Funny Bunny
Looking for something a little lighter?
Catch Bob's more irreverent and amusing pieces in his Funny Bunny Blog.

The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution...

Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog    
Posted by:   bobo 3/24/2006 11:00 AM

Dr. Byrne issued a press release a few minutes ago. You can read it here. You should. It is simple, straightforward, and easy to comprehend.

It states, with accuracy, that the legal short interest in OSTK is now 9.578 million shares. Not counting "ex-clearing", long and short FTDs (shares failed to be delivered on settlement date), "open positions" (WTF?), and FTDs hiding behind the curtain of offshore clearing entities.

That is 107% of all available shares held at the DTC (the subsidiary of the DTCC).

So, what is there to stop this from getting to 200%? 400%? 800%?

Nothing.

Nothing at all.

The DTCC assures us that the Stock Borrow Program doesn't create more shares than exist legitimately (issued by the company). That is technically true. It is also technically true that it does allow a virtually infinite number of IOUs to be created, which trade, and have the identical impact on the stock, as legal shares. Because if Wells Fargo lends a short seller a share of stock, and that seller sells it to a customer at UBS, UBS can then deposit it back into the Stock Borrow Program, to be relent to someone else tomorrow, leaving a trail of IOUs in its wake. One share at the DTC, who knows how many IOUs created? There is no real limit.

Legal short borrowing and selling from margin accounts could certainly account for a virtually unlimited number of legally shorted shares, as well - completely seperate from the Stock Borrow Program.

But here's a fair question: How can anyone put money into the market if there is no barrier to the number of shares that can be sold, both legally as well as illegally?

I mean, another way of saying this is, how can anyone ever hope for a stock's price to rise if an unlimited number of sales transactions can be generated, both legally, and illegally?

In the 1980s, following the revelations of Milken and Boesky and the Drexel gang, investor confidence was at a low - it became evident that Wall Street was a "Den Of Thieves" and that nobody was minding the store.

That is nothing compared to what we are seeing today. OSTK on the SHO list forever. 107% of the shares at the DTCC shorted. Unknown millions of shares failed (creating...who knows what to even call the fake shares - IOUs? Markers? Chits?), and yet traded as readily sell-able. What precisely is the difference between the legally precise terminology offered by the DTCC that it doesn't create any new shares, and the end effect that investors are concerned about, namely an infinite capacity for dilution and devaluation of a company's stock?

How can anyone with a brain believe that it is a good or fair system, if there are virtually no barriers to the wholesale creation of these "chits", which are traded in the system as though the company issued them legitimately - when in fact they are nothing more than something the brokers and their clearing system conjured up, and which completely lack any of the rights that imbue legitimately issued shares with their value?

I've said it before, I'll say it again. A share is an abstract, like a car title - it is a representation of something; in the case of a car title, it is the representation of a 3,000 pound juggernaut of steel and rubber and petroleum by-products. In the case of a share, it is a representation of a finite piece of equity in a company, with attendant rights - the right to vote, the right to dividends (with preferential tax treatment), the right to legal redress.

The chits trading in the system lack any of those rights. They have none of them. And yet the industry, in an effort to create more trading and hence more commissions, treats these worthless chits as being interchangeable with genuine shares. This is a fundamental dishonesty. If the brokers told the truth, and accurately represented that they were selling IOUs with no attached rights, very few would likely want those, thus they would trade at a steep discount, if at all. So they have created a system where they don't tell anyone. They pretend those IOUs are the same, by making them readily sell-able - how could they charge commissions with a straight face, and then have to tell the "shareholder" that they can't sell the IOU, because the broker has lent the real article out (in order to fatten the broker's wallet), thus the shareholder needs to wait until the broker can get the real share that supports the IOU back before he can sell it? Who would sign up for that?

Nobody.

So instead, we have the current system where the brokers lie to their customers, falsely representing IOUs as being "the same" as legitimate shares, and an entire industry derives its income by the trading of these shares. "It's good for liquidity!" Uh, liquidity is great if you are making your income from trades. It sucks if you are a shareholder being diluted into the ground by IOUs, or are a company being methodically undermined by depressed share prices.

Here's an idea: Why not just only trade legitimate shares, and notify shareholders when the shares are lent out of their margin accounts that they no longer own stock, but rather IOUs, and they are further restricted from selling the IOU, as there is only a market for genuine shares?

Why is that so far-fetched?

The answer?

Because Wall Street wouldn't be able to generate many, many billions of dollars of bonus money for itself every year if that was the market. It would be limited to getting paid only when genuine articles are delivered, and it doesn't want a fair system. It has created for itself a system that generates the maximum amount of income for Wall Street, and screw the investors, and Main Street America.

Screw them.

Or rather, more accurately, screw us.

And that is precisely what is being done - think of it as the 107% solution. You lose, they win.

Additionally, there are predators out there gaming the system, hedge funds using short and distort tactics, coupled with abusive short selling and illegal naked short selling, who are also screwing you/us. They do so with impunity, because they correctly believe that their crimes are so complex and sophisticated that the SEC won't ever be able to figure out what is really going on. These parasites are frontrunning, and committing 10b5 violations, and colluding in a manner that can only be described as racketeering, secure in the knowledge that the cops are asleep at the wheel.

