Oh, my god, i just finished reading an article that made my jaw dropped to the floor because it makes me think that biden is actually going to get done with the whole naked shorting and the reason is phenomenal. The guy who was fighting the fight 12 years ago and didn't get it done, is the same guy who was in charge of the biden, transition team, so he's very close with biden and he's actually very adamant about taking care of the whole naked shorting and the Double shorting, this whole stuff actually may get resolved. The other thing is this article actually made me look deeper into this, and the numbers that i uncovered make me think that amc and this whole naked shorting synthetic shares, isn't some cocoa jumbo urban legend. The numbers makes me think, there's a lot of red flags here.

I don't know for sure that it is naked, shorted or synthetic shares actually exist, but the numbers for the shorts for this company just don't add up and in this video i'm gon na share everything with you in a five minute. Video no fluff, nothing to sell nothing to click, nothing to smash, just listen to me. So in my previous video i completely ignore the naked shorts and the synthetic shares. Because, honestly, i thought it's some sort of an urban legend.

Now i've actually took a look into this and i, even though i can't confirm that it is actually what's going on here. The red flags are quite alarming, which makes me think that, if it is true, this might be the best opportunity of amc retail investors for the first time to actually punish the entire industry, not just guys like melvin capital, like we had with gamestop, so check this Out, first of all, a few basic terms now short selling by this point: you should know what it is. Essentially, it's me boring a stock selling it to a third party, hoping the price would come down, so i can repurchase the stock in the open market, bring it back and make a profit. You guys should know this by now now check this out.

When you have stocks that are in high demand, you can't get them there's not enough of them, because the people who provide these borrowed chairs are brokerages and if they don't have enough inventory, there's not a lot to borrow, not to mention that they're becoming very expensive. When you borrow, you got to pay interest and if it's in high demand, because it's high shorted well, it's quite expensive. Sometimes the shares get re-shorted, because if somebody shorted the stock, some guy bought it in open market. The brokerage can just cycle it back through through the mid grinder and reshort the stock.

That's how we got to 140 percent in gamestop now that thing is despicable and vile, but not illegal, even though it's easily fixable - and this latest article, which i'm about to show you right now, proves how the sec ignored this and refused to address the issue. Every five-year-old knows how to solve this now. The other problem, which is even actually worse somehow, is naked trolling, because naked shorting is actually much worse is when you actually sell a fake share, a share that doesn't really exist, that's naked, showing now that thing is illegal, but it seems that the hedge funds found A loophole essentially as crazy as it sounds. You have three whole days to prove that you can actually borrow a share to facilitate that short sale, which you already carried out as crazy as it sounds so basically, three whole days to sell short, a stock which you don't even own, or you didn't even borrow.

Yet and i'm guessing a lot of you are asking: well, how can this even be possible after naked shorting got outlawed? The loophole is that the traders have to determine that they can borrow the shares. They don't have to actually borrow it. They have to determine that. It can be borrowed before you can sell, it short, isn't it great, i mean all you have to do is say well i can borrow.

I think i can. I think i can. I think i can. They don't have to actually borrow that.

There's a three-day waiting period before they have to report that they actually found the share that they've already sold. Who thought of this now beyond that? Even what they need by that point is not the actual share. It's just the belief. They need to believe that they're capable of locating a share that they can actually sell.

Now that thing is mind-blowing, so what happens here is that the sec and the government prohibit naked shorting, but they leave every possible loophole to make it still an option for these guys. And what do you think they're not going to use it? I think they will. I think they have, and in this article, which i'm about to show you, it proves how the sec and the dtcc, which you probably remember from the robinhood saga, actually refused to address this issue. When the solution was ready in front of them.

But guess what the guy, who promoted this legislation in 2009 and couldn't get it done, is now close to biden. In fact, he just led the transition team of biden. So i think that if amc erupts and it causes a pandemonium that will actually mandate the government to address it, kaufman being close with biden will actually catalyze them actually solving this and killing naked shorts and this re-shorting recycling once and for all. But here's the thing there's also some numbers here which actually don't add up.

So, first of all, let's talk about the article. Then let's look at the short numbers for amc, because the numbers just don't make any sense. I just got this article today and it's titled. The gamestop mess exposes the naked short selling scam and this is from february this year and it somehow got drowned in the noise of mainstream media.

But you got ta see this at the house financial services committee hearing last week on gamestop department. There was an elephant in the room naked short selling. The trader is supposed to locate or have a reasonable belief. Remember what i told you earlier that he can locate or borrow the shares, so he has to believe.

That's all just believe. Naked short selling is when the trader does not find those shares to deliver it's costly to a big hedge funds to locate hard to borrow shares. So prime brokers, who carry inventory of stocks of high volume short sellers, simply lie about the borrowers to assist their favorite clients. It's a scam central to the stock trading system, enabled by the ssc, the market regulator and the btcc.

