InvestorsHub Logo

Coopermun

08/05/09 5:20 PM

#36851 RE: sneaky_peaky #36850

Maybe that's why all the DKAM shorts have been covered or is there a better reason. I think the later.

Toxic Avenger

08/05/09 5:27 PM

#36852 RE: sneaky_peaky #36850

It's interesting that both firms were playing this game during the period of DKAM's run in early 2007, but I can't find any references to specific stocks.

However, these days it looks like the problem has been greatly reduced, and of course, the notion of short selling a stock near its all time low seems ill advised to me at best.

From another article on the SEC action -
"In its continuing effort to address short selling abuses, the SEC last week announced several regulatory actions to further protect investors and the markets from the negative effects of abusive "naked" short sales. The Commission made permanent a temporary rule implemented in 2008 to address concerns about "fails to deliver," and the SEC's Office of Economic Analysis has since determined that the number of fails to deliver has declined significantly under the rule. Fails to deliver in all equity securities has decreased by approximately 57 percent since the fall of 2008, and the average daily number of threshold list securities has declined from a high of approximately 582 securities in July 2008 to 63 in March 2009."