We will likely hear more about that on 60 Minutes, this Sunday.

So to recap, the system is screwing investors for the benefit of Wall Street, the parasites and predators are screwing investors for their own benefit, and the regulators have gone nappies.

Any questions?

Copyright ©2006 Bob O'Brien
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (72)
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By rangermcall on 3/24/2006 4:49 PM
You got it right. It is the brokers, market makers, and big hedge funds that have corrupted the system. They knowingly create fake shares and when they cannot locate legitimate shares they swap the shares back and forth in the system to keep from having to buy the shares back until the real shareholders sell out at huge losses in frustration because they cannot get a fair shake at the makets. Spending hours of time doing research and making informed buys in the maket are irrlevant if somebody decides to take down a company with illegal share creation. Makes me sick. I wish you sucess in your fight, I lost my money buying shares of OSTK last year and am only watching from the sidelines since the losses killed my portfolio.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By hwh on 3/24/2006 4:58 PM
After a brief reflection on land rights,ie-sub-soil, surface, & air/h20 rights., I have come to the conclusion that only the company itself via it's shareholders properly held vote to determine such divisions of assets.Not the realtor nor lawyer nor broker/dealer...hwh
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Granny on 3/24/2006 10:08 PM
How about an old fashioned picket. Those who want to remain anonymous can wear bunny suits. Start at the NYSE, or is that gone now? We can meet at SACs. They will probably be on the Riviera so we won't have to disturb them.

I have to go rest now. I have a big day ahead of me tomorrow. I am taking my invisitble car out on an imaginary road trip.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By bobo on 3/25/2006 1:10 AM
Anyone wonder at the apparent pull of the 60 Minutes piece? Is the money and the pervasive reach really so big that the most prestigious icon in the country can be silenced?

God Bless America.

The days that shall be memorialized in infamy just shifted. Bravo, American journalism. Hats off.

I'm sickened in a way that is so much more profound than I can articulate.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By smuopr8r on 3/25/2006 4:55 AM
CBS 60 minutes site still lists it. Where'd you hear it was pulled?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/07/08/60minutes/main13502.shtml
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By smuopr8r on 3/25/2006 4:59 AM
Pre-empted by what?

Up Next - CBS NewsSunday's 60 Minutes will be pre-empted by a network special featuring interviews with superstar celebrities including George Clooney, Sheryl Crow, ...
www.cbsnews.com/stories/ 1998/07/08/60minutes/main13502.shtml - 96k - Mar 23, 2006 - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from www.cbsnews.com ]
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By smuopr8r on 3/25/2006 5:06 AM
Please ingore the previous post, didn't read the link, sorry.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By smuopr8r on 3/25/2006 5:16 AM
The email address for 60 minutes:

60m@cbsnews.com
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By AWS on 3/25/2006 5:34 AM
Bobo-

I genuinely appreciate today's blog entry. Thank you. No mention of NSS (w/r/t OSTK) and legitimate concerns were voiced with a possible solution proposed. We're not so far off, you and me.

//Here's an idea: Why not just only trade legitimate shares, and notify shareholders when the shares are lent out of their margin accounts that they no longer own stock, but rather IOUs, and they are further restricted from selling the IOU, as there is only a market for genuine shares?//

This suggestion basically amounts to "make legal short selling illegal." However, if that happens, you end up with a market ripe for pumping abuses, "corners" and shares overpriced versus the intrinsic value of the business. You eliminate an important check on the system. There would be plenty of room for share price gaming in that world.

Which situation is worse for owners? Which situation is more likely to be worse for Grandma investing her life's savings for her golden years?

But how does one construct a fair system with a healthy middle ground? I wish I knew.

My somewhat unrelated question: Does the unfortunate current clearing situation in OSTK shares brought on by high short interest warrant Dr. Byrne's association with failed diamond mining companies, PIPES abuses and corporate shell shenanigans? Are those really his fights?

AWS
[My question is not about the Gradient or Biovail actions. Nor do I contend that NSS isn't going on out there.]

Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By dave on 3/25/2006 5:53 AM
Read this link on how the hedge funds were able to travel back in time to place their trades.

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2006-38.htm

90% of US brokerages are "introducing brokerages". They hold their assets at "clearing brokerages" like Bear Stearns. The clearing brokerage than holds their assets at the DTC.

The big failures - Refco, MJK Clearing, Adler Coleman, were at these second tier brokerages. This is where the huge counterfeits are hidden, outside the DTC system.

The clearing houses have established case law for themselves that even if they facilitate fraud by the introducing brokerages, they have no liability.

http://www.kurtisward.com/news122005002.htm

"These firms are paid to clear trades, not to watch customers. Clearing firms will charge more or consider leaving the business if they are asked to police sales practices and that will end up hurting the average customer," says Sidley Austin Brown & Wood lawyer Henry Minnerop, who has represented most of Wall Street's clearing firms over the years.

http://www.sidley.com/lawyers/bio.asp?ID=M497722507

"Approximately ninety percent of all broker-dealers registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) hire clearing brokers and utilize clearing arrangements."

