July 16, 2008
Can anybody with the SEC office explain why only these handful of stocks were chosen for the naked short ruling? Why only Finance and Bank stocks?
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-143.htm
Only 1 of the 19 companies being protected (DB) is on the REG SHO list!
http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=RegSHOThreshold
So why is the SEC doing this? Umm, perhaps to make it LOOK like something is being done, duping those who don't understand the concept?
Ummm, maybe to protect cronie investment banks from FUTURE naked shorting?
I read that Cox told Congress that getting rid of naked shorting would be a better fix reinstating the uptick rule...that's not the case for these 19 stocks, they aren't being naked shorted except DB!
This proves the SEC is likely NOT trying to stop naked shorting...since the ban occurs for only 19 companies (which aren't being victimized, except 1) and NOT the entire market!
Even worse, the ban protects the stock prices of investment banks from being victimized by naked shorting in the future, but these are the same companies (along with hedge funds) that are doing the naked shorting of other companies!
Has it gotten this bad that the SEC openly protects criminals who rob the very society that pays taxes to create government regulatory institutions? Every day, as the criminal behavior gets worse, it seems more and more likely given the number of enemies the SEC makes.
If you want to look like you are trying to stop Naked shorting,then impose the rule across the market! This is the biggest joke I have ever seen.
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-143.htm
Charles Zorbo
Sr Sales Rep