...
Patch quoted Boni as noting that "strategic failures" occur "when the short sellers choose not to deliver shares that would be too expensive to borrow". Her analysis of Regulation SHO was that, "pre-Regulation SHO, equity and options market makers strategically failed to deliver shares that were expensive to borrow or impossible to borrow".
Boni said "strategic fails (i.e. naked short sales) likely accounted for a higher percentage of short interest pre-Regulation SHO than previously understood".
The professor said that a whopping 42% of listed stocks at the New York Stock Exchange, NASDAQ and AMEX, and 47% of unlisted stocks in the OTCBB and Pink Sheets had persistent fails of 5 days or more with 4% being above the SEC's threshold limits for failures.
...
Small public companies are squeezed not only by hedge funds, naked short sellers, overseas listers such as the Berlin Stock Exchange, and the out-of-control "Stock Borrow Program" run by the governance-conflict-laden Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, but to the amazement of the industry, as often and not by their own regulators.
A new staff recommendation by Annette Nazareth, director of the division of market regulation at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to "outlaw" ownership of paper certificates at the same time the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation is under intense scrutiny for alleged electronic counterfeiting has begun hitting the small public company markets, company executives, shareholders and manipulative short-selling opponents like the proverbial ton of bricks.
A Dow Jones (DJ) article by Judith Burns sparked the uproar, as the inextricably intertwined web of connections between the SEC and the DTC, which is sagging from the weight of conflicted governance by representatives from a rollcall of industry heavyweights, including NASD, which owns NASDAQ (NDAQ), the New York Stock Exchange, Goldman Sachs (GS) and Lehman Brothers (LEH), to name only a few.
The Dow Jones report noted that "naked short-selling occurs when sellers don't buy shares to replace those they borrowed, a manipulative practice that can drive a company's stock price sharply lower.
The recent lawsuit filed by Nanopierce Technologies (NPCT) alleges that the Depository Trust and Clearing Corp. has a lot of reasons, almost one billion of them a year, to keep illegal naked short selling in operation. It was the shot across the bow by the legendary Houston law firms of Christian, Smith, Wukoson and Jewell, and OQuinn, Laminack and Pirtle, whose notches already include environmental targets, the breast implant industry and the tobacco industry, all brought to their knees.
In comments to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, C. Austin Burrell, who is providing litigation support and research for the law firms, said that StockGate is more massive than anyone may have imagined. "Illegal Naked Short Selling has stripped hundreds of billions, if not TRILLIONS, of dollars from American investors," and have resulted in over 7,000 public companies having been "shorted out of existence over the past six years." Burrell said some experts believe as much as $1 trillion to $3 trillion has been lost to this practice.
...
The Depository Trust Company (DTC) is a member of the U.S. Federal Reserve System, a limited-purpose trust company under New York State banking law and a registered clearing agency with the SEC. The depository supposedly brings efficiency to the securities industry by retaining custody of some 2 million securities issues, effectively "dematerializing" most of them so that they exist only as electronic files rather than as countless pieces of paper. The depository also provides the services necessary for the maintenance of the securities it has in "custody."
According to the suit, the DTCC has an enormous pecuniary and conflicted interest in the entire short selling scandal through the huge income stream they were realizing from it every day. They have made literally billions of dollars lending individual real shares, in most cases over and over, getting a fee each time they made a journal entry in the "Stock Borrow Program."
The Stock Borrow Program was purportedly set up to facilitate expedited clearance of stock trades. Somewhere along the line, the DTCC became aware that if it could lend a single share an unlimited number of times, it could collect a fee each time, according to Burrell. "There are numerous cases of a single share being lent ten or many more times," giving rise to the complaint that the DTCC has been electronically counterfeiting just as was done via printed certificates before the Crash.
"Such re-hypothecation has in effect made the potential 'float' in a single company's shares virtually unlimited and the term 'float' meaningless. Shares could be electronically created/counterfeited/kited without a registration statement being filed, and without the underlying company having any knowledge such shares are being sold or even in existence." Burrell said the Christian/O'Quinn lawsuits will seek to show that the "counterfeiting/creation of unregistered shares is a specific violation of the Securities Act of 1933, barring the 'Sale of Unregistered Securities'."
One lawsuit alleges that the DTC has a colossal disincentive to stop the "stock borrow" program, booking revenues from services of $425,416,000 and similarly, the NSCC deriving revenues of $293,133,000.
Further, the suit alleges that "open positions" resulting from this activity at the close of business on December 31, 2003, "approximated $3,025,467,000" due to NSCC, and $2,303,717,000 due by NSCC, and unsettled positions of $721,750,000 for securities borrowed through the NSCC's "Stock Borrow Program."
Nanopierce claims that DTCC and NSCC have joined in a "scheme" to "manipulate downward the price of the affected securities, thereby reducing the market value of the open fail to deliver positions." The suit also claims that the s have permitted sellers to maintain open fail to deliver positions of tens of millions of shares for periods of a year and even longer.
It quotes the National Association of Security Dealers as admitting that "concerns have been raised by members, issuers, investors and other interested parties about potentially abusive short selling activities occurring in the marketplace. In particular, naked short selling, or selling short without borrowing securities to make delivery, can result in long term failures to deliver, including aggregate failures to deliver that exceed the total float of a security. NASD believes such extended failures to deliver can have a negative effect on the market. Among other things, by not having to deliver securities, naked short sellers can take on larger short positions than would otherwise be permissible, which can facilitate manipulative activity."
The largely unregulated DTC has become something of a defacto Czar presiding over the entire U.S. markets system, wielding more day-to-day influence and control than the SEC, the NASD and NASDAQ combined.
The Depository Trust and Clearing Corp.'s two preferred shareholders are the New York Stock Exchange and the NASD, a regulatory agency that also owns the NASDAQ (NDAQ) and the embattled American Stock Exchange! Regulators, regulate thyself?
In an era when corporate governance is the primary interest for the SEC and state regulators, the DTCC is hardly a role model. Its 21 directors represent a virtual litany of conflict.
...
Basically, particularly rapacious, hungry and unethical foxes are "guarding" the henhouse
containing your nest-egg, and don't hold your breath waiting for the foxes comprising the cabal
to do anything about it, especially after their "mandate."