"This increase of nearly 900% over twenty-six years is, in large part, the direct result of favorable regulatory treatment accorded clearing arrangements by the SEC."

http://www.allbusiness.com/periodicals/article/582269-1.html

“Even if one accepts that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Bear Stearns did this with knowledge that these brokers were manipulating the securities at issue, the complaint does not establish Bear Stearns primary liability under § 10(b).” Id. at 95,620.

http://lksu.com/Articles/bdcustomerdisp.htm
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By mfairview on 3/25/2006 6:09 AM
>>>This suggestion basically amounts to "make legal short selling illegal." However, if that happens, you end up with a market ripe for pumping abuses, "corners" and shares overpriced versus the intrinsic value of the business. You eliminate an important check on the system. There would be plenty of room for share price gaming in that world.

AWS, I think the suggestion amounts to more transparency. The "revealing trading strategies" argument is getting quite old. With transparency, everyone has the same advantage/disadvantage and funny things like front running stocks are less likely to happen.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By The Midas Touch co-author on 3/25/2006 6:31 AM

To AWS- These less prestigious entities that you mention were the training grounds for awareness and preparedness for fighting naked short selling. Just as when the Mafia floods the ghetto with drugs, it eventually flows into mainstream society where people have more resources to fight back. It's a which came first, chicken or the egg argument. Having done extensive research, I've concluded there are both chickens and eggs in this arena. If legitimate enterprises hadn't been ruined by naked shorting, however, this movement never would have gotten this far. Patrick Byrne, like many other CEO's would be wondering how this could be happening to his company's share value but he was fortunate enough to get tipped off in advance by folks who had already been through it and didn't have the clout and resources that Dr. Bryne has.

It's very easy to devalue the victims. It's a well known dynamic that you see all the time.

The fact of the matter is, if you bring a factually based level of trust into the market, everybody wins. People who would not have invested, will start investing. In my opinion, the thing that is needed to control the pump and dumps is more enforcement resources and possibly civilian over site/input for the SEC and the DTCC. Leaving the criminal market forces of pump and dump vs. naked shorting to cancel each other out isn't working because there is simply too much collateral damage.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By InTheKnow on 3/25/2006 6:35 AM
You can't pump a stock forever, at some point people will stop buying. However you can naked short (sell counterfeit shares) forever, which is exactley what is going on now with the little guy left holding the bag. The pump and dumpsters are the same naked shorters.

SETTLE THE TRADES OR SETTLE IN JAIL!
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Pissed off on 3/25/2006 6:40 AM
How is it the SEC cannot find 1 naked short seller,JUST 1 in OSTK
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By AWS on 3/25/2006 6:51 AM
Midas-

I don't think I have a beef with anything you said. I'm simply missing the unassailable link of evidence showing that a measurable portion of OSTK's clearing problems are absolutely related to illegal naked short selling, not simply legal short selling swamping an imperfect system. Today's blog entry by Bob, IMHO, was a step in the right direction. Discussion of improving the system is a good thing, made better by removing any NSS issues from the mix of troubles facing OSTK share buyers today. That way, if some hard evidence of NSS pops up, it will stand out on its merits, rather than being just one more complaint from a CEO whose shares are heavily shorted.

I think that it is easy to mix all the abuses you mention together in one big ball of "bad" and determine that everyone needs to work together to fix all the bad. I disagree. I think problems need to be isolated to deal with them effectively. If you have a child who has diabetes, doesn't finish homework on time, and also steals candy from Walmart...I say parents seeking solutions should address these problems separately, even if there are some causational overlaps.

And yes, I think that those who take on the larger issue of system-wide abuses were very fortunate to have enlisted Byrne on their side. I'm not sure OSTK shareholders were so lucky. That's a company that I'd like to see succeed and having a fully-focused CEO would seem important.

Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By mhelburn on 3/25/2006 7:03 AM
How does Canada do it without naked shorting? We have a model. If naked shorting is disallowed per the law of 1934, companies would have to compete with each other for investor money. The best performers would get the most because fundamentals would actually have meaning in such a market. It would not be horrible if the PE for all companies doubled. It would all be relative. Instead of the money from the market being syphoned off by naked shorting which depresses the entire market, the money would stay in the market until shareholders sold their legitimate shares. Volatility would be reduced which would reduce the commissions and trading opportunities for traders, but the market would work the way that it is supposed to work.

