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

Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling

Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog    
Posted by:   bobo 6/13/2006 7:14 PM

I've used a saying on the Yahoo boards for about a year and a half now, which drives the bashers there crazy.

I kind of like that, as I suspect that many of them are associated with stock manipulating hedge funds, or prime brokers trading alongside the manipulating funds - and anything that drives them nuts is a positive, in my book.

The saying is, "This time it's different."

Today, the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary announced that it is going to hold a hearing next week focused on hedge funds, "independent" analysts, and short selling.

That sounds an awful lot like an exploration into the Biovail vs. SAC and Gradient suit, as well as the Overstock vs. Rocker Partners and Gradient suit - and further, into the scheme which I outlined in some detail on the OSTK CC a year and a half ago, and have detailed in a number of blogs.

All I can say is, it's about time.

I have stood by in rapt amazement as target after target of a cartel of short sellers, acting in concert with a few bad apple journalists, captive "research" firms, class action attorneys, and even personnel at the regulators, get demolished in a very systematic manner - and everyone pretends they can't spot the pattern.

Here's the URL for the committee's hearing schedule, along with a list of the members. I would urge you all to send your favorite rep an email or fax supporting their participation in this landmark hearing, perhaps suggesting that they do some homework on this particular variant of stock manipulation, abuse of property rights, abuse of voting rights, fraud, and racketeering.

Actually, that sounds a lot like the charges against Milberg Weiss - a favorite class action foil that has sued most of Rocker's known shorts, and quite a few of SAC's, as well, I'll bet.

Small world. 

We just had Utah pass a landmark law a few weeks ago, instituting reasonable reporting requirements about those failing to deliver stock when it is due - alas, only for those companies on the Reg SHO list - but that's a start.

Now we are seeing Senate hearings to probe the shenanigans that this site has been documenting for years.

I would say that this time is different.

What becomes of the hearing is another matter. And why this committee is having to probe the allegedly flagrantly illegal behavior of participants in the stock market, versus the committee chartered with oversight of that market, should give everyone tremendous pause for concern.

I have maintained for some time that the system is broken. I have also alluded to wanting to document hundreds of emails and letters to Shelby, the head of the banking committee who canceled hearings on naked short selling, so that when this blows sky high he is directly in the cross-hairs as one who was, at best, asleep at the switch, and at worst, facilitated the looting of America's retirement by Wall Street.

This hearing is a good beginning - but it is troubling that the Senate Banking Committee shows no interest in getting to the bottom of things that are occurring in its back yard, under its purview. I cannot think of any benign explanation for that disregard for protecting investors - any more than I can conjure up a benign explanation for the SEC's grandfathering of all fails before a stock winds up on the SHO list, or for Annette Nazareth's "let them eat cake" dismissal of investor concerns over obvious manipulation of SHO list stocks.

Email Senator Hatch and express support. Post your correspondences in the Forum on the Wall of Letters. Some of the other committee members have had numerous letters sent to them, and issued boilerplate back to their constituents rather than substantiative response. This is a chance to request their undivided attention, and be on the record regarding their views.

I would also like to point out that perseverance is critical in any struggle, and would further like to thank everyone that has sent correspondence to their representatives, and posted their efforts in the Wall of Letters for the record. It takes individual effort, and nobody knows which of their efforts will be the one to take this past the tipping point.

We are all of us just a lone voice, but what we are seeing is that many voices, raised in harmony, can create a sound that must be heard. This is a good step in the direction of ending a seeming kleptocracy in the market. Let's make sure that every journalist, every commentator, every elected official knows about this hearing, and is prepared to pay attention.

Because this time, is, well...you know.

Copyright ©2006 Bob O'Brien
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (41)
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Jim on 6/13/2006 9:36 PM
Bobo, will you be able to find out who will attend this meeting? I am curious who the "experts" of naked short selling are. It seems to me that there is tremendous circumstantial evidence of naked short selling, but the fact that the SEC refuses to publish meaningful data outside of the Reg SHO list makes certified "experts" hard to find. It is so much easier to form compelling arguments with irrefutable numbers. Whether or not NSS exists, greater transparency is needed. Congrats to Utah for leading the way!
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By n-tres-ted on 6/13/2006 9:45 PM
Well, well, well is right! I assume it must have been inspired by Senator Hatch of Utah, who is on the Judiciary Committee. Does the Judiciary Committee have any jurisdiction over the SEC? It does have jurisdiction with respect to the Justice Department, which prosecutes crimes, so looks like maybe that's where this thing may arrive. Remarkable. As usual, Bobo, great work, and thanks!
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Wicked World on 6/14/2006 5:43 PM
anony,

Much thanks for your added insight on guaranteed delivery. And the distinction made by physical ownership vs. subject to delivery (for WLS) fills in a blank that I was ignorant of. I now understand more about what is happening at WLS.