Remember them this stock clearinghouse to benefit the big players. They were phantom shares that didn't exist, but that were posted in buyer's accounts as entitlements. The buyers have no idea, they don't even have real shares, they can sell and even loan those digital entitlements interesting. In other words, a large number of locates or borrows were fake, making the shorts naked.

In fact, more than 1 million gamestop shares were deemed failed to deliver, meaning buyers never got the shares they ordered. According to bloomberg report business instead reported that 359 million in stock was in limbo, with buyers lacking cash or sellers to having the shares to settle trades. According to data from the sec check. This out ken griffin, the ceo of citadel, said institutional investors earned substantial returns from lending out shares 25 to 30 percent.

He didn't point out that gain for those investors is a loss for the borrowers, often big hedge funds, so their brokers commonly wink and do a locate not borrow effectively saying yes, i know where the share is, and i can buy it whenever i want to when It comes time to deliver. Much like you know, people who smoke and say well, i can quit any time. I want no, not exactly the sec rule itself is so weak traders can roll over naked shorts and stay naked indefinitely. Remember that three-day rule you can roll it over again and again and again, and here they claim they have a source that says failed trades roll over to the next day.

I.E you can buy them back and they will net out day to day. So you could continually buy back your sale, fails and re-short extending your fail. If you don't after 10 days, brokers are forced to buy them back and that's the interesting part right here. Of course, there is no enforcement, even when crooked traders and dealers are caught red-handed.

All they pay is a small fine, the cost of doing business. Now this is actually very interesting, so this is about pat kaufman, who used to be a senator and he just recently ran joe biden's transition. So he essentially tried to completely curtail this practice and failed, but the way he failed is actually very interesting. In july 2009, senator kaufman and six colleagues from both parties wrote to the sec proposing a hard locate plan that would ban all short sales unless the executing broker first obtained a unique identification number for these shares, perhaps through an automated centralized system implemented by the dtcc.

This would completely prevent multiple short sales on the basis of a single share. Now this is insane because this would literally kill naked shorting in its seed, and now we find out how this insanely smart initiative was killed by interest and money. So here they say, according to a book from 2012 called the payoff months before the letter, the dtcc had gone to the sec, with a proposed solution to naked short selling that look very similar to kaufman solution with the dtcc creating a centralized database that would prevent The same shares from being used for multiple short sales - i mean every five-year-old would think about this solution. It's not complicated shortly after the sec announced a roundtable for september.

At that point, i thought great we're going to change the way stocks are traded. However, the event was dominated by the big crater banks, which made huge sums lending stocks for short sales and had been lobbying against any restrictions on it. Now they see during the meeting the dtcc representative said, mute and didn't even mention the proposed solution that they had for naked short selling. He asked dtcc official what happened they admitted we got pulled back.

They met by their board by the wall street powers that be, and now let's take a look at the numbers here, because the short selling numbers are just astonishing, we're seeing a 20 short interest, and for me that was good enough to actually say well, it's short Interest much higher than any other company i can think of, but it's still not 140 like in gamestop, but looking at these numbers right here, this is actually very interesting. This is from nakedshortreport.com and they aggregate the volume and the short volume of every trading day going back three days. So, as you can see right here, we have the entire volume and we have the percentage of volume shorted. So if you take a look at this thing, which is from the past two weeks, you don't see any 20 numbers.

Look at this 40 shorter 28th may 27th, 54 shorted may 26 61 showed it 52 showed it 59 shorted 59 showed it 59 showed it. So this is quite insane and here's the actual story here, which i think a lot of these traders on reddit and wall street bets and on youtube are trying to make essentially they're making a mathematical case. They're saying well guys, if you're shorting, anywhere from 30 percent to 60 per day of the entire volume of being traded. And if we know based on the statements of the co.

That 80 percent of the float is being held by retail investors, who don't short by definition - i mean they don't have the capacity the risk management for the most part. I don't think we have a lot of short interest going on in retail investors. That's highly unusual! How the hell is this mathematically possible and i think it's a really good question i'll be honest with you. I don't know if there's any naked shorting going on here or if there's anything shady or fishy or illegal or if there's any synthetic shares.

I honestly don't know, based on the article we just read and based on these numbers. The mathematics here, just don't add up something here is not making sense to me as far as the numbers. I don't think it's 100 proof of naked and synthetic shares, but it raises a lot of questions and it makes me really wonder about these numbers because the numbers just don't add up. Let me know what you think in the comments below it's been a pleasure, showing you this side of things again, i try to keep it real.

My name is tom. Thank you for spending some time with me i'll see you guys next video. So, as you just saw, there's a lot of red flags here that pose a lot of questions that need answering. I'm not going to tell you for sure it's naked shorted or there are synthetic shares, but these numbers make no sense to me and i'd love for somebody in the comment section to actually make sense of it.

In any case, this is just my opinion, which means it might be inaccurate might be wrong, it might be the ramblings of a madman. Who knows you got ta, do your own research, allegedly blah blah blah blah and, as always a huge shout out to our channel members and our patrons? Thank you. So much we'll see you guys in the next video.