RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:2023 VGCX Revised Production Guidance - Misguided? Here's a Wikipedia link that provides all the info most of us will ever need to get our heads around the Naked Shorting topic.
Naked short selling - Wikipedia From what I can see, in the US atleast when shares cannot be borrowed from a lender to cover a short position they are merely considered/called FTD - "Fail to deliver". Well isn't that just like the Wall Street crooks in bed with the US Regulators to create a new buzzword to hide what is essentially a Naked Short. I guess when a company can't afford to pay their debts and is bankrupt, they're not really bankrupt they're just FTD - Fail to deliver their payment....GIVE ME A BREAK!
To me, the solution to all this is pretty simple. Make a rule that a short sale position order cannot become active/open/confirmed by the brokerage handling the trade until there is a confirmation from the brokerage handling the trade or another lender that they actually have the shares available and are being lended to the short seller to eventually cover their short position. The Canadian position that a short seller i
n Canada does not need to locate the shares and that all that is required is that they had a reasonable expectation that the shares were available to borrow is just as rediculous. Seriously, who is ever going to monitor and enforce this rule IIROC?...again I say GIVE ME A BREAK!
Anyway, it's pretty clear the system isn't designed as a fair and level playing field for the retail investor.
HB77