Should shorting be suspended/banned?

[Trembling Hand]

Well its either another ill informed journalist or its an interesting statistic. I guess for intraday positions in the larger liquid stocks it might be possible but it seems highly unlikely. I would love to know where the figure came from.

We will have all the answers at the end of the week. We can compare the volume from two weeks ago to this week and see what is missing. That will be the shorts.

All will be revealed.

Please for F sake don't anyone compare last weeks Futs rollover to this weeks and say that's short volume or I am going to get Extremely F'en grumpy.

 

[mazzatelli1000]

We will have all the answers at the end of the week. We can compare the volume from two weeks ago to this week and see what is missing. That will be the shorts.

All will be revealed.

Please for F sake don't anyone compare last weeks Futs rollover to this weeks and say that's short volume or I am going to get Extremely F'en grumpy.

Nah that triple witching stuff is all bollocks. No such thing as witches

 

[Trembling Hand]

Nah that triple witching stuff is all bollocks. No such thing as witches

Don't give a toss about three witches but do ya wanna put some money on the fact that Wed, Especially Tuesday and Fridays jump in volume was Sep SPI Futs delivery/Rollover/Arb unwind??

Of course these could be just another HUGE coincidence that the dates of these spikes are, Thu 21st Jun 07, Thu 20 sep 07, Thu 20th Dec 07, Thu Mar 20th 08, Thu 19th Jun 08 & Thu 18th Sep 08. The same day as Futs expiry

 

[mazzatelli1000]

Don't give a toss about three witches but do ya wanna put some money on the fact that Wed, Especially Tuesday and Fridays jump in volume was Sep SPI Futs delivery/Rollover/Arb unwind??

Of course these could be just another HUGE coincidence that the dates of these spikes are, Thu 21st Jun 07, Thu 20 sep 07, Thu 20th Dec 07, Thu Mar 20th 08, Thu 19th Jun 08 & Thu 18th Sep 08. The same day as Futs expiry

Haha - bit of tongue in cheek on my behalf TH

 

[Trembling Hand]

Haha - bit of tongue in cheek on my behalf TH

I'm losing my mind.... and in the process my sense of humour :freak3:

 

[Kremmen]

Here's one 100 times worse than shorts. Retail broker account being able to trade on T3. There are actual threads on this forum and others of FOOLS daytrading without ANY money!!!

But thats ok because they are longs

No, it's okay because it's irrelevant to overall market stability. Sure, any of us could do that, but our effect on the market is negligible. What matters to the market stability is what big fund managers or very large numbers of smaller investors do. Large numbers of investors don't trade with no money, but large numbers of investors turn to shorting in a plunging market.

 

[Kremmen]

If a company takes out a loan that depends on stock price they have only themselves to blame when things go wrong (as they surely do).

That would be fair enough if the company directors who made the decision were the only ones to suffer. Given the ramifications for shareholders and the wider economy of such collapses, it's not that simple. Having a bank collapse, and then other banks moving in to take over all their work, is astronomically inefficient and a huge waste of productivity for the society. It benefits nobody except a few greedy stock traders who are, themselves, doing something intrinsically non-productive.

Most of the posts here appear to be basically founded in greed. A market which rockets up and down way out of proportion to any sensible valuation of the stocks is great for stock traders but not much good for anyone else in society. The amazing part is the posts about how bad it is the government "changing the rules of the game". It's not a game and it's not there for the benefit of ASF readers.

 

[prawn_86]

It's not a game and it's not there for the benefit of ASF readers.

What benefit is it there for then?

 

[nioka]

Most of the posts here appear to be basically founded in greed. A market which rockets up and down way out of proportion to any sensible valuation of the stocks is great for stock traders but not much good for anyone else in society. The amazing part is the posts about how bad it is the government "changing the rules of the game". It's not a game and it's not there for the benefit of ASF readers.

Agreed. However if you make statements like that on this thread you run the risk of upsetting about 60% of contributors because the truth of the statement can not be understood or accepted by them.

 

[cuttlefish]

A market which rockets up and down way out of proportion to any sensible valuation of the stocks is great for stock traders but not much good for anyone else in society.

The point that a lot of the supporters of short selling on here are making is that the price discovery provided by shorting helps to temper volatility, and that the hedging products provided by options and futures market makers also help to reduce volatility by allowing the larger players (funds etc.) to manage their risk via these products rather than having to constantly adjust the size of their holdings.

The amazing part is the posts about how bad it is the government "changing the rules of the game". It's not a game and it's not there for the benefit of ASF readers.

I'm sure the many private investors, funds and market makers that had legal open short positions to the tune of millions of dollars would agree that its not a game and hence changing the rules dramatically from one day to the next without warning is highly irresponsible. Many of those short positions would have been created as a result of legitimate risk management activities - including risk management by super funds etc. in using hedging products like put options or SPI futures etc. to cover downside risk on portfolios.

