This reply is as much to loanranger as to you.
For the last time, I AGREE with you that SPNG mgmt illegally sold shares into the market via fake opinion letters converting restricted shares illegally to unrestricted shares, consequently becoming, illegally, part of the float. I AGREE!!
By you using the phrase "The shares were NOT legally authorized to sell" this is where the confusion comes in with both you and toxicdebt.
Loanranger is correct. There is only one occasion "authorized" should be used with respect to shares of stock. That is the total amount of float + restricted + unissued. This is the phrase referring to as "Authorized Shares" in a publicly traded company.
You and toxic debt keep saying "NOT legally AUTHORIZED to sell, when the better term would be allowed to sell due to restrictions. The reason in suggesting this is because restricted shares are a part of authorized share count, and saying "The shares were NOT legally authorized to sell" is misleading to people who do not know the makeup of A/S.
This whole discussion began when I stated that if OBO + NOBO > A/S, then there are uncovered short sells, NSS, in the market for this, or any other equity.
I understand, but for loanranger's sake, please use the phrase NOT allowed to sell into the market when referring to restricted shares rather than NOT authorized as he seems to find it confusing.
Thanks and have a good day.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
