Replies to post #93673 on Cascadia Investments (CDIV)

[caltrader]

I agree. I'm just saying that the law of averages shows there must be a greater short position.

If stock A is averaging 60% short and stock B is averaging 30% short over the same monthly time frame, then it must be more than just the MM opening and closing short positions. The stocks that continually lead with greater x over y must have other factors influencing their numbers.

It's also interesting to see how the ChiOsc moves up on lower daily short but comes down on larger daily short and is reflecting the MM letting it run or not.

[timmyjames]

correct

just because FINRA may show a 65% short for any particular day, say 650,000 / 1,000,000

does not mean that there are 650,000 new shorts added to their hole,

but any day where the short is over 50% means those over that mark could not have possibly been covered, so using the above #s, there wold be 150,000 more added to the hole

that doesn't mean those 150,000 won't be covered on the next day, but, what you can get from FINRA data

is how many consecutive days the shorting has exceded any potential covering

ex. a 10 day trading period where a total of 8 days with 60% or more shorting, and only 2 days with slightly less than 50% (+ low volume) shows the MMs could not possibly cover the shorts that have been opened


what is nice with the larger share holders of Monk's team, is that they keep tally of how many shares they hold as a whole, and can clearly see, without even using FINRA data, that they hold more than the actual float (which is impossible without shorts)