Posted On: 09/17/2015 7:25:23 PM
Post# of 72447
Yesterday 27% short sales, today 56%. Now somebody tell me why that is not meaningful data in some way, even if we're not exactly sure how to interpret it.
If market makers need to naked short some, and quickly cover it, to make a market run smoothly, why would that number vary by more than ONE HUNDRED PERCENT from one day to the next?
Arrgh, well I tried to post an image of the chart but it doesn't work, so --
here's a link to yesterday's and today's one minute chart. We got "dandruff" again, a lot of little tiny trades that look like specks. Almost all of today's volume was in 3 trades.
I don't for a minute believe that the philanthropic market makers decided to make sure that 25,000 share lots shouldn't have to wait to have their orders filled -- not when I've had the experience of sitting for several minutes with a bid at the ask price, on small lots.
So, there's something going on. And everyone who says the FINRA data is meaningless -- we don't know how to interpret it, for sure, but it can't be meaningless. Not with 27% one day and 56% the next.
If market makers need to naked short some, and quickly cover it, to make a market run smoothly, why would that number vary by more than ONE HUNDRED PERCENT from one day to the next?
Arrgh, well I tried to post an image of the chart but it doesn't work, so --
here's a link to yesterday's and today's one minute chart. We got "dandruff" again, a lot of little tiny trades that look like specks. Almost all of today's volume was in 3 trades.
I don't for a minute believe that the philanthropic market makers decided to make sure that 25,000 share lots shouldn't have to wait to have their orders filled -- not when I've had the experience of sitting for several minutes with a bid at the ask price, on small lots.
So, there's something going on. And everyone who says the FINRA data is meaningless -- we don't know how to interpret it, for sure, but it can't be meaningless. Not with 27% one day and 56% the next.
(0)
(0)
