Comments (16)
sorted by:
POed_Texan 4 points ago +4 / -0

I believe that the speaker was leaving an opening for an "honest" Fail to Deliver. That means that they actually had the share but for some reason it was not delivered to the purchaser.

Since things are done electronically, I can't comprehend why we do not make the exchange instantaneously other than to leave the loophole for corruption.

Hattmall 2 points ago +2 / -0

Instantaneous can have massive problems when computers fuck up. Which they do. Frequently.

deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
Hattmall 1 point ago +1 / -0

So you can actually go to computershare.com and transfer your shares there and then there are held as yours legitimately.

Though you should know most all of the GME stuff you read is pretty much entirely made up. There aren't more shares sold short than the float. There are more short transactions over the reporting period than the float. Just like there can be more volume than the float on any given day. The published short interest % isn't a snapshot in time of an actual amount of shares short.

It's just a general idea of how much shorting is occurring. The settlement periods and variety of reporting dates can give the illusion of more shares being short than the float.

The failure to deliver on GME is not particularly high, there's actually more short volume on a lot of SPACs than GME. There's just a lot more shorting transactions because of the wild demand. There's no indication that widespread or illegal naked shorting is going on.

Auroraalpha 2 points ago +2 / -0

Because of time. Hedgies have austistic spreadsheets to cover it all on the basis over time, since not everything gets called at once. That and for every borrower, there is a lender. Because most folks go through another institution to get their investment orders in, they dont know about this. Youd be surprised how far removed people are from knowledge of their investments.

yeldarb1983 2 points ago +2 / -0

My guess? It is illegal, but only if you get caught.

GaIIowBoob 1 point ago +4 / -3

I t s entirely illegal.

You know how cops can murder and get away with it? SEC is those cops.

Relhok 8 points ago +8 / -0

Not the best analogy there fren. Most so-called murders by cops are actually not.

I have a better example:

You know how democrats commit crimes, and never even get arrested, much less go to prison?

HighFrequency 1 point ago +1 / -0


I'm seeing DAILY reports of new arrests of various pols and govt lackeys. Corruption, child porn and trafficking, mostly.

But once the AZ audit flips the state, with others to follow, I do believe we will see some long time crooks, oh, excuse me, members of Congress, be charged with serious crimes. Treason.

GaIIowBoob 0 points ago +1 / -1

Homicide then.. Wordplay doesn't make it OK for the SEC commit crime.

wampdog29 3 points ago +3 / -0

Bad analogy....

GaIIowBoob 2 points ago +2 / -0

True, that one cop got convicted and the SEC never ever gets convicted

Auroraalpha 1 point ago +2 / -1

The word murder has specific legal definitions. Just because your definition of murder equivocates any sort of death, doesnt make it true

GaIIowBoob 0 points ago +1 / -1


mojavegreen 1 point ago +1 / -0

Shorting is a good strategy in a bear market. Buying puts is essentially beting the stock will go down. To short you have to pay interest on the shares and the lender gets interest. Shorting is a valid strategy.

Lurking_Waiting [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Shorting yes. Naked shorting however. This day and age sounds like they are abusing the fail to deliver function.