Actually it's an excellent example to prove a poin

Quote:

---

Actually it's an excellent example to prove a point.

---

Any example dealing with less money than I have in my money clip is not going to translate to a $100M+ company in my humble opinion.

I

Quote:

---

lliquidity makes it much easier to manipulate the stock price. The spread between bid and ask is usually large so the SP can be manipulated using a small amount of shares.

---

No argument there.

Quote:

---

On the other hand, if the daily volume was over 1M shares, it's much harder to manipulate the SP with a small amount of shares (like 18K).

---

That's also true.

I think it's a bad example because you're dealing with $142 and a completely illiquid stock. We can only speculate on the reason why the order was filled short shares (as is always the case and is something we agree on). Weird things happen in those situations and while IPIX is not exactly trading huge amounts of shares/dollars it is significantly more than this sub-penny example. Your examples of strong companies with similar short volume to IPIX are better at demonstrating the harmlessness of the number in my opinion. I'll let this one rest as you and I don't even disagree on the short volume issue. Those who think it's a valid example are free to do so.

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.