This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Riverrunrun (talk | contribs) at 22:07, 31 January 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:07, 31 January 2006 by Riverrunrun (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree with the following statement made by you.
"Counterfeit" Securities: See the answer to Question 7.1, SEC FAQ. The SEC's answer is a clear and unequivocal no. "Naked short selling has no effect on an issuer's total shares outstanding." Thus the cornerstone of the pressure groups' concerns is simply not true.
Naked short selling dramatically dilutes the target company's capital worth and, in the case of an MREIT, it dilutes the company's attempts to obtain necessary increase in capital by issuing new share offerings to continue growing their business. You have to understand that the SEC does not want the investing public to know how widespread this practice is. They therefore downplay the seriousness and will not allow any transparency as to the true extent of the FTD situation. Also, through naked shorting in which the share sold short are never covered with real shares artificially inflates the total number of shares outstanding with non-existent shares which can not be obtained by the retail investor. A pig in a poke situation.river 20:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Your argument is with the SEC, not me. They say the counterfeit securities issue is bogus. --Mantanmoreland 23:00, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but you made the statement. Therefore, maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that you are the one to be corrected. The SEC says many things, not all believable, especially since they won't allow any transparency as to how serious the situation is. No FTD numbers are forthcoming. I have written them under the FOIA asking for a release of the FTD numbers and received an absolute refusal. If you wish to accept their pronouncements, that is your perogative, but I wouldn't take them to the bank. --river 22.11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)