For once I am in agreement with you. Nonetheless, AveInv is onto something here. IMO the example is okay except that the reference is to a short sale where there is a ligitimate borrowing of shares to cover the short. I think that AveInv means to be addressing the impact of "Naded" shorting". In that regard, the twist at the end is altered somewhat in that once the naked short is covered all is balanced when accounting for shares. The impact, however, is whatever dilutive damage to the company occured as a result of the naked shorting via share price as a direct result of the transaction itself and any dilutive effect those phantom shares might have had while they were out in the market.
The primary direct effect on a Company occurs when the Company is dependent on the sale of additional shares to fund day to day operations. That just might be where the short seller's miscaluted in the case of CMKM. If UC had all of his operating funds lined up before the battle, the impact of the artifically diluted share price will not affect his ability to operate while the battle in on. THAT'S THE BET. I'm betting that he has it because everything points to UC wanting to battle. It's your job to scare everybody into the thought that he doesn't have it. Good luck. RFL
AI
