(Total Views: 1014)
Posted On: 09/02/2017 11:04:35 AM
Post# of 72446
We have already mathematically proven it impossible for there to be any significant naked short position due to no FTDs after three consecutive days of declining volume.
If he is saying they are not subject to the rules of mathematics then why would they need to cover at any price? If there are no FTDs after three days of declining volume then their scheme is undetectable by any means and they would never have to cover. This is, of course, completely illogical.
Alan has put me on ignore as he does not enjoy the simple three step formula I laid out to debunk the silliness of this conspiracy theory.
Go IPIX!
If he is saying they are not subject to the rules of mathematics then why would they need to cover at any price? If there are no FTDs after three days of declining volume then their scheme is undetectable by any means and they would never have to cover. This is, of course, completely illogical.
Alan has put me on ignore as he does not enjoy the simple three step formula I laid out to debunk the silliness of this conspiracy theory.
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.
