Estimate of naked shorts!
As of 8/19 there were 363m shorts. According to Finra equity short interest on 8/31 there were currently only 35k. Since we have noticed numbers are falsely being reported (see http://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=3207098) I decided to double check to see if I could determine the amount of shorts out there. I added the short positions settled from 8/19-8/31 and they totaled 385m. That means that they could have covered their "real" short position and there might have been 22m additional "real" short positions opened that were then covered.
Here is where it gets interesting. Out of those 385m that were covered, 257m were covered from August 24-August 26, which would add to the price increasing significantly. We had two 400m volume days followed by 200m volume day (August 24-26). That means that out of a billion shares traded, 257m were "buys". That leaves a remaining 743m shares traded.
How did the price come tumbling down so much if no new short positions were being opened? You can remember E-trade was receiving their dividend during those days and many of us expected the price to continue rising, but the contrary occurred. Sentiment was bullish, dividends were being reinvested and somehow the price went down substantially.
Rough calculations - Remove an arbitrary 50% of volume for day traders who bought and sold. Remove an arbitrary 30% for profit takers/sellers that didn't buy back in. That leaves 148m retail buyers. Add this to the 257m short covers and you have 405m "buys" during the period. How many NSS shares would be required to make the price go lower?
Lets say NSS position was 500m. They have covered 81m since halt. Anyone else see the problem? The numbers I provided might be off and you can tweak them but no matter how you see it, a large NSS position seems obvious, at least to me. I'm a buyer again tomorrow.
As of 8/19 there were 363m shorts. According to Finra equity short interest on 8/31 there were currently only 35k. Since we have noticed numbers are falsely being reported (see http://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=3207098) I decided to double check to see if I could determine the amount of shorts out there. I added the short positions settled from 8/19-8/31 and they totaled 385m. That means that they could have covered their "real" short position and there might have been 22m additional "real" short positions opened that were then covered.
Here is where it gets interesting. Out of those 385m that were covered, 257m were covered from August 24-August 26, which would add to the price increasing significantly. We had two 400m volume days followed by 200m volume day (August 24-26). That means that out of a billion shares traded, 257m were "buys". That leaves a remaining 743m shares traded.
How did the price come tumbling down so much if no new short positions were being opened? You can remember E-trade was receiving their dividend during those days and many of us expected the price to continue rising, but the contrary occurred. Sentiment was bullish, dividends were being reinvested and somehow the price went down substantially.
Rough calculations - Remove an arbitrary 50% of volume for day traders who bought and sold. Remove an arbitrary 30% for profit takers/sellers that didn't buy back in. That leaves 148m retail buyers. Add this to the 257m short covers and you have 405m "buys" during the period. How many NSS shares would be required to make the price go lower?
Lets say NSS position was 500m. They have covered 81m since halt. Anyone else see the problem? The numbers I provided might be off and you can tweak them but no matter how you see it, a large NSS position seems obvious, at least to me. I'm a buyer again tomorrow.
Calissio Resources Group, Inc. (CRGP) Stock Research Links
PLEASE READ IF YOU READ MY POSTS
I invested in Calissio Resources Group because I considered the financial statements warranted an investment. For every reader here that has been paying attention to my posts, please note the following:
1) I am not licensed to give investment advice. Everything expressed here is an opinion of my own for discussion purposes.
2) The only thing I know about the upcoming merger is that typically they are good for investors. A premium is typically offered when companies go private from what I understand. I certainly was and still am an investor before this announcement was made.
3) Finally, regarding the current OS, while there is lots of conjecture, I must rely on the only available information out there which has been presented in PRs. Therefore, OS as of the last PR was 242m. Consequently, I don't believe there is reason to believe I am a majority holder, despite recent purchases, without making a large degree of assumptions.
If anyone is wondering why I am posting this, it is because I want to make sure no one misinterprets my posts or considers I have any intent on the board other than to share potential ideas/speculate on possibilities.
I invested in Calissio Resources Group because I considered the financial statements warranted an investment. For every reader here that has been paying attention to my posts, please note the following:
1) I am not licensed to give investment advice. Everything expressed here is an opinion of my own for discussion purposes.
2) The only thing I know about the upcoming merger is that typically they are good for investors. A premium is typically offered when companies go private from what I understand. I certainly was and still am an investor before this announcement was made.
3) Finally, regarding the current OS, while there is lots of conjecture, I must rely on the only available information out there which has been presented in PRs. Therefore, OS as of the last PR was 242m. Consequently, I don't believe there is reason to believe I am a majority holder, despite recent purchases, without making a large degree of assumptions.
If anyone is wondering why I am posting this, it is because I want to make sure no one misinterprets my posts or considers I have any intent on the board other than to share potential ideas/speculate on possibilities.
