Re:How a 25-Year-Old Investor Spurred Lumber Liquidators’ Pl...
by jared314 on Wednesday March 04, 2015 @05:22PM
(#9147788)
> Let's look further at this short selling behavior as it scales.
I'm not talking about general short selling. I'm talking about this specific case.
He discovered the company was a fraud, shorted the stock, and then exposed it. That stock had to be sold, to someone else, for the short to be profitable. This means he knowingly participated in the scam.
Re:How a 25-Year-Old Investor Spurred Lumber Liquidators’ Pl...
by clarky07 on Thursday March 05, 2015 @12:33AM
(#9149417)
How is it a scam for a guy to do research on a company and then sell the stock when he decides said company isn't worth the current price. He isn't the person that made the company a scam, he just uncovered it. The poor sap on the other end didn't do as much research. Not they sellers fault. He can't be held responsible for the due diligence of every other investor in the world. That's basically what you are stating.
Every single stock transaction involves 2 people who think the opposite thing is going to happen. The vast majority of the time 1 of those participants knows more than the other.
Why should we give a pass to investors willing to expose themselves to excessive risk from being uninformed about their investments?
Let's look further at this short selling behavior as it scales. What happens if investigative short-sellers become muckrakers noveau: sufficiently pervasive and influential that they collectively become the market "conscience" that so often seems missing?