I mentioned briefly about insider trading, the elites, and shorting a stock last week. How it was easier, less risky, with a bigger payoff than waiting for a stock to organically increase in value. Two big examples of where government caused a stock value to plummet promising two big pay days for those in the know.
Jif Peanut Butter a subsidiary of Smuckers was trading at $143 a share on May 17th. Then the FDA wanted a recall for salmonella (let me take some time for the low brow thinkers here, I'm not in favor of salmonella or bypassing safety if it is real. What I am saying that if someone knows what is coming 24 hours ahead of time they can make a killing.) The price plunged to $122.45 six days later. A 10 million dollar trade could have snagged a million and half dollar pay day in six days. Then the other shoe dropped and the stock lost some of it's regained value.
Abbott baby formula was selling at $141 a share on the 29th of December before the recall. After the recall, the stock price was $105 a share on May 11th. For a short sell, that could mean a couple of million off a ten million dollar investment. Plus, Abbott used the opportunity to buy back 5 billion of stock which put money in the pockets of investors and increased the stock price. Easy enough to do if you know a head of time. I wonder if Nancy or Hunter is involved.
Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn
I see that the feeble minded did not understand what I wrote and the corrupt want to disparage what I wrote. Let me try to clarify for those that can "get it".
The short that I'm speaking of is with the full knowledge of a decline in stock value. Not a guess, not something based on market analysis but insider knowledge that the government will force or take some action that will hurt a stock value. In simpler terms (for the simple minded), unethical and possibly criminal action. The two examples that I laid out (JM Smuckers and Abbott) were both affected by the government oversight. A person in high office could borrow a great deal of stock on the margin meaning that they pay maybe 10% of the actual value of the actual stock for a short period of maybe 30 days. If the stock declines in value (as they know that it will) then they can return the stock and pocket the difference which as I wrote could be in the millions. No risk, all profit...if they are doing it illegally
Yep, those transactions could be tracked if someone was of a mind to do so but DC is definitely a swamp. If someone did try to track the money, there are many ways to disguise money or involvement. They put Martha Stewart in prison for insider trading based on an offhand comment to her lawyer during a golf outing. Should unconvicted felons like Nancy or Hillary escape the same fate?
Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn
That's just not right. I'm feeble minded and I understood what you wrote. And no one has disparaged what you wrote but I'm happy to oblige.
Where's the evidence that people in high office or government employees took advantage of this and sold short? You haven't presented any. If evidence arises the SEC will look into it. When there are indications of illegal insider trading, they do go back and track the transactions.
You are cherry picking with Abbott. You chose a day when Abbott was extremely close to its 52 week high ($141/share), 12/27/21, and then compare that to a 48 month low ($105), on 5/11/2022. So when did the recall begin? Mid February. Not close to either of the dates you're throwing out. And Abbott bought back its stock before it knew there was a problem with the formula. Big deal.
You seem to assume that if a product is recalled, politicians and government employees and "elites" will make money off it through illegal insider trading. I'm sure that has occurred and will occur, but it's not as common as you think.
Finally an ordinary Joe who's not a professional trader is not going to be able to put up just 10% margin on a short sale.