It goes back to the loan, put option and stock loan arrangement entered into with Macquarie. You have to read the equity option and loan agreement to get a sense of what is going on here. My reading of it is that Waterhouse borrowed money from Macquarie and pledged stock as security and embedded a long put position in it. It meant that Waterhouse would have downside protection in the event that the stock fell (and thus not be sufficient collateral for the loan).
Waterhouse gets to borrow money, Macquarie gets to borrow stock and do whatever it needs to do... like lending some of it to other people, but is also now short a put option. The put option meant that Macquarie was long delta to BET and would therefore need to short BET to remain net zero exposure to BET. The more BET falls, the more they need to short BET to remain hedged.
These recent transactions look a lot like exercising a put option. Waterhouse gets money (probably to set aside against some of the loan), while Macquarie gets some shares.
I'm not exactly an expert at reading contracts, so maybe someone else can tell me if I've misread the terms.
BET Price at posting:
33.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
