News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A “short squeeze” sounds innocuous enough.... Parent comment

Re:A “short squeeze” sounds innocuous enough... by dabeeeenster on Thursday January 08, 2009 @04:22AM (#424678)
You get different brokers to buy it on your behalf bit by bit, anonymously. From there it depends on the laws of the country you are operating within.

Companies often do this when selling stock too, so as to not draw attention to themselves or their positions.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “short squeeze” sounds innocuous enough... by swombat on Thursday January 08, 2009 @05:20AM (#424712)
Except that, in the US and UK, that's illegal. In Germany, though, where this happened, it's not. That's not a good thing for Germany.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “short squeeze” sounds innocuous enough... by jsrn on Thursday January 08, 2009 @06:41AM (#424781)
... and it's not a good thing for hedge funds playing with billions to apparently not know about the laws of the market they are investing in:-)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “short squeeze” sounds innocuous enough... by dabeeeenster on Thursday January 08, 2009 @05:29AM (#424717)
It's only illegal for companies though, right? If individuals do it they don't need to declare anything do they?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “short squeeze” sounds innocuous enough... by Harkins on Thursday January 08, 2009 @06:54AM (#424787)
I've poked through FEC data (lots is available free online via FTP) and seen releases indicating when an individual owns mroe than 5% of a public company. I understand that to be the reporting threshold but could be wrong.

Remember, in the US legal system, companies are people. And the legal system is reluctant to create laws restricting only corporate behavior.

[ Parent | on HN ]