Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
1–10 of 312 posts
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#2The "self-replenishing pool" missing image is available here: https://web.archive.org/web/20201104113520im_/https://cdn.eu...
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#3> The stock borrow programme at the DTCC, they allege, enables the naked shorting of shares to the extent that the number of shares in circulation of some companies is now several times in excess of that issued. Even companies listed on the NYSE, could have been affected. As Wes Christian, partner in law firm Christian, Smith & Jewell in Houston, and lead lawyer on several of the cases, explains: "With the revelation of the Regulation SHO Threshold Securities list and the Leslie Boni report, published in November 2004 [see glossary], it is now crystal clear that this problem of naked short selling is systemic in Wall Street, and virtually impacts every business sector on every exchange including numerous billion-dollar companies listed on the NYSE and other companies listed on the Amex."
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#4Non-archive.org version: https://www.euromoney.com/article/b1320xkhl0443w/naked-short... The "self-replenishing pool" missing image is available here: https://web.archive.org/web/20201104113520im_/https://cdn.eu...
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#5Very interesting indeed.. > The stock borrow programme at the DTCC, they allege, enables the naked shorting of shares to the extent that the number of shares in circulation of some companies is now several times in excess of that issued. Even companies listed on the NYSE, could have been affected. As Wes Christian, partner in law firm Christian, Smith & Jewell in Houston, and lead lawyer on several of the cases, expl…
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#6Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#7> Michigan-based entrepreneur Robert Simpson decided to see what would happen if he bought the entire stock of one company. Using a single broker, within a couple of days Simpson had paid a little over $5,000 for 1,285,050 shares in OTC bulletin board property-development company Global Links. According to Simpson, these shares were delivered into his account shortly afterwards. Yet the following day 37,044,500 Global Links shares were traded on the bulletin board. The next day, 22,471,000 shares were traded. On neither day had Simpson traded a single Global Link share, he insists. And events surrounding Simpson's investments became yet more confusing. Global Links had only ever issued 1,158,064 shares. Simpson had managed to acquire 126,986 shares that did not exist. How he had managed to be sold more shares than were in issuance is exactly the question Simpson hoped his foray would raise.
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#8Wow, how has nobody noticed this before? This looks seriously rotten: > Michigan-based entrepreneur Robert Simpson decided to see what would happen if he bought the entire stock of one company. Using a single broker, within a couple of days Simpson had paid a little over $5,000 for 1,285,050 shares in OTC bulletin board property-development company Global Links. According to Simpson, these shares were delivered into…
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#9Wow, how has nobody noticed this before? This looks seriously rotten: > Michigan-based entrepreneur Robert Simpson decided to see what would happen if he bought the entire stock of one company. Using a single broker, within a couple of days Simpson had paid a little over $5,000 for 1,285,050 shares in OTC bulletin board property-development company Global Links. According to Simpson, these shares were delivered into…
It was noticed. The SEC even had data supporting Global Links' claims. This incident is almost 16 years old and was later investigated by the SEC.
Re: Naked shorting: The curious incident of the shares that didn't exist (2005)
#10This is, in my opinion, the raison d’etre of blockchain. Public, immutable ledgers are immune to this kind of fraud (although they have other issues, of course).