I suspect there is an element of that happening here where...

I suspect there is an element of that happening here where borrowed shares are then lent out to another entity (often within the same umbrella organisation). That would certainly explain the discrepancy in number of 'declared' shorts and the sales figures. Also, is there anything to prevent an entity declaring a short position without actually holding one? I am sure that individuals involved in shorting would NEVER do that as they are of extremely high integrity and morals aren't they? The only hard evidence available to a 'normal person' is when someone becomes a substantial holder or ceases to be a substantial holder and EVERY transaction (including all the single share transactions) are listed in a 250+ page document which we all have the time and desire to read every line to find what is revealed in it. If there is no change to a substantial holding then the data is then just reported as short sales and delayed for release by a few days so that the shorters have an unfair advantage over the punters. But then I guess the ASX have the view that it is information that a 'reasonable person' would have known.

Maintain your rage.