I am afraid that the underlying loopholes will remain in place and the only way to level the field is to take out one criminal at a time. Perhaps, an action that involves many of the BD's would help, but the enforcement has to be done also.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By TOTALKNOWLEDGE2006 on 3/25/2006 7:31 AM
THIS IS MAIL FRAUD... EVERY BROKERAGE FIRM IN AMERICA IS COMMITTING MAIL FRAUD EVERY TIME THEY SEND OUT STATEMENTS.. WHY DOESNT PAT B JUST GET HIS GUYS TO BUY 200% OF THE STOCK FORM A PARTNERSHIP TO TAKE THE COMPANY PRIVATE AT 200.00 A SHARE A 1000.00 A SHARE WALL STREET WOULD END UP PAYING FOR THE TAKEOVER.. GET A GROUP THAT OWNS 99.9% OF STOCK AND MAKE A RIDICULOUS BID KNOWING THEY REALLY OWN 200% OF THE STOCK.. IF THEY CAN SELL MORE SHARES THEN LEGALLY ALLOWED AND THE CROOKS AT THE DTCC WONT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT BEND WALL STREET OVER AND MAKE THEM CHOKE ON THE NAKED SHORT.. SOMEONE HAS TO DEVISE A WAY THIS CAN BE DONE AND BURY THEM ONCE AND FOR ALL.. SEE WHAT THE SEC SAYS ABOUT THAT... THIS IS A WAY TO STOP NAKED SHORTING.. BOBO ANY COMMENTS ON THIS IDEA....
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By The Midas Touch co-author on 3/25/2006 7:36 AM
My father once said "Never do anything important unless there is something far more important you should be doing at the time." I caution you, people have been known to get headaches thinking about that. Conventional wisdom doesn't apply to unconventional circumstanses. If you stay focussed on being profitable while people who understand and knowingly exploit the flaws in the settlement system, therefore creating massive dilution of stock value while creating a media frenzy of negative reporting, how do you protect your shareholders? I think the answer to that question is you don't/can't protect and serve your shareholders unless these other issues are addressed first. You end up spinning your wheels while sliding backwords down a slippery slope.

In my opinion, Dr. Bryne IS appropriately focussed on the most important and primary issues affecting stock value. If these issues aren't addressed, Dr. Bryne has very little control/affect over the stock value no matter no matter what Overstock's fundamentals are.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By rick on 3/25/2006 8:45 AM
Hello Bobo,
I'm waiting for a transfer to go through then I'll be requesting my OSTK certificates. Where do you store them?

rick
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Wonder Boy on 3/25/2006 9:23 AM
Is the 60 minutes show still on or not? Thanks!
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Wicked World on 3/25/2006 9:24 AM
I just watched a snippet/preview of the Leslie Stahl 60 minnutes segment.

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

Look for link marked "Leslie Stahl's Notebook" in the CBS News Video section on the right side
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Wonder Boy on 3/25/2006 9:55 AM
Thanks Wicked !
Guess I am just gun shy after the last fiasco.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By bobo on 3/25/2006 10:09 AM
I'm gathering that it is still on - 60 Minutes, that is. I hope so. I had been sent a number of emails indicating that the promo on the website had been pulled, and that there was no mention of it anymore.

AWS: You keep demanding 100% proof, when that proof is unavailable - deliberately unavailable. It gets tedious. Byrne has access to the top experts in the country, and all the records from ADP, the DTC, NOBO, OBO, etc. He is 100% convinced that there is a massive naked short selling problem. He has gone on TV and called the DTCC crooks and liars. They have not sued him - obviously, to avoid discovery. And we have Rocker and Gradient doing everything they can to avoid discovery. So everyone is claiming to be innocent, and yet going to the wall to avoid discovery. Odd, that.

So we have you saying any and all proof is inadequate, and we have the DTCC steadfastly avoiding providing the info that would prove this to all be a paranoid delusion - avoiding it at any and all costs.

While I sincerely appreciate your constant unsupported insistence that there is no naked short selling problem, given that you have absolutely not one iota of proof that position is correct, it is tiresome. So please leave it at the door, along with your not particularly clever swipes at Byrne. The fact is that he is one of the only CEOs in the country willing to take on Wall Street and point out that what they are doing is crooked. And the system is doing everything it can to simultaneously slander him, while avoiding divulging any info that would actually show him to be mistaken.

In the mid-80's, Boesky and Milken and Levine ran massive insider trading rings, and depended on bank secrecy and the notion that nobody would ever talk. Eventually some folks did, and criminality at a level unimagined by regulators was revealed as endemic among many on Wall Street. They got convicted, even as Milken mounted a PR campaign to simultaneously paint the SEC as fascists and himself as a national treasure.

The tactic we are seeing is nothing new. Proclaim that it is all delusion, slam your critics, claim to be the last honest man, and ignore all the niggling little indicators like the quarter billion dollar fines leveled for rampant abuse.

Given the level of larceny that we have seen on a historical basis from Wall Street, and given that we have seen large, coordinated rings of predators engaged in massive criminal collusions before, and further given that every day or so we see more fines for Wall Street abuses, what proof can you offer that this isn't precisely what I claim?

Not possible alternative explanations that require elaborate suspensions of disbelief. Proof. The short answer is that there isn't any.

Because all the data that would collapse the waveform is kept secret.

The notion that I am saying don't allow short selling is an interesting, but specious one. I am saying only trade in genuine shares. If you want to short sell, go borrow the shares first, from someone that is now told that they just lost all their rights by lending the shares. If they aren't OK with that, too bad, you don't get any shares. Simple. Tell everyone the truth. Whenever I hear the crap about how valuable it is to combat pump and dumps, I know I'm dealing with an apologist crackpot. It is akin to saying that vigilantes are good to combat crime - maybe some are, but it doesn't justify vigilante-ism nor the unchecked and arbitrary and often incorrect application of "justice."