So based on the rest of what you said (by that I mean "possible" scenario with WLS), there is a certain number of "key" shares that have been "guaranteed" to Poly so they can block the deal *and* another certain number of "Key" shares guaranteed to the General so he can do the deal? But Poly's counterpart has not actually made delivery and neither has the General's?

If this is correct then NSS *could* be a factor, right?

Thanks for your time and just thinking about your view of the Park puts a much needed smile on my face.

PARL analyst today By wtf on 6/14/2006 5:44 PM
This fool has a $27 target, calls a $20 stock a "hold", and says it will earn 2.60 next year and 3.00 the year after. And says it will drop to 5 or 6 if the deal falls through.

What the effing eff? Look at those numbers. Anyone else see a massive disconnect in the Earnings and what this cretin is calling a target and a worst case? that's a 2 PE.
SENATE HEARINGS ON CSPAN? By wtf on 6/14/2006 5:45 PM
Will this hearing be on any CSPAN channels? Please dear god...
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By bobo on 6/14/2006 6:11 PM
What I've seen is when the miscreants want to clear up some fails, what their buddies the prime brokers do for them is work with the specialist or the MMs and drive the price down until panic, depression, or margin calls force liquidity.

That's called a bear raid, and it is illegal. It is also routinely seen, and the SEC pretends they have no idea what is going on. You are watching it happen to OSTK right now, and you are seeing it in NFI. It is stock manipulation, regulator condoned, blatant, and part and parcel with how Wall Street operates. It is also why you haven't seen a short squeeze in years. The brokers have figured out that the SEC would rather allow them to steal investors' money than risk a conflagration when a hedge fund or cartel of funds gets one wrong.

Any questions?
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By kevin m on 6/14/2006 6:26 PM
I wonder if any of the naked shorting investigation files were lost when the WTC 7 collapsed. Scroll down 2/3 to the grey box re: the SEC documents that were lost.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By InTheKnow on 6/14/2006 6:32 PM
What must be made clear to all those running for re-election is that the investors votes on election day are the ones that count and not the dollars handed to those running for re-election.

Let it be known that we will do everything in our power to make every investor aware of how Wall Street has been fucking them all these years and what officials stood up for the investor and who took the Wall Street agenda.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Above The Law on 6/14/2006 6:52 PM
What a bunch of whiners. When you control the money you control the non-enforcement of laws. Watch the Senate hearing closely. You won't even see their lips move. This is just another ringer session to placate a few Senators running for re-election. Just like Reg SHO and grandfathering all of the guilty. We will continue to take your money and there is nothing you can do about it. Nothing!
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Wicked World on 6/14/2006 7:25 PM
wtf,

"Will this hearing be on any CSPAN channels? Please dear god..."


Keep an eye on this link. It should update over the weekend.

http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/fullschedule.csp?month=6&day=20&year=2006
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By mfairview on 6/15/2006 2:27 AM
Bobo, is this the other "shoe" that Patrick was speaking about?
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Bobo on 6/15/2006 6:03 AM
Could be. He actually refers to a number of smooth stones. The number 7 came up.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By hwh on 6/16/2006 8:25 AM
I fear this is but an opportunity for the -Judiciary- Committee to yield a formal opinion on the cases you listed. It would bear more weight than the Amicus Briefs sent in support of the defendants. At best it is a chance to say they are actively "monitoring' the issue.

There is a higher probability the committe is trying to defend the Banking Committee's inaction or deflect criticism than take an action in contrary to that of their floor members.

I wonder how many Banking/Judiciary Committee members are up for re-election this fall? hwh
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Wicked World on 6/16/2006 11:56 AM
3 days ago I posted this:

“I mean no disrespect to anyone when saying this but it's premature to start high-fivin' or even breathing a sigh of relief. Based on history this meeting could be called off with one or two phone calls by any number of slimeballs.”

BobO replied:

“Wicked: I completely agree - no high fives, but if they call it off, then there is an explanation that needs to be floated, pronto - "Wall Street called and said don't you dare" won't cut it. I suggest everyone email their officials and get them behind this - it is the next S&L crisis, on steroids.

