If COR was wrongly debited then in that case: A
Post# of 11038
Posted On: 09/25/2015 11:46:46 AM
If COR was wrongly debited then in that case:
Assuming the 257m short positions that covered were opened in those three days (August 24-26), that means that 514m volume out of 1B were those trades leaving 486m in volume to account for. 92m shorts have covered since halt so assuming those short positions were opened during the time period, that would leave 302m in volume for those three days. So far the outcome would be no net change to the stock (92m were counted as buys during period). With positive sentiment and reinvestment of dividends, for the price to go down I would say 60% would have to have been sells. That would mean roughly 183m were sells/short positions being opened. I would say maybe 20% were profit takers on the first day of that period, leaving 147m as new short positions (assuming no one else sold). IMHO this is the minimum number that should have to cover still. If the company was buying during the period though, this means that the number or shorts would increase at a similar rate under this calculation. In theory the maximum retail buying was 242m shares during the period, based on those assumed short covers, so the maximum shorts to still cover would be 369m.
ALL IMHO and many assumptions so do your own calculations and decide if there are short position or none, and if its justifiable to think there are naked short positions or not! There is no right answer IMHO
Assuming the 257m short positions that covered were opened in those three days (August 24-26), that means that 514m volume out of 1B were those trades leaving 486m in volume to account for. 92m shorts have covered since halt so assuming those short positions were opened during the time period, that would leave 302m in volume for those three days. So far the outcome would be no net change to the stock (92m were counted as buys during period). With positive sentiment and reinvestment of dividends, for the price to go down I would say 60% would have to have been sells. That would mean roughly 183m were sells/short positions being opened. I would say maybe 20% were profit takers on the first day of that period, leaving 147m as new short positions (assuming no one else sold). IMHO this is the minimum number that should have to cover still. If the company was buying during the period though, this means that the number or shorts would increase at a similar rate under this calculation. In theory the maximum retail buying was 242m shares during the period, based on those assumed short covers, so the maximum shorts to still cover would be 369m.
ALL IMHO and many assumptions so do your own calculations and decide if there are short position or none, and if its justifiable to think there are naked short positions or not! There is no right answer IMHO
(0)
(0)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.
Scroll down for more posts ▼