Short selling is a bet against a stock or a company. Period. It is not some noble undertaking that is a national treasure. It is a bet on a price decline. The system is currently set up so that it invites fraud (misrepresenting IOUs as shares) to facilitate a practice that makes brokers lots of money - from lending shares and increased commissions. Period. Those that own and operate the system that allows this are those financially benefiting from the practice. Period. The reason they don't want shareholders to understand the truth about their non-rights bearing IOUs is because they know that nobody would want the worthless IOUs if they told the truth, and their little money making scheme would collapse. Period.

It isn't about protecting folks from pump and dumps, it is about Wall Street making obscene profits by misleading investors. And naked short selling is about predators making even more obscene profits by engaging in stock manipulation, and prime brokers making obscene profits by creating stock out of thin air.

It is all about Wall Street making obscene profits at the expense of investors. Period. And all the rhetoric about how vital short selling is, or how trustworthy the system is, is horseshit. It is all about the money, and all the self-serving circular logic is nothing more than facile rationalizations by those generating obscene profits.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By robelita on 3/25/2006 10:11 AM
Does anyone else see the disturbing trend-NBC and now apparently CBS have quashed articles about our illustrious stock exchange system. Makes you wonder how these projects ever get started in the first place. It appears there are at least a few journalists willing to investigate the issue-that's the good news. The bad news is someone above them has veto power and they are the ones who should be pressed for answers. What these not-so-clever censors fail to grasp is that each time they strike out an article it only brings MORE attention to the subject at hand.

The Congressional mid-term elections are fast approaching. It is encumbent upon each and everyone here to press their respective candidates to ascertain which side of the fence they sit on-are they for or against securities reform-there is no middle ground. If they pull the tired old "we need more study on the matter" you know they are against and should vote accordingly. Congress may have to be completely cleared out and infused with new blood-so be it. Congressional terms of office should be capped anyway as the Framers never envisioned (nor wanted) a cadre of career politicians. The supposition was concerned citizens would volunteer SOME of their time to government service then RETURN to private life. Of course this is politics and another issue in itself.


ARRRGGHHHHHH................it's Saturday-I can only be serious for so long and then the silly bug bites.........can't....fight....it.....any.......longer...................



Ah let's go to the hop......snap, snap

Let's go to the hop......(oh baby)

Let's go to the hop......(oh baby)

Let's go to the hop................

Comeeeeeeee .......................

Onnnnnnnnnn.......................

Let's go to the hop!!!!!!!!


Credits: Danny And The Juniors ....At The Hop



HASENPFEFFER
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Wonder Boy on 3/25/2006 10:33 AM
Robelita----
Notice how those 'volunteers' seem to vote themselves plenty of pay increases in the dark of night! You would think that with all the corruption in Congress that they could work for free. One guy wrote to our local paper with a great idea---make all the lunches, trips, gifts, etc. TAXABLE to the Congresspeople. Of course, if we think this stock market thing is complex, imagine the accounting if 'our representatives' were actually taxed. 'Hop' on!
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Kevin on 3/25/2006 10:58 AM
On the 60 Minutes web page, it says... ONLY ON THE WEB...

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml

It looks like they're pulling it from television. Boy does this go deep.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By CMKX&OSTKPERFECTTOGEHER on 3/25/2006 11:06 AM
SEC should halt trading in OSTK and start full investigation into Byrns concerns.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By mhatmccane on 3/25/2006 11:21 AM
Bobo,

You nailed it in this post:



Thank you. Well said.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Wicked World on 3/25/2006 11:34 AM
"On the 60 Minutes web page, it says... ONLY ON THE WEB..."

It says the same thing about the Tiger Woods segment so I don't think that means anything.

We won't know until Sunday nite IMO.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By www.investletter.com on 3/25/2006 11:36 AM
Here is the text of a suggestion I sent to CBS regarding the possible disappearance of the naked short selling piece on tommorrows show:

"As an investment advisory newsletter publisher I was very interested in the piece your had announced would be airing this Sunday regarding naked short selling. I have already sent out an email informing my subscribers that this segment will be airing. I am aware that several other media outlets have been strong armed into dropping their coverage of this topic. It would be disappointing to see 60 Minutes cave into this type of pressure. I also made a screen grab of the information you had posted on your site yesterday. This will come in very handy if you omit this content from your show.

This is a very important topic for investors and the American public. Our financial markets are not very useful unless they are run honestly so investors can trust them. With the recent accounting and corporate scandals, a serious problem of this nature needs to be nipped swiftly and harshly. Confidence is what makes our financial system the strongest in the world. This is the beginning of the steps we need to take to eliminate the naked short selling problem from the financial markets.

I sincerely hope that 60 Minutes has the courage to run the piece they advertised yesterday. I would find it deeply troubling if it is not broadcast. The implications would be rather obvious."