Killing it at this point would cause more havoc than letting it go forward - every single member would be tarred and feathered by their adversaries in the upcoming election - with our help - for facilitating a cover-up. I don't see that being appealing now.”

Now we have:

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1953

Crooks win again??
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By ginger on 6/16/2006 1:40 PM
Postponed ...

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1238

I hear from Judy Cline there is an 8 day delay in order for the media to come fully onboard. I look at this as a huge positive for the reform movement.

Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By hemingway811 on 6/17/2006 5:39 AM
The Judiciary's website does not show the Hearing re-scheduled for June 28. Can someone cite a source for the re-scheduling for the 28th?

"I wonder how many Banking/Judiciary Committee members are up for re-election this fall? hwh"

Banking Committee:

Rick Santorum - R
Paul Sarbanes - D
Thomas Carper - D
Debbie Stabenow - D
Robert Menendez - D

Judiciary Committee

Orrin Hatch - R
Edward Kennedy - D
John Kyl - R
Mike DeWine - R
Herbert Kohl - D
Dianne Feinstein - D

Paul Sarbanes announced he is retiring after his current term ends.

Three Senators are at risk of losing:

Rick Santorum behind in the polls 35/56
Robert Menendez behind in the polls 37/40
Mike DeWine behind in the polls 41/44
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By William DeVane on 6/19/2006 8:28 AM
I just called Sen Hatch's office to see if anyone knows if this has been rescheduled. I am very disapointed to see the hearing canceled. Hedge Funds and Short selling companies in to oblivion is hurting small independent investors like me.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By bobo on 6/13/2006 9:52 PM
Check out this Marketwatch article:

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B4B3FE0D6%2D1EFF%2D4986% 2D83B3%2D54F21475CA1C%7D&siteid=mktw

All in all, very balanced, although note the DTCC's sleight of hand - they talk about how less than 1% per day of the transactions they handle fail - but don't point out that those that do could be for many thousands of shares each transation, thus the metric is meaningless.

As to congratulating me, I think everyone involved in this battle deserves and shares in any glory - Patrick Byrne, Bud, Dave, Mark, Rod...and every single person who decided to try to make a difference. Mary, with NCANS. Craig with his blog. Decosta for educating. The very brave affiants who risked it all to do what's right.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Wicked World on 6/13/2006 10:22 PM
I mean no disrespect to anyone when saying this but it's premature to start high-fivin' or even breathing a sigh of relief. Based on history this meeting could be called off with one or two phone calls by any number of slimeballs.

n-tres-ted, assuming you're right that this committee has reign of the DOJ that's good news in my book. They've got handcuffs and know how to use them. Also, Wall St. doesn't seem to have as many lucrative openings for seasoned DOJ do they? While I (naively?) believe that the SEC *is* involved and doing something on this issue I fear that the effort is purposely being kept unfocused from within. Keeping the objective unfocused and the digging shallow allows them to look concerned but in actuality stalled out.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Wicked World on 6/13/2006 10:31 PM
I want to add that the coming days just before the meeting would be a good time to remind our elected officials about this issue. The relevancy of the matter may finally register among those politicians who have not seen the light.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By bobo on 6/13/2006 10:38 PM
Wicked: I completely agree - no high fives, but if they call it off, then there is an explanation that needs to be floated, pronto - "Wall Street called and said don't you dare" won't cut it. I suggest everyone email their officials and get them behind this - it is the next S&L crisis, on steroids.

Killing it at this point would cause more havoc than letting it go forward - every single member would be tarred and feathered by their adversaries in the upcoming election - with our help - for facilitating a cover-up. I don't see that being appealing now.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By bcinvestadvisor on 6/14/2006 4:22 AM
Here is another article on NSS. http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B4B3FE0D6%2D1EFF%2D4986%2D83B3%2D54F21475CA1C%7D&siteid=mktw&dist=

The blossoming coverage is refreshing.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By browntrout on 6/14/2006 5:25 AM
Don't get too excited here. Afterall it is an election year. But at least it is a start. Of course if they don't invite any NSS critics I guess it will turn out the same as those baseball players who testified saying "no steroids were used" and got off scott free. Maybe they will invite Rocker? Sadly I thinks this just another baby-kissing grandstanding event on the way to another election. I hope I am wrong.
an interesting new step by CEO By a_spectator on 6/14/2006 6:22 AM
I sure hope this time is different. On a onother front, this one seems an interesting thread to pull. It could summarize as "Companies fleeing the market tired of being fleeced".