I haven't got a strong opinion one way or another as to whether short selling is a good thing or a bad thing for the markets (I think the markets can live without it however my biggest issue with it is regulation and transparency) but I am at least capable of understanding the rational points being made by the short selling advocates though.

 

[Trembling Hand]

It benefits nobody except a few greedy stock traders who are, themselves, doing something intrinsically non-productive.

You may not like it pointed out but your "investing" is no different to my 30 second trades.

Just because your trades last month/years doesn't mean you are doing anything more productive than stripping capital growth and the odd div from some other poor sucker. We are playing the same zero sum game. One of us realizes it the other is in denial. IMHO

 

[Kremmen]

Agreed. However if you make statements like that on this thread you run the risk of upsetting about 60% of contributors because the truth of the statement can not be understood or accepted by them.

Possibly, but I don't think it's that hard to see the other side. I myself treat lots of things as games, but I like to stay aware that that's not everyone's view. If the rules change, then I try to think of it as being a positive that I used the system to my advantage earlier rather than complain that it's not going to last forever to suit me.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

????

Most of the posts here appear to be basically founded in greed.

Based on what criteria?

A market which rockets up and down way out of proportion to any sensible valuation of the stocks is great for stock traders but not much good for anyone else in society.

Perhaps if some companies considered their actions on society the market may not see companies go down. But who pushes them up well over what is considered overpriced? Ah, those ethical guys and gals right? The ones considering society. The one's who aren't greedy right?

Total hypocrisy of the charlatans.

The amazing part is the posts about how bad it is the government "changing the rules of the game". It's not a game and it's not there for the benefit of ASF readers.

What is the game? Are you confusing game with business?

Nioka,

Agreed. However if you make statements like that on this thread you run the risk of upsetting about 60% of contributors because the truth of the statement can not be understood or accepted by them.

Do you have anything of substance to add?

Why don't you answer the oil question? Enough here are interested in the ethical answers of the ethical?

 

[Kremmen]

I'm sure the many private investors, funds and market makers that had legal open short positions to the tune of millions of dollars would agree that its not a game and hence changing the rules dramatically from one day to the next without warning is highly irresponsible.

I quite agree that for those actively in a position at the time, the ban without warning is irresponsible. I was meaning my comments about the general topic of shorting.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

I myself treat lots of things as games, but I like to stay aware

How do you stay aware?

What do you treat as games?

 

[Kremmen]

You may not like it pointed out but your "investing" is no different to my 30 second trades.

I'm quite aware of that. We are indeed playing the same zero sum game. (Except when some of us actually invest in the company directly and give it capital to work with, but I don't do that often.) I'm just not complaining that someone's taken part of the game away. If someone takes part of my game away, I'll look for other options (so to speak).

 

[prawn_86]

I'm quite aware of that. We are indeed playing the same zero sum game. (Except when some of us actually invest in the company directly and give it capital to work with, but I don't do that often.) I'm just not complaining that someone's taken part of the game away. If someone takes part of my game away, I'll look for other options (so to speak).

So you have never complained about anything before?

As TH says, i would like to see them ban shorts in oil and see the uproar then...

 

[IFocus]

Most of the posts here appear to be basically founded in greed.

Nope mostly ignorance of how a market functions and history of markets generally IMHO

A market which rockets up and down way out of proportion to any sensible valuation of the stocks is great for stock traders but not much good for anyone else in society.

Nope depends on your strategy, method and time frame experienced traders trading EOD prefer to manage their risk, markets banging around are not good for risk management.

The amazing part is the posts about how bad it is the government "changing the rules of the game". It's not a game and it's not there for the benefit of ASF readers.

Again I think you miss understand changing the rules changes risk to a point you cannot measure it. Trading is understanding risk IMHO

 

[Kremmen]

How do you stay aware?

What do you treat as games?

I just mean that it's worth noting that we don't run or regulate the markets, the governments do. If they don't like what's happening, they'll intervene. This shouldn't be unexpected. It is, if you like, part of the game.

Another example of games? Round-the-world air fares. As part of one, I flew back and forth about a dozen times between two nearby cities in order to rack up frequent flyer points. (If distance A-B = 80 miles and min. credit per sector = 500 miles, then 10 trips A-B = 800 miles used out of allowable total and 5000 miles credited.) By the next time I booked such a fare, they'd changed the rules to stop that.

 

[mazzatelli1000]

Most of the posts here appear to be basically founded in greed. A market which rockets up and down way out of proportion to any sensible valuation of the stocks is great for stock traders but not much good for anyone else in society.

Depends on the trader and their strategy
There are traders out there that prefer the underlying not to move around alot.
And the talk of greed - we are all operating a trading business. Im sure you would take whatever profits came your way.