HOLY SMOKES : Did i read this right? Dow below 10,000 S&P;1,100 Nasdaq 1500. Is this possible by October?

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="ipoplaya" date=1223530957]blackvault, do you have any idea what acpme does for a living?! I'm thinking probably no...</blockquote>


What does that have to do with anything? When he actually doesn't know how manipulation works in the market, or for the fact that he even believes that stocks are manipulated, or for the fact that he doesn't understand the psychology of the stock market which is correlated to money flow.



But please humor me. AIG exec on a retreat? Ex Lehman CEO? go ahead pull the "I do X for a living, so you should agree" card.
 
[quote author="blackvault" date=1223531132][quote author="acpme" date=1223530468]and so why are you bearish? because you believe the markets are will be manipulated downward... or is it because companies aren't as "solid" as they're currently priced at?</blockquote>


Neither, because money supply isn't there and wont be for some time. But if you could comprehend 10% of my posts you would be intelligent enough to see that.</blockquote>


Ok, reading this I now get the impression your investment positions are more than a little "personal".



I'd be careful about that.



You're preaching on a bearish board here. No need to go AWOL because people have different degrees of bearishness. Preaching for another 35% on top of the existing 35% drop you should realize you're kinda playing off-the-hook odds here.
 
[quote author="muzie" date=1223531413][quote author="blackvault" date=1223531132][quote author="acpme" date=1223530468]and so why are you bearish? because you believe the markets are will be manipulated downward... or is it because companies aren't as "solid" as they're currently priced at?</blockquote>


Neither, because money supply isn't there and wont be for some time. But if you could comprehend 10% of my posts you would be intelligent enough to see that.</blockquote>


Ok, reading this I now get the impression your investment positions are more than a little "personal".



I'd be careful about that.



You're preaching on a bearish board here. No need to go AWOL because people have different degrees of bearishness. Preaching for another 35% on top of the existing 35% drop you should realize you're kinda playing off-the-hook odds here.</blockquote>


You're damn right its personal when acmpe decided to insult me. So direct the same statement to acmpe as well to be consistant.



Anyway. I'm done.
 
[quote author="skek" date=1223530588]I don't have time to get into details, but there are also SEC disclosure requirements, short swing profit rules, 10b-5 liability, Rule 144 volume and sale limitations and contractual restrictions on transfer that are designed, albeit imperfectly, to limit the ability of insiders and controlling shareholders to engage in market manipulation. Any investor who holds a large controlling interest in a company probably isn't selling into the open market anyway, but rather, is selling directly to another institutional investor because (among other things) they can seek a control premium. One exception is where the initial investment was private equity and the investor is cashing out in an IPO or secondary offering, and even those are subject to underwriter lockups. Like I said, that's a generalization, but market manipulation is much harder to do than some posts are making it out to be.</blockquote>


At least you agree that it happens. You betcha its difficult and that is why the CSCOs and MSFTs are pretty immune to major manipulation as it requires big bills to do so (once again money flow). Stocks that are lower in volume tend to be easier.



But just because its difficult doesn't mean it doesn't happen, happens all the time. It commonly happens when stocks are already going up or going down. Just last week you could see it on Goldman Sachs. The panic set it, people started selling, big boys come in and start flooding the market with a ton of small sale orders creating even more panic. As many start unloading shares (this the small drop to 85 a share occured before popped back to 100) big boys scoop them up. Same rational happens when they push prices up.



Sigh...I give up on this seriously. I don't think i'm getting anywhere.
 
[quote author="skek" date=1223532046]Between optimus/Panda and blackvault/acpme, I'm starting to understand why people throw themselves out of windows during stock market crashes. Wow, tempers are short today.</blockquote>


Lol. My buddy is reading this and laughing and so am I now...finally.



BTW he allowed me to share with you that he paid a 280K fine to the SEC for stock manipulation 6 years ago with a buddy of his. They manipulated the prices of a 6 dollar pharma company. Pumping and dumping. He will also tell you first hand that thats how big boys with bigger money treat bigger companies.
 
<blockquote>

WOW. Are you serious? You really don't know how manipulation works. If my 1st grade explanation isn't clear. I don't know how else to explain it other than repeating what I just said. I'll try again.



