Zuberi

"Naked shorting is the illegal practice of short-selling shares that have not been affirmatively determined to exist. Despite being made illegal after the 2008–09 financial crisis, naked shorting continues to happen because of loopholes in rules and discrepancies between paper and electronic trading systems" - Investopedia 2023

"...due to various loopholes in the rules and discrepancies between paper and electronic trading systems, naked shorting continues to happen" - Investopedia 2012

Current Link: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nakedshorting.asp

Wayback to 2012: http://web.archive.org/web/20120709205628/http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nakedshorting.asp

Edit: The original I stole had its watermark removed. I reverse imaged searched the image and found the original artist and their tweet!

https://twitter.com/benzaehringer/status/1271064640672411649

https://www.berkeleymews.com

The concept that the 1% (or the most affluent and powerful segment of society) is actively preventing true ownership of the things we buy isn't a universally accepted notion.

Instead, it's often discussed in the context of broader economic systems and practices that can restrict the sense of true ownership.

Here are several ways in which systems, policies, or practices can be seen to limit ownership, which some might attribute to the influence of the very wealthy or powerful corporations:

1. Digital Rights Management (DRM): This technology restricts how digital content (e.g., e-books, video games, music, movies) can be used by consumers. For example, you may not be able to share an e-book or transfer it to another device due to DRM, limiting your control over the purchased product.

2. Software as a Service (SaaS): Many companies have moved away from selling software as a one-time purchase to a subscription model, where users pay to access software on a monthly or annual basis. This means the user never truly owns the software and will lose access if they stop their subscription.

3. End User License Agreements (EULAs): These agreements often contain clauses that limit how consumers can use products and can include provisions that prevent ownership transfer, modding, or reverse engineering.

4. Proprietary Parts and Repair Restrictions: Some manufacturers use proprietary components and restrict third-party repairs (also known as "Right to Repair"). This forces consumers to use the manufacturer's own services, which can be more expensive and further distances the owner from truly "owning" their product in terms of being able to maintain or modify it.

5. Planned Obsolescence: Some argue that companies design products with a limited lifespan to encourage consumers to buy newer models. This practice means that even if one "owns" a product, its usefulness is artificially limited.

6. Intellectual Property Laws: These laws can be used to create monopolies over knowledge and innovation, which can limit consumer rights to use and modify the products they purchase.

7. Subscription-based Models: Companies are increasingly pushing towards subscription models for various goods and services, from vehicles to clothing. These models can undermine traditional ownership by making it more financially advantageous or convenient to rent or subscribe rather than own outright.

8. Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and Large Corporate Landlords: There's a perception that these entities buy up substantial amounts of property, making it difficult for individuals to purchase a home due to increased prices and limited supply.

• 00:00 🤔 Market Hearing Expectations

  • Discussion on Thomas Peterffy's absence from the hearing.
  • Anticipation regarding focus areas: insider trading, impact on customers (e.g., Robinhood), potential power abuse by entities like Citadel.

• 00:37 🚨 Systemic Collapse Warning

  • Warning about the perilously close collapse of the entire financial system.
  • Illustration of GameStop's stock fluctuations, emphasizing the risk of a catastrophic system failure.
  • Lack of awareness among the public, Congress, and regulators regarding the severity of the situation.

• 02:17 💡 Systemic Risk Explanation

  • Explanation of the potential chain reaction: short squeezes leading to broker defaults and market chaos.
  • Advocacy for immediate SEC action, proposing daily reporting of short interests and increased margin requirements for shorts based on their interest.
  • Addressing the impact of social platforms on traditional market dynamics, allowing for unconventional market manipulations.

• 03:53 🕵️ Absence of Blame

  • Assertion that nobody is to blame for the market turmoil.
  • Emphasis on the urgent need to address systemic issues, particularly the lack of increased margin requirements for shorts as their interest rises.
  • Clarification that the root cause is not short interest reporting but the absence of heightened margin requirements for shorts.

• 04:28 💸 Payment for Order Flow

  • Brief insight into Thomas Peterffy's trading practices, mentioning that a smaller percentage (around three percent) involves payment for order flow.
  • Contextualizing his approach compared to industry rivals.

• 00:00 🦍 Transparency and Market Issues

  • The apes uncovered issues in the market's transparency.

  • Disclosure and transparency challenges revealed by apes' crowdsourcing.

  • Systemic problems like outdated information and lack of disclosure highlighted.

• 01:02 🌐 Exploring Alternative Systems

  • Discussion on finding a better system than the SEC.

  • Exploration of potential partnerships between SEC and crowdsourcing.

  • Calls for dreaming of a more effective financial system.

• 02:03 🕵️ Decentralization and Whistleblower Programs

  • Senator Grassley's role in advocating decentralization via whistleblower law.

  • Decentralized crowdsourcing success illustrated through whistleblower programs.

  • Acknowledgment of the challenges within the existing system.

• 03:04 ⚖️ SEC Enforcement and Accountability

  • Overview of SEC's enforcement cases and joint criminal investigations.

  • Critique on the effectiveness of financial crime prosecution.

  • Discussion on the need for more individual accountability and deterrents.

• 04:37 🛡️ Strengthening SEC Accountability

  • Exploration of measures to bring more teeth to the SEC.

  • Emphasis on individual accountability as a deterrent.

  • The importance of high-profile cases and focus on gatekeepers for market integrity.

The PDF has since gone to the 404 graveyard.

This is an archive from when it first when live (pg 7 for relevant info): http://web.archive.org/web/20210412224834/https://www.rosenlegal.com/media/casestudy/2289_Robinhood%20-%20Initial%20Complaint%20-%20Market%20Manipulation%204835-8623-1514%20v.2.pdf

I'm sure they were able to easily cover their short positions afterwards as it rocketed to >$81 (post-split) a week later ;)..