Check the link:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=parl

Here we have a company with 61% of its public float shorted (doesn't not show up on reg SHO, I wonder how it si possible). The CEO seems to believe the stock is trading at improper low levels and suggest he would take it private offering a 55% premium on previous closing price.

Among the firsts "journalists" to react, guess? Our friend Herb. What a small world. He must be worried.

Hey Bob, what about a piece on this issue. Looks that on top of the legal tools these moves could also contribute sanitizing the markets. I can't wait for Patrick announcing such steps.

BTW stock up 15% as a write.
PARL going private By a_spectator on 6/14/2006 6:25 AM
I forgot: among the reasons cited by the CEO for pulling out of public markets:
"end disruptions caused mainly by short sellers"
Houston, Do we have a problem?
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By piddly_sum on 6/14/2006 6:35 AM
Is this going to be a problem for Chuck Schumer since he is on both committees? Too bad.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By browntrout on 6/14/2006 7:31 AM
Piddly- No problem for Chuck Schumer. Take a look at who his biggest political contributors are and you know who he will protect at any meeting.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By rtway1 on 6/14/2006 7:49 AM
Please keep in mind that there is an election coming up and the Dems are looking for anything that can discredit this administration. I have no particular favorite as far as political parties, I favor any party that remotely looks out for the public. I gave a call to Sen. Durbins office in Washington about a month ago and spoke with a very interested and polite lady and I pointed out to her some of the atrocities that are occuring daily on Wall St. and the failure of Reg. Sho. and counterfeiting of shares electronically.I found it alarming that she as well as many others in government have not a clue about short selling let alone naked short selling. I gave a very brief explanation and also the address of this web site. I then informed her of the dismal performance of Shelby, Donaldson and Cox and how their committees have been shelved and Reg. Sho. grandfathered, all of this on the Republicans watch. I reminded her that this could help out in their campaign efforts if it were to be exposed and how they could be the saviors of the publics financial future if they pursued this. She seemed very interested and said she would pass it on to Brad McConnell who was more knowledgable in this area.May be some of you might want to contact Sen. Durbin as he seems to be the leader in going after this administrations failures and is very vocal in his feelings. I also pointed out that what they did when they grandfathered Reg. Sho. was unconstitutional and deserved an investigation. You might want to bring that up no matter who you contact.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By Sean on 6/14/2006 10:12 AM

Related Quotes
Sym. Price Chg.
WLS Trade
News 147.15 0
William Lyon Homes says share trade suspended

June 13, 2006 17:04:32 (ET)


SAN FRANCISCO, June 13 (Reuters) - Home builder William Lyon Homes (WLS,Trade) said on Tuesday the New York Stock Exchange suspended trading in its common shares, indicating the amount of publicly held shares available for trading is not sufficient.

The move will not affect trading of the company's senior notes due April 1, 2013, and Feb 15, 2014, the company said.

The NYSE told the company it intends to ask the Securities and Exchange Commission to delist the stock.

William Lyon, chairman of the California-based company, said last month his tender offer for the company's stock had expired and he intended to take the company private via a short-term merger.

© Copyright 2001 - 2006 Reuters. Click Here for Limitations and Restrictions on Use.

Set Alerts



Create your Personalized SmartAlerts here.







Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By dave on 6/14/2006 11:35 AM
http://news.goldseek.com/RichardDaughty/1150297680.php
re. WLS By a_spectator on 6/14/2006 12:07 PM
Looks like the NYSE has opted for "grandfathering" the shorts. Last "known" short interest reported amounted to 523.000 shares out of a 2.5 million shares (+/- 25%). A picture is worth a thousand words, so do have a look at a chart. The tender ofer was for $ 109.00. Las trading price was $ 147.00. This means a short squeeze was in process with shorts forced to buy at ask.

Theoretically, a long having purchased 9 months ago at $ 165.00 had a right to expect recovery of its initial investment and here comes the NYSE delisting the stock, litteraly telling the shorts, don't worry to cover any longer, full profit for you. This is what shorts advocates call "efficient markets". The gist of the WSJ articles days ago claiming that naked short selling was good to prevent us from phony IPOS.

Oh by the way. As of today, WLS is on reg SHO. Now the funny thing. We already knew the sec opted to granfather past FTD to prevent upward volatility and now the NYSE will ask the SEC for a delisting of the stock cutting any possibility of an ongoing squeeze to go on. Guess what the SEC's reply will be?

Bob, you see, all the senate hearing will change nothing if the crooks make the rules to their advantage.