1. Unloading chunks = Dump 100000000000000000000000000 shares early in the morning when market opens. Price drops.



2. During lunch time when volume is usually relatively low (don't get technical with me it doesn't have to be lunch time just low volume. Place many buy orders of 100 shares and have somebody else buy them. (because last sale is what determines current price, follow so far?) If you are lucky sometimes you get unexpected help from other investors that see an increase in price and have no clue why? (irrational exuberance) and thus you created momentum.



3. Then when prices are "high" unload another big chunk.



You can do this yourself. Get 100K and go play around with a 1.5 stock and see what you can do...



PS. I won't take offense to "where did you get your education on the markets?", because I know you are clueless when it comes to this. But the answer is experience.</blockquote>


like muzie said, it's basically a conspiracy theory notion of the markets. on a stock where a few buy orders of a hundred shares can drive the price, you'd never be able to dump your shares quick enough without taking the brunt of the drop yourself. look, that kind of stuff might work once or twice on a penny stock but even that is a stretch let alone working on the MSFTs and CSCOs of the world. nevermind the fact what you're suggesting is illegal so the idea that the practice is widespread enough to sustain an entire industry of money mgrs with trillions in AUM is just farfetched.
 
[quote author="acpme" date=1223532695]<blockquote>

WOW. Are you serious? You really don't know how manipulation works. If my 1st grade explanation isn't clear. I don't know how else to explain it other than repeating what I just said. I'll try again.



1. Unloading chunks = Dump 100000000000000000000000000 shares early in the morning when market opens. Price drops.



2. During lunch time when volume is usually relatively low (don't get technical with me it doesn't have to be lunch time just low volume. Place many buy orders of 100 shares and have somebody else buy them. (because last sale is what determines current price, follow so far?) If you are lucky sometimes you get unexpected help from other investors that see an increase in price and have no clue why? (irrational exuberance) and thus you created momentum.



3. Then when prices are "high" unload another big chunk.



You can do this yourself. Get 100K and go play around with a 1.5 stock and see what you can do...



PS. I won't take offense to "where did you get your education on the markets?", because I know you are clueless when it comes to this. But the answer is experience.</blockquote>


like muzie said, it's basically a conspiracy theory notion of the markets. on a stock where a few buy orders of a hundred shares can drive the price, you'd never be able to dump your shares quick enough without taking the brunt of the drop yourself. look, that kind of stuff might work once or twice on a penny stock but even that is a stretch let alone working on the MSFTs and CSCOs of the world. nevermind the fact what you're suggesting is illegal so the idea that the practice is widespread enough to sustain an entire industry of money mgrs with trillions in AUM is just farfetched.</blockquote>


Ahh you are finally getting it. You're almost there. You got one thing right. It barely would work on the MSFTs and CSCOs as it requires an unreal amount of cash to move it. (whcih I already mentioned in a previous post) *CLAP*



Who the hell is talking about moving an industry? You think 100 hedge funds and institutions collaborate together and try and move an industry? Just stay out of the subject of market manipulation, you are clearly clueless. But a least are starting to realize that market manipulation does occur.
 
It happens every day Skek. The most classic is manipulation is artificially push prices up or down even more that is should have happened.



Example: Panic sets in...people start selling, big players start flooding the market with a ton of small sell orders to get a mass panic ball rolling. Then they start scooping up shares once the momentum started. That my friend, can almost never be proven and that might not even be illegal? But you betcha it happens everyday...
 
hey dude before you call me out on insulting you, keep in mind you changed the tone of this conversation. you want to talk about the theory of market manipulation, sure. i'm not the one who started with the smug condescending remarks.



"I really hope graphrx that your statement is a joke or meant something else that I?m not seeing. If its not, I understand why you wanted to meet for lunch for advice. "



"Like I said...keep sticking to your 1950?s mentality of investing. I?m sure you will do well in the long run. "



"Is it me or do people here need an educational tour on market manipulation in wall street and how money supply effects prices of stocks?"
 
[quote author="blackvault" date=1223533065]

Who the hell is talking about moving an industry? You think 100 hedge funds and institutions collaborate together and try and move an industry? Just stay out of the subject of market manipulation, you are clearly clueless. But a least are starting to realize that market manipulation does occur.</blockquote>


i didnt say move an industry. i said, the idea that an entire industry (hedge funds) managing trillions can be sustained using illegal market manipulation which only works on tiny illiquid companies. read it again.
 
