no idea what's going on.
my theory turns a seemingly bearish downtrend into something very bullish. on more than one occasion, many traders around here have thought the stock sold off because someone changed their mind, decided they wanted to liquidate a large position, etc, but it's far more likely someone with a longer investment time frame wanted to make money on the short side and grab a larger position for less capital. fairly simple, and effective. jmho.
i don't want to single out DR because anyone can operate in this fashion, but let's think in terms of big money's long term goals, and how it might serve their best interests to short the stock down from a short term top, and then accumulate a lot of shares from freaked out retailers who have no idea what's going on.
my theory turns a seemingly bearish downtrend into something very bullish. on more than one occasion, many traders around here have thought the stock sold off because someone changed their mind, decided they wanted to liquidate a large position, etc, but it's far more likely someone with a longer investment time frame wanted to make money on the short side and grab a larger position for less capital. fairly simple, and effective. jmho.