I would encourage each of you to speak your piece on the cbs website. When I tried to submit it as a complaint I received an error. I re-sent it as a suggestion and that seemed to work. The contact button is down at the bottom ofthe page. Let 'er rip.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By www.investletter.com on 3/25/2006 11:50 AM
I did manage to find the reference to the piece still up on 60 Minutes web site here is a link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/07/08/60minutes/main13502.shtml
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By AWS on 3/25/2006 12:28 PM
Bob-

I meant what I said when I thanked you for your change in emphasis. And I realize that I owe the forum a little more sensitivity, and fewer digs in the ribs. While I wait for a group confession from the Bear Stearns clearing team, I'll try to be less critical of you and your honest efforts to make the system better.

So if I read you right, your proposed solution is to disallow the right of an owner to sell out of a position if one also lends. I do understand the sentiment behind this, and am only trying to think the idea through to its natural conclusion. The only one I see is that virtually nobody other than small retail owners lends shares, leading to the dislocation of price to the upside. I can't picture any fund allowing a long in a position that cannot be sold because it is frozen out of that right. Do you think I'm off-base?

Another proposed semi-solution that I've heard was the elimination of share trading ex-DTCC (including physical cert issuance), AND slapping on some sort of a reserve requirement on share blocks, which would add friction to any borrow. Think the bank model, but instead of their small reserve requirement, have 10-20% levels withheld per borrow to gradually clamp down on multiple borrows with each successive lend. I'm not sure how it could be implemented or if investors would accept giving up the physical option, but food for thought anyway.

Last possibility - open a futures market for individual share prices which would allow betting on price, and arbitrage both ways versus physical shares at delivery. This would take some pressure off physical delivery. Anyone not locating real shares to deliver would be forced to cover in futures before settlment day. If futures traded at a significant premium to cash, owners of real blocks could sell futures and deliver shares alleviating some pressure on the borrow. This works in bonds.

Comments anyone?
60 minutes By Clearthinker on 3/25/2006 12:30 PM
It is very clear that 60 minutes is "hedging" by NOT having the Gradient/BVF piece as a "front and center"....I think it could go either way.....
60 Minutes By Kevin on 3/25/2006 12:52 PM
I'm going to share an educated assumption, which may or may not work.

I have several colleagues who work for CBS and it seems the standard email address would be the person’s first initial plus the last name @ CBS.com, not that the powers-that-be couldn’t change this if they wanted but it might be a good effort if you're feeling powerless and frustrated about this 60 minutes meets Flight Plan scenario.

The reporter anchoring this piece is Lesley Stahl and the producer is Janet Klein. If I were a betting man, which I am, I would put money on:
Lstahl@CBS.com
Jklein@CBS.com

Should you be inclined to get it from the horse's mouth.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By mig on 3/25/2006 1:17 PM
How about this as a rule proposal.
If you have a margin account and are currently in your margin, the brokerage may loan out your shares for somebody else to sell short up to your margin. If your shares do get loaned out then your brokerage should not charge you interest on your margin balance, or charge interest but then pay you the interest they get for the loan. What they currently do amounts to double dipping because they get interest on the loaned shares plus they are charging you interest at the same time. This would let you know if your shares are lent out dividend or not, and reduce the benefit to the broker for loaning out the shares.

just a thought.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By accordingto on 3/25/2006 1:26 PM
according to Bud Burrell the whole system is going to colapse and all because of CMKX.

My question is why would anyone own any stocks including OSTK is wallstreet is getting ready to crumble?

Thats what Bud says on his blog so Bob please do not skirt this issue.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By justanoldfog on 3/25/2006 1:50 PM
Bobo, I have a concern, (yeah, who doesn't after reading all this), which is, assuming you are correct and that many "supposed shareholders" are out there thinking they own shares of company xx. (Could be any one on the SHO list). Let's also say that our friends at the hedge fund and journalists issue articles about the bad the company has done and put the company in a bad light. Which in turn brings out the attendant attorneys and class action lawyers to file a law suit when the stock "tanks" due to the crushing news. (Sounds a lot like NFI doesn't it.)
Now, assuming the attorneys get some "supposed shareholders" to agree to be part of the law suit, here is the question:
Don't the class action attorneys have to "Prove" that the attendant shareholders actually own "REAL SHARES" of the company before the company can be held liable to the people who file the class action??? Seems like they have a sticky situation if they try to take a company to court for doing something wrong when they are not even shareholders of record and might not have voting rights to begin with. With the hugh number of shares outstanding that are "short" or "naked short" how are the attorneys going to prove that their clients were indeed "hurt" by some action of taken by the company and not hurt by the actions of the hedge fund traders???

This might just be a "catch-22" type concern, but you could run around in circles trying to figure this one out. As long as the DTC allows this type of "IOU trading" to continue I don't know how you could hold a company management liable for any action. I guess you could sue them for not watching out for the shareholders and making sure there is no illegal shorting of their company stock. Now that would be an interesting class action......

Just speculating on what could happen next......

foggy...
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By KEVIN on 3/25/2006 2:06 PM
For a 60 Minutes email contact, 60M@CBSNEWS.COM

The two email previous I listed didn't work.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By bobo on 3/25/2006 2:45 PM
justanoldfog: I blogged on this in the past. I think it is incumbent on every attorney representing a SHO list company to demand proof of registered ownership from the plaintiffs - the odds are extremely good that those suing the company lack the right to do so as shareholders.

