InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

ozz112

07/01/09 1:05 AM

#126605 RE: stoxmagic #126603

STOX: Thanks for the reply...I guess I'm wondering where they come up with 300 million figure if they are talking about RM shares..isn't the lowest figure of RM shares the current known amount of around 460 million? So that made me wonder if he was talking about RM shares or shares currently in the float but none RM shares...essentially trying to tell stockholders that "hey, we only have 200-300 million shares that are tradeable and outstanding and we control 300 million of them, so there is indeed a massive short position. Get ready for a ride"

But, it seems he must be talking about RM shares when he says they can not be sold. If so, I just don't understand where he comes up with the 300 figure.

icon url

ozz112

07/01/09 1:11 AM

#126607 RE: stoxmagic #126603

Also, did anyone find this interesting?

Fails to Deliver Data

I'm just beginning to look into this idea of naked shorting. It seems when a naked short occurs that it delivers back a "fail to deliver" response when the entity who shorts(sells) the stock fails to deliver that share of stock. The government has been releasing some data on this and it can be found at this website:

http://www.sec.gov/foia/docs/failsdata.htm


SETTLEMENT DATE: 20090302

CUSIP: 849109103

SYMBOL: SPNG

QUANTITY (FAILS): around 100k shares

DESCRIPTION: Spongetech Delivery Systems, I


Are these numbers an indication that the shorts already covered? In January, there were around 4 million fails to deliver, then 2 months later, only a balance of 100k