News Focus
News Focus
icon url

lindy1401

07/13/17 11:15 AM

#94019 RE: nsomniyak #94018

Fat finger would be hard to believe...3 trades separated by some time...
icon url

God_Father

07/13/17 11:16 AM

#94021 RE: nsomniyak #94018

Option A is a lot more plausible, I agree. But I really think its MMs passing shares around for whatever reason.

I highly doubt it was a fat-finger trade because it happened at 3 separate instances, would mean someone really loves losing money. Not to mention we have levels upon levels of bids.


I think you have it wrong. The .032 trade was not a SHORT being forced to cover - a short would love to cover at that price right now. Presumably that trade was a long being forced to sell for some reason - presumably held DOLV in a margin account, failed to meed a margin call and the broker just dumped stocks fronm the account starting from the lowest tier until the margin requirements were satisfied.

Either that or it was a fat-finger trade where the price was entered incorrectly.

icon url

WHIP THE HORSE

07/13/17 11:18 AM

#94023 RE: nsomniyak #94018

You make more sense, IMO

It was a shorter who failed to cover, he had a margin call, failed to put the money, and his broker sold his position at the lowest possible price.

A shorter was screwed in a major way.

They deserve it.
icon url

elcochino6

07/13/17 11:20 AM

#94025 RE: nsomniyak #94018

That trade wouldn't make sense as a retail fat finger trade, the shares would have been sold all the way down to 32 not all at 32 which didn't happen
icon url

JEM165

07/13/17 11:53 AM

#94067 RE: nsomniyak #94018

I tend to agree, but not with the fat finger scenario, as it was done twice. Had to be a really fat finger. lol Margin calls can be devastating to a long and apparently, this was. A short would, as you say, have to cover at the ask because that is what part of the penalty would have taken FROM his account. (Love to smell SHORTS burning in the morning) lolDOLV