(Total Views: 247)
Posted On: 07/01/2017 11:03:29 AM
Post# of 72440
Well the CUSIP change idea was completely debunked when we tried it. There was no notable change in the IPIX price as a result of the change. That means one of two things:
1) Naked shorts don't have to cover on CUSIP change.
or
2) There was no significant naked short position in CTIX at the time of the CUSIP change.
The only third explanation I heard is that the CEs just re naked shorted IPIX to cover their CTIX markers. That doesn't hold water since they could have just done that in AMBS.
Also, just to sprinkle it in for the record, I categorically refute the lie that I am Scottsmith.
Go IPIX!
1) Naked shorts don't have to cover on CUSIP change.
or
2) There was no significant naked short position in CTIX at the time of the CUSIP change.
The only third explanation I heard is that the CEs just re naked shorted IPIX to cover their CTIX markers. That doesn't hold water since they could have just done that in AMBS.
Also, just to sprinkle it in for the record, I categorically refute the lie that I am Scottsmith.
Go IPIX!
(0)
(0)
All my posts are my own personal opinion and speculation. They should not be used as the basis for any investment decision. No, I am not Scottsmith.
Scroll down for more posts ▼