[quote author="blackvault" date=1223531377][quote author="ipoplaya" date=1223530957]blackvault, do you have any idea what acpme does for a living?! I'm thinking probably no...</blockquote>


What does that have to do with anything? When he actually doesn't know how manipulation works in the market, or for the fact that he even believes that stocks are manipulated, or for the fact that he doesn't understand the psychology of the stock market which is correlated to money flow.



But please humor me. AIG exec on a retreat? Ex Lehman CEO? go ahead pull the "I do X for a living, so you should agree" card.</blockquote>


In your book, it probably doesn't have anything to do with anything... I was curious if you knew or even cared. Pay it no mind.
 
[quote author="acpme" date=1223533661]

Example: Panic sets in...people start selling, big players start flooding the market with a ton of small sell orders to get a mass panic ball rolling. Then they start scooping up shares once the momentum started. That my friend, can almost never be proven and that might not even be illegal? But you betcha it happens everyday...</blockquote>


before you keep calling others clueless, you might want to get an understanding that this is not necessarily market manipulation. an observer might notice the sell-off and subsequent buyback, then assume something malicious occurred. when it can't be easily explained from outside observation, the assumption is something foul afoot. it's simply momentum, like you said. a sell-off occurs and everyone follows suit. no one, even large funds, want to be on the wrong side of momentum. what you may be witnessing could be margin calls and/or quantitative models all trying to exit the same positions at the same time -- in fact thats exactly what their models would tell them to do.



to make this trade work however, you would need to drive the price down, and yet scoop shares back up withOUT driving the price back up. otherwise you've done nothing but ride the momentum both down and up. in most cases the stock would need to recover not only to the original price, but beyond that in order to really make a profit. the wash sale rule makes the whole thing much less profitable than it sounds.
 
[quote author="skek" date=1223532046]Between optimus/Panda and blackvault/acpme, I'm starting to understand why people throw themselves out of windows during stock market crashes. Wow, tempers are short today.</blockquote>


At least me and graph aren't going after anyone... Today I didn't even have to use my AK. I got to say it was a good day.
 
[quote author="acpme" date=1223534501][quote author="acpme" date=1223533661]

Example: Panic sets in...people start selling, big players start flooding the market with a ton of small sell orders to get a mass panic ball rolling. Then they start scooping up shares once the momentum started. That my friend, can almost never be proven and that might not even be illegal? But you betcha it happens everyday...</blockquote>


before you keep calling others clueless, you might want to get an understanding that this is NOT market manipulation. it's simply momentum, like you said. a sell-off occurs and everyone follows suit. no one, even large funds, want to be on the wrong side of momentum. what you may be witnessing could be margin calls and quantitative models all trying to exit the same positions at the same time -- in fact thats exactly what their models would tell them to do.



when it can't be easily explained from outside observation, the assumption is foul afoot. most observers just notice the sell-off and the buyback, then assume something malicious occurred. on avg the stock would need to recover not only to the original price, but beyond that in order for the trade to be profitable. also, the wash sale rule makes that trade much less profitable than it sounds.</blockquote>


acpme, don't forget, bv is studying for his CFA. That gives him a ton of cred on this topic doesn't it? :)
 
Just curious. Is there anyone who thinks that naked shorting is <strong>NOT</strong> a stock manipulation tactic used by hedge funds? I am not trying to start an argument, nor will I try to convince anyone of anything. I just want to know.
 
My options manager has chosen to suspend all activity while awaiting the LIBOR index. He is looking for less volatility and the credit market situation to stabilize. I was actually happy to hear this, it doesn't seem that many people are making money either short or long. Volatility has been a great thing in this fund in the past, but things are changing rapidly.
 
[quote author="awgee" date=1223539461]Just curious. Is there anyone who thinks that naked shorting is <strong>NOT</strong> a stock manipulation tactic used by hedge funds? I am not trying to start an argument, nor will I try to convince anyone of anything. I just want to know.</blockquote>


awgee, technically the only diff between a borrowed and naked short is who's effectively lending the shares. the academic view is that there's little to no economic impact on the price of the stock in question. studies by the SEC have reached the same conclusion although the PTB still decided to frown upon the practice. simply put, naked or not, the question of whether a stock is priced correctly is still going to be the determinant of where the price moves.



i do agree naked shorting should not be allowed because the owner of the stock 1) does not voluntarily agree to lend the shares, and 2) does not receive compensation for lending shares as in a traditional short sale. the bigger issue imo is that prime brokerages that allowed this to go on instead of requiring their clients to have the borrow and ensuring lenders got paid their fair share of the transaction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top