![]() ![]() |
Sep 20 2008, 03:53 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Member Group: Traders-Talk User Posts: 50 Joined: 1-February 04 Member No.: 1394 |
If their is a buyer for every seller, who was buying on Monday and Wednesday? Thank you for any help you can offer.
|
|
|
|
Sep 21 2008, 12:30 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Mark S. Young Group: Admin Posts: 15577 Joined: 20-August 03 From: CVG Member No.: 3 |
If their is a buyer for every seller, who was buying on Monday and Wednesday? Thank you for any help you can offer. Bottom pickers "structual buyers" like funds and pensions, and market makers. They just didn't hit the ask much. The naked shorting thing, however is a bad, bad thing. The integrity of the market is based upon all buying and selling have a direct relationship to economic reality. Naked shorting is essentially fraud. It's like counterfeiting. There are theoretically more shares available to sell than actually were issued by the company when folks short naked. That's unacceptable and bad for our markets. -------------------- |
|
|
|
Sep 21 2008, 05:18 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Member Group: Traders-Talk User Posts: 50 Joined: 1-February 04 Member No.: 1394 |
If their is a buyer for every seller, who was buying on Monday and Wednesday? Thank you for any help you can offer. Bottom pickers "structual buyers" like funds and pensions, and market makers. They just didn't hit the ask much. The naked shorting thing, however is a bad, bad thing. The integrity of the market is based upon all buying and selling have a direct relationship to economic reality. Naked shorting is essentially fraud. It's like counterfeiting. There are theoretically more shares available to sell than actually were issued by the company when folks short naked. That's unacceptable and bad for our markets. Thank you for your help. I am a paranoid old man and I was starting to wonder if we even need actual buyers and sellers,especially after the wild ticks on Friday. |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th June 2013 - 01:37 PM |