Accordingto: I want to be short the brokers, and long the SHO list companies, when Wall Street "crumbles." Because by crumbling, I believe that what will happen is some of the largest hedge funds and prime brokers are going to wind up insolvent as they are forced to disgorge the profits they made selling stock naked, and the mechanism for that disgorgement will be buying in the fails.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By am I right or am I right on 3/25/2006 4:51 PM
It appears to be listed to me.

From the 60 minutes home page
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml
click "Up Next" on the left and it will pull up the Leslie Stahl story

"Sunday, Mar. 26, 2006
BETTING ON A FALL – Investment pools for the very rich are known as hedge funds. One of the major ones is being accused in a lawsuit of spreading negative information about a major company and then betting on its falling stock price. Lesley Stahl reports. Janet Klein is the producer."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/07/08/60minutes/main13502.shtml

there is also a 1 minute video for the web only
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Patchie on 3/25/2006 5:14 PM
AWS...

The reality is, if you loan out your shares, you are restricted from selling thse shares until such time as a recall on that loan has been initiated. The SEC and DTCC stated such in their SHO comments but it has apparently been removed. I think If you do a Google search of Owen Lamont Stock recall you will see where he desribes such a requirement.

So based on this being law (Can't sell long when you do not posess share to sell long) What exactly is the trade volume in OSTK or TASER today? OSTK has traded their entire shares outstanding 8 times over (16 times DTCC positions) since April and has doubled their short position.

How are those loan recalls going since theoretically every sell creates 2 buys. One before the sell and one at the time of the sell.

Instead of following this law, the long sells first and then allows the borrower to move the borrower to the new buyer. this delays settlement and is in violation of the law. It would not suprise me if the banks are moving the same shares around in a manipulative practice since the Industry owns a reported 163% of the public float (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=OSTK).

Recall how pump and dumps work with a controlling interest in shares. Think opposites.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By AWS on 3/25/2006 5:56 PM
Patchie-

I found this:
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:6Y223CS4M9AJ:financialservices.house.gov/media/pdf/052203ol.pdf+owen+lamont+stock+recall&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=firefox-a

In it, the expert actually gives support to shorting to make markets more efficient in finding an appropriate clearing price.

You mentioned:

//
The reality is, if you loan out your shares, you are restricted from selling thse shares until such time as a recall on that loan has been initiated. The SEC and DTCC stated such in their SHO comments but it has apparently been removed.//

In reality, this is certainly not the case. Shares in ones margin account...street name, get lent out all the time and there is no requirement at the customer level requiring anything preceding a sale. The DTCC can't/doesn't/won't regulate this. They are too busy matching buys and sells, and allowing loans off any cleared blocks of shares, and seeking a borrow afdter the fact. A short may at some point face a buy in (especially if the market moves against him...margin call), and the last guy in line to face any nastiness would be the guy who sold out of a lent long.

The delivery there presents no problem (if all DTCC traded) as it is a pairoff.

So contra to what you say, a seller of a lent position faces very little in the way of a restriction. Many don't even know the BD street name position was lent out int he first place.



Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By hwh on 3/25/2006 7:23 PM
India was about to install our system until the recent Transactional Failure epidemic , they have tabled the idea until the resolution to our current crisis is found...hwh
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Patchie on 3/26/2006 6:41 AM
AWS...

I suggest you read Page 4:

There are several reasons that a shareholder might initially refuse to lend stock, or might later withdraw his shares from the stock lending market. First, if the lender sells his stock, he must recall his stock loan so that he can deliver his shares to the buyer.

http://mba.yale.edu/pdf/godownfighting.pdf - By Lamont

This same comment was made by the SEC in their comments on SHO in the Q & A but those statements are mysteriously missing. I am looking through my old documents to find it now.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Patchie on 3/26/2006 6:45 AM
By teh way AWS..

I am not saying it is enforced I am saying it is a requirement including how a trade is marked. For example, If a BD has lent out a clients shares and that client sells while the BD does not have control of those shares for settlement, the BD must mark that a short sale and thus, must have completed AD that shares can be borrowed for settlement.

SHO goes into detail about long side selling and long side settlement failures.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By rtway1 on 3/26/2006 9:57 AM
Let us sit back with clear heads and start from the very begining. This country is based on the foundation of a constitution for and about the people. People are what make this economy work. Not everybody can be a broker, banker, hedgefund operator, mutual fund manager, etc. etc. Without the common populace these people would not have a job, pure and simple. Mr. AWS and people of his persuasion seem to loose that or avoid it. When Patchie responds, or Bobo, they usually are quoting the law of the people, the Constitution. The constitution was by ,for and of the people. Therefore let the people decide. Without the participation of the people in the market place, it would collapse, and has proven it on occasions. A simple question put forth to the people who invest, whether it be private money, 401,s pension plans,IRA,s should be " Do you wish your documents of ownership to be lent out, or do you wish them to be held in the form of a document in a visible place that you have access to" This question shoud be on every application for any type of investment and must be checked off and signed for. All of this conversation from Mr. AWS and others of that mind set, take the position that the investing establishment concerns should be satisfied first, then the people second. Without the seeds you grow no crop. The government needs to let the people be heard on this subject. This is the reason they never mention anything about investing in your formal education, it is purposely to keep you in the dark so that you can be used because you know no better. Mr. AWS if we were to take a vote now on stock certificate ownership, how might you think it would turn out. Create a commodities market for stocks and let speculators do what they want, but leave the people out of your game.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By AWS on 3/26/2006 10:31 AM
rtway1-

