Once again don't let the facts get in the way of your own story....

Once again don't let the facts get in the way of your own story.

I was bearish last year at around $3 and bearish all the way down. I changed it to hold around 0.80ish and changed it to buy on 11 June at 0.47. At $3 and most of the say down I thought there was way too much hype in the stock and there wasn't/still isn't any quantifiable fundamental support. I didn't sledge the business model other than saying there is no evidence that it actually works. All of this is true. Read the last post on why I recently changed it to buy.

As I written a number of times you have a poor understanding of shorting, hedge fund etc.

For someone to do what you are suggesting makes no sense. If they had $100 long and allowed the PB to lend out the stock then they get a slightly lower funding rate (the client doesn't usually get the fee directly). If they then wanted to short the stock as well as being long they would then need to borrow the stock (at 10% or whatever the rate currently is) and short it separately. So, they would be long $100 with slightly lower funding and short say $100 with 10% cost of borrow. They would have no net exposure but be paying funding on their long and stock borrow on their short. It makes no sense. Changing the long or short amount around changes their net exposure but still costs them more money than just an outright long or outright short. They should just sell their long and short the net exposure. What you suggest makes no sense.


Please explain how the scam works??