Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 1
Regarding short attacks:
My understanding is that the shorts can only "borrow" real available shares. If all the longs were to place limit sell orders on their shares at, say $40, would this make them unavailable to the shorts?

I'm still stuck on the Craig Hallum bit about 14.5MM shares changing hands. How can that be if it does indeed exceed the float (longs and insiders excepted)? Whatchathink?


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Randy: 'My understanding is that the shorts can only "borrow" real available shares.'

That's in theory. In practice, there's also 'naked shorting', i.e. shorting a stock without having access or title to it. Of course it's illegal, but when did that stop Wall St. from anything?

"In a "naked" short sale, the seller does not borrow or arrange to borrow the securities in time to make delivery to the buyer within the standard three-day settlement period. As a result, the seller fails to deliver securities to the buyer when delivery is due; this is known as a "failure to deliver" or "fail."

For further information on short selling, naked short selling, and threshold securities, please see the Division of Trading and Markets' Key Points About Regulation SHO. Additional information relating to the SEC's activities relating to short selling can be found in the SEC Spotlight on Short Sales."
MDP Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top