Mr. AWS is only trying to understand what is going on, not what is imagined. Mr. AWS doesn't have a horse in this race. Seems to me shareholders should be given the option of lending shares for a fee, and we can debate what restrictions should be in place thereafter. I have to admit, again, I miss most of your points.

Patchie- The marking problem seems to be easy to fanagle. Long lenders are not seemingly sell restricted at all. What's your model for how this happens?
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By rtway1 on 3/26/2006 11:19 AM
Mr. AWS I don,t know how to state this any simpler. The public should have a question that they must answer, or option box that they must check off, telling the administrator, trustee, broker or whoever whether they want their shares in a paper certificate that can be made transparant at any given time or given to them personally, and whether or not they want their shares to be lent out. If they don,t want their shares lent out then they have the right to see visual proof of ownership.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Patchie on 3/24/2006 5:09 PM
Bob,

The 107% issue is not as prevalently abusive as the fact that the stock trades a large percentage of shares daily and that number continually goes up and not down.

By law, if you loaned out a share in a borrow, you cannot sell that long stake in the company until such time as the loan is recalled for delivery in the long sale i.e For evry sell there would be two buys the first buy on the loan recall and the second buy balanced by the long sale. With a ratio of 2:1 buys to sells the stock should continue to move up. It is illegal to sell first without a recall and allow for the new buyer to possibly loan those shares in a borrow to the previous short seller and using those shares as the delivery on the long sale.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By bobo on 3/24/2006 5:11 PM
It is simple.

Only the company is allowed to issue shares. The current system corrupts that simple, effective prophylactic. It has allowed the system to create equivalent markers that are traded like genuine shares, and corrupts the integrity of the market. If a broker or network of predators can generate an unlimited number of these markers, and the system treats them as identical to genuine shares, then we have a market of counterfeits.

That is what it is. The system goes to great pains to pretend that simple, accurate explanation isn't correct. And yet there is no other accurate word for illegitimately created fake shares being used to trade in the system as real.
Re: The Amazing OSTK 107% Solution... By Wonder Boy on 3/24/2006 5:12 PM
With an SEC like this, can we ever expect any justice?



SEC Overturns Ban Against Former Banker By MARCY GORDON, AP Business Writer
3 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Federal regulators overturned a lifetime ban from the securities industry against former star technology banker Frank Quattrone on Friday, four days after his conviction on charges of obstructing justice was thrown out by a federal appeals court.

ADVERTISEMENT

The five members of the Securities and Exchange Commission took the action unanimously, ruling that the brokerage industry's self-policing organization violated its own rules when it banned Quattrone in November 2004 for allegedly failing to cooperate in an investigation of his activities.

Quattrone had appealed to the SEC the ban by the National Association of Securities Dealers, saying that it unfairly singled him out for harsher treatment than that given people in similar cases. Quattrone contended that being compelled to testify in the NASD's investigation while criminal charges were pending against him would violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

"Given the particular set of facts raised by Quattrone, we find that NASD was not entitled to conclude that he had not raised a genuine issue of material fact," the SEC said in its ruling. "NASD did not act in accordance with its rules."

The NASD action went beyond the 10-year ban stemming by law from Quattrone's criminal conviction, which brought him a sentence of 1 1/2 years in prison and a $90,000 fine. Quattrone was convicted in May 2004 — in his second trial — of hindering a federal probe into how his Wall Street investment bank, Credit Suisse First Boston, had allocated shares of initial public offerings of stock during the late-1990s Internet boom.

In January 2004, an NASD hearing panel suspended Quattrone from the industry for only a year and fined him $30,000. That decision was later overruled, however, by the organization's National Adjudicatory Council, which imposed the permanent ban.

The SEC action marked the second victory in a week for Quattrone, the king dealmaker of the Internet stock boom who once made $120 million in a single year. He may face a third obstruction-of-justice trial after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan tossed out his conviction on Monday after concluding that the jury was improperly instructed on how to interpret the law.

The appeals court granted Quattrone a new trial and ordered a change in the judge and rules governing a retrial. The government is weighing whether to retry the case.

"The SEC decision corrects the NASD's gross injustice in barring Mr. Quattrone from the securities industry for life for nothing more than exercising his constitutional rights," one of Quattrone's attorneys, Jerome B. Falk, said in a statement. "The decision lifting the lifetime bar is particularly appropriate given that the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals threw out Mr. Quattrone's conviction earlier this week."

___

On the Net:

NASD: http://www.nasd.com

Securities and Exchange Commission: http://