Blatantly disgusting.
WLS By a_spectator on 6/14/2006 1:00 PM
The Nyse alludes: "the amount of publicly held shares available for trading is not sufficient"

Why did the NYSE not made the same allegations when because of excessive fails (i.e. crystal clear evidence that no sufficient shares were available on the sell side) the stock appeared on the Reg SHO list?

On one side: the milk cow aka the investor
On the other: press, brokers, regulators, markets,

Houston, do we have a problem?

P.S.
Today: OSTK down 5% on 735.000 shares when the CEO and friends have litterally all the shares in pocket.
Nasdaq: halt the trading, ""the amount of publicly held shares available for trading is not sufficient"

Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By clearthinker on 6/14/2006 1:16 PM
does the phrase:

"Make it up as you go along"...ring a bell.....

Let's be asleep at the switch and not settle trades properly
Let's deny the problem exists
Let's attack the shareholders that complain
Let's take years to put Reg SHO into place
Let's grandfather all of the crime
Let's have companies on the Reg SHO list for 1year + and not force buy ins
Let's protect the interests of hedge funds over the American investor
Let's subpeona journalists for bashing companies in co-ordination with short sellers
Let's take back the subpeonas and protect the hedge funds
Let's have a meeting and invite the DTCC to show up
Let's cancel the meeting when they don't show up


You can't make this stuff up.....

I'm not proud of the government who is SWORN to uphold the law and protect me....


right......


WLS By Wicked World on 6/14/2006 1:38 PM
a_spectator, here's a quote from a recent WLS article. This quote appears in only one of the many articles:

"General Lyon intends to vigorously enforce his rights against those institutions which have failed to honor their guaranteed delivery obligations in full."

This indicates an awareness by the owner that he should anticipate some chicanery in getting his stock. Here's the link:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060613/nytu182.html?.v=44

Would be interested in your basic take on what's happening with WLS. How this unfolds should be closely followed.
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By a spectator on 6/14/2006 2:06 PM
As per recent Company's press release, at expiration of the tender offer:

"the shares tendered, together with the shares already owned by General Lyon, The William Harwell Lyon 1987 Trust and The William Harwell Lyon Separate Property Trust, represent in excess of 90%"

This means grossly 7.8 million out of 8.65 million outstanding, leaving approximately 850.000 shares out there. So where is the alleged scarcity of shares NYSE puts forward. My guess is that apart from those certificates eaten by the dog (credits to Bobo for the metaphore) is that some longs have legitimatelly played the squeeze scenario. Why in hell are thy not allowed to when naked shorters drove the share price to the basement without no one preventing them ?

A case study: say I buy OST at $20 today feeling the price is attractive. Say they tank the price to $5 flooding the markets with phantom shares. At $5 Byrne announces tender offer at $6/share, buys the small amount of "real" shares available to complete his 100% ownership and Nasdaq seeks for SEC green light to halt trading. End of the story, who is f___d? It's not WLS who should sue, it's the owners of the remaining 850.000 shares. Who knows if some of them didn't buy at $165 before the raid started and are still underwater and without a market to trade their legitimately bought shares.

Looks like I'm going to shop for puts on every single share on the Reg SHO. Regardless of their financial shape, life cycle, life expectancy, their death is a safe bet.

And don't forget a further dimension as far as OSTK is concerned. Wall Street will do everything so that no one ever again dares to short cut them with Dutch options and the likes cutting into their Daily Bread.

I'm watching the whole scene from Europe, and all I can say is where is your great country headed with such a mess. I read on latest Gary Weiss blog he thinks merger of NYSE with Euronext is a bad idea. Basically I agree it's bad for the wrong doers since nothing similarly blatant would be tolerated to happen in European markets. Even knowing about the Austrian connection, they can steal in US not in Europe. Wake up and to the barricades my friends, time to clean up your own place for a change.

Rgds to all from a supporter
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By anony on 6/14/2006 2:35 PM
The weird thing about WLS is that it didn't start appearing on SHO until May, which was AFTER General Lyon increased his tender offer TWICE. Nobody would short that stock unless they were already short before the tender offer. (in fact it traded at a premium to first offer b/c the market was EXPECTING a bump. Nobody was newly shorting it.) Yet WLS didn't surface on the SHO list until after the increase in tender offer. Bizarre.

Take it from a guy who came from the land of naked shorted subprime REITS but now can see Central Pak from his window, there are immensely intelligent and knowledgeable people that are starting to get interested in the full scope of this issue. And they're honest and ethical to boot.
WLS By Wicked World on 6/14/2006 3:14 PM
Fellas, my knowledge of the WLS episode is limited to the recent articles. Here's a few more snippets I want to key on:

"guaranteed delivery procedures"

"Several institutions have satisfied their delivery obligations in whole or in part, and eligible guarantor institutions which have not yet fulfilled their commitment to deliver shares should immediately comply with their guaranteed delivery obligations."

