Gump, like others I can't tell if you are serious about these posts or just trying to jerk everyone's chain.
In the unlikely event that you are serious, let me take a whack at your post.
The mix of physical certs and electronic credits now in vogue allows more credits to be in play than are backed by physical certs. What part of that can't you get ?? Until physical certs are completely eliminated Shorty will thrive .. because NOBODY audits the totals. The cert totals and the electronic totals should be equal.
1) They are equal. It doesn't make any difference if the stock is not shorted, located shorted, or naked shorted. If the stock is shorted (located or naked), a given broker will have the correct NET amount of shares at DTCC, and internally on its books will have certain plus numbers and minus numbers which net out to the correct total.
2a) There is nothing about the mix of physical and electronic credits which allow more credits than are backed by physical certs. Long before there were electronic credits there was shorting.
2b) Either you are aggravated by shorting in general or you do not understand the very subtle distinction between shorting naked and shorting with a locate. In both cases the stock is borrowed after the short sale, and in both cases the delivery may fail if the borrow goes away or never materializes in the first place. There is a higher likelihood of fails with naked shorting; that's all.
3) You wrote, "Until physical certs are completely eliminated Shorty will thrive." I don't see how the elimination of physical certificates will stop short-sellers from thriving. At this point in time virtually all shorts are against electronic entries.
AI
