With all the corruption and control around, generally and also the SEC specifically, how far is it beyond ridiculous to have enough faith that there is really a sufficient oversight on brokerages not to lend your shares to the like of this corruption guy if you have no margin loan? Previously I told the story of the stock (the same stock for which I filed my first lawsuit against this guy) which I noticed when buying it later how the corruption guy more easily than earlier sells me big quantities of it at cheap prices. So I doubted that he really sold me those shares and to test that I tried to transfer those shares. That very routine and guaranteed to work task failed with every brokerage I tried and for justifications that sounded at the top end in being just made up for this request. Much later I had a similar suspicion about another stock I held at the same broker (Fidelity) and tried the same test and again could not do the transfer.
So yesterday, I wondered how, in addition to everything else, if this corruption guy can make such naked shorting and keep my account with years and years without really holding the shares I am supposedly bought, is he really unable to make brokerage firms lend him shares even though the holders of those shares have no margin debt? Then suddenly a connection came to my mind between this thought and all the callings I have been getting from a broker at one of the firms where I hold my stocks. Not only I have never gotten as much callings from other brokers before but the guy calling never says why he called in the messages he leaves. That sounded a good fit for testing whether I have intention in selling my shares or that they will remain in my account and therefore available to be lent to the corruption guy.
No comments:
Post a Comment