What is a guaranteed deliver obligation? Is it a contract document? A verbal agreement? Is it something that the SEC, DTC, etc. has authority over? Is this what P. Byrne received initially via his broker before requesting shares?

Ultimately, my question is this: Is it plausible that someone was heavily short (or naked short (hence their recent SHOwing) betting WLS would decline along with the rest of the sector but being caught off guard by the General thus forcing the recent long position by a hedgie (Poly?) in an attempt to block the General's takeover and more importantly hide the naked exposure?

Is that hedgie unable to get delivery?
PARL By a_spectator on 6/14/2006 3:15 PM
Can't resist posting a last one, far too funny. Sorry Bob for polluting the initial subject but I couldn't stand such an amount of bullshit in one delivery.

So here it goes: something weird about Parlux, Googling around look who the major holder is: S.A.C. CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC run by our friend Steve Cohen named in the Biovail suit. So summarizing we have Herb spitting into Steve's soup, when both are named in the same suit as defendants. Talk about a shark infected pond.

Isn't this a pretty tiny world we live in?
PARL By a_spectator on 6/14/2006 3:27 PM
Oops, the last sentence got stuck in my keyboard

"Unless Cohen's position into PARL has similar motivations to Rocker's- Cohodes position in OSTK, who knows"
Re: Senate Judiciary Committee To Hold Hearing on Hedge Funds, "Independent" Analysts, and Short Selling By anony on 6/14/2006 3:56 PM
wicked,

Don't make it too much of a story...

Think of guaranteed delivery obligation like this: (we will be making some implicit simplifying assumptions that won't cover every technical eventuality. Also some things I say are technically wrong but make it easier to understand. If you have more Q's, ask)

I buy stock 2 days before the tender expires. A trade has 3 days to clear and settle, but I paid commish and the price of the stock, so I am owed the benefits of it even if it hasn't been delivered to me yet. One of those benefits is the right to tender my stock and receive the consideration. 2 days after I bought stock I decide to tender my shares. Well, if my trade hasn't settled yet (it wasn't required to settle until AFTER the last day to tender) then the company still accepts my intention to tender and has my consideration ready to go, but WLS can't say they received the shares until my trade settles and I can send them my shares. What WLS does is they note that I have the right to send my share to them but I haven't had it actually delivered yet because somebody else owes me the stock. WLS calls all shares in that state as "shares tendered subject to guaranteed delivery". For WLS it's a pretty high number.


It gets more complicated in WLS' case because the law says that you need physical ownership of 90% of shares to automatically buy the other 10% at the same price in a short-form merger. Counting shares subject to guaranteed delivery, WLS gets to 90%, but w/o them it doesn't. Normally a prime broker would not worry because they can borrow the stock from somebody's margin account and give to the person who is owed the shares, and failing that, can force the party that is failing to deliver to buy the shares in the market. In this case though, there are no shares to be bought in the market because WLS physically owns in the high 80%, and Polygon owns a ton themselves and they aren't selling! So there is no market for somebody being bought-in! Normally our clearing/settling system can handle a lot of people not following the rules, but not in this case. It's fascinating.

Read Polygon's 13-D, see the shares they rolled out of swap, and you'll see their prime broker counterparty is having trouble finding 40k shares for them. Hilarious.

People should read the B-berg April article on proxy over-voting then realize that the incentives are infinitely higher in the stock loan business for schenanigans to happen. No surprise here.
Re: PARL By PhantomCertificates on 6/14/2006 5:37 PM
PARL's CEO just made a tender offer for the company at $29/share (seems kind of cheap for a company making over $2/share in earnings, but whatever). As soon as that happened Herb Greenberg wrote a hatchet job article about them post at midnight. The yahoo board got flooded by all kinds of bashers calling the companies financing a fraud. More media articles claimed that if the deal doesn't go through it will be a $5 to $6 stock. The stock went off the SHO list just 3 days ago after a plunge in stock price from around $25 to $18.

All I can say is that it's nice to see more and more companies fighting back. Keep up the good work guys.

Your name:
Title:
Comment:
Please limit your comments to 500 characters. For longer comments, use our forums.
Subscribe via Email
Get This Blog via Email:


Powered by Squeet.com
Sanity Check Archive