Once again a series of videos is making the rounds touting how evil short sellers destroyed Bear Stearns. I was asked to comment on this.
The video makes a bunch of assumptions
1. That whoever bought way out of the money Bear Stearns PUTs "knew" something and illegally acted on it.
2. The same institution that bought the PUTs was illegally shorting shares.
3. There is a conspiracy to protect those evil doers.
How The System Really Works
Fact #1: When someone buys PUTs the market maker or counterparty who sold them is short those PUTs. This is a mathematical statement of fact.
Fact #2: The market maker who sold the PUTs, shorts stocks as a hedge against those short PUTs.
Fact #3: The lower the share price, the more shares the market maker has to short to stay delta neutral.
Fact #4: Market Makers are not governed by naked shorting rules
The video alleges that it was the person buying way out of the money PUTs that was doing the shorting. The reality is the market makers who sold PUTs were most likely those doing the allegedly "illegal" naked shorting.
To stay delta neutral, the market makers were forced to short more shares the lower the price dropped. Also remember this happened with every PUT at every strike all the way down, not just on that batch of way out of the money PUTs.
It should not take a genius to figure out how easily this could spiral out of control.
Who Was Shorting?
It was probably Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch or whoever sold the PUTs. Moreover, those market makers probably lost money shorting because of how quickly the stock plunged.
The irony is everyone blames the naked sellers for making a fortune by short selling when the PUT sellers lost more on the PUTs they were short than they gained shorting the shares.
Did Someone Know Something?
The video alleges that someone "knew something". Well someone did know something, and that something is what we all knew: Bear Stearns was not only the most leveraged of the large institutions, but also held the highest concentration of subprime mortgage garbage.
Also other institutions could see or at least feared a run on the bank at Bear Stearns and started pulling money.
Three Reasons To Buy Puts
Someone might have bought those PUTs speculating on a cascade as described above. They probably got a great deal because the seller erroneously…
Pity, because that drug may have been useful to everyone else buying the broader stock market with the hope they won’t eventually suffer the same fate. Yet what is notable is that this information, which hit Business Wire at 7:30 am Eastern, was apparently good enough for someone to make a huge bet on a stock plunge just before the market closed yesterday, at 3:59pm to be specific, and to make almost $21 million on inside information.
Below, you can see the actual trades in MDVN April $40 puts, which amounted to nearly 16,000 in three unique trade blocks of 500, 4750 and 9850, just before the bell rang, at a price of $14/put.
Here is how the volume of this particular put has looked recently.
This class of puts now trades at about $27, meaning a profit of $13 per share, also meaning a total profit of 16,000*$13*100, or about $21 million.
SEC, take it away. Oh wait, we forget that most of your staffers are engaged in not policing this kind of behaviour, but looking at transvestite pornography. Oh well, we tried.
With kind gratitude to @Olivertse who first noticed this now perfectly acceptable market behavior.
You have to love it. If the allegations prove true, it provides further evidence that the banksters cannot contain themselves. Here they get their bacon saved by the TARP (which was way too cheaply priced relative to the risk involved) and a host of hidden subsidies and supports. Yet the employees cannot stand to let an opportunity for personal enrichment go to waste, legal or not.
The Financial Times appears to have broken the story that the Office of the Special Inspector General is investigating reports of insider trading in connection with the TARP. And what makes this probe potentially serious (aside from the brazenness of it) is that the suspects include executives as well as foot soldiers:
Eight of the largest banks in the US received between $2bn and $25bn in October 2008 under a programme to prop up the financial system led by Hank Paulson, then Treasury secretary.
Dozens more institutions followed and Mr Barofsky, who examines the troubled asset relief programme, is looking into whether information improperly made its way to trading rooms during a feverish period in which the government and banks were frequently exchanging information.
“We have pending investigations looking into that – typically into insider trading,” he said. “Once upon a time getting Tarp funds actually meant your stock price would go up and we are looking at specific trading around Tarp announcements by insiders or looking at potential tips from insiders.”
Yves here. With the notable exception of the network surrounding Raj Rajaratnam, nearly all insider trading scandals have involved junior employees as the ones leaking confidential information, usually on corporate mergers. While most M&A deals involve lots of junior level support, knowledge of pending TARP financings at a particular firm would presumably be limited to comparatively few people, and then largely the very top officers… continue here.>>
My belief is the benefits of TARP and the entire alphabet soup of lending facilities was not as stated by Bernnake and Geithner, but rather to shift as much responsibility as quickly as possible on to the backs of taxpayers while trumping up nonsensical benefits of doing so. This was done to bail out the banks at any and all cost to the taxpayers. - Mish
Inquiring minds are reading the SIGTARP Quarterly Report To Congress. The report is a massive 224 pages long. I will do my best to condense it down to the critical highlights involving Fraud, Money Laundering, Insider Trading, etc.
Let’s start with the SIGTARP mission, then the findings.
Mission
SIGTARP’s mission is to advance economic stability by promoting the efficiency and effectiveness of TARP management, through transparency, through coordinated oversight, and through robust enforcement against those, whether inside or outside of Government, who waste, steal or abuse TARP funds.
Let’s dive into the 224 page report and see how well TARP, and the alphabet soup of lending facilities met their stated goals.
On the positive side, there are clear signs that aspects of the financial system are far more stable than they were at the height of the crisis in the fall of 2008. Many large banks have once again been able to raise funds in the capital markets, and some institutions — including some that appeared to be on the verge of collapse — have recovered sufficiently to repay their TARP investments years earlier than most would have predicted. These repayments and the sales of the warrants associated with them have meant that Treasury (and thus the taxpayer) has turned a profit on some of the individual TARP investments; as a result of these repayments, among other positive developments, it now appears that the ultimate cost of TARP to the American taxpayer, while still substantial, might be significantly less than initially estimated.
Mish: The idea that there are "profits" is fictitious. It’s effectively praising making 10 cents on a dollar while not counting hundreds of $billions lost on AIG and Fannie Mae, and ignoring $300 billion worth of loan guarantees at Citigroup still in effect.
Moreover, the only reason banks were able to show a profit and pay back TARP loans is mark-to-market rules were delayed further and banks did not have to bring hundreds…
Details of Obama’s new proposal are still hard to come by but this looks huge.
Sources inside major financial institutions are saying that they are scrambling to see if they will have to spin off operations, change their regulatory status, and perhaps find new business models.
Here’s the AP’s report:
President Obama is calling for tougher regulations on banks that would limit the size and complexity of large financial institutions.
The proposal would also limit banks’ ability to engage in high-risk trades. Restrictions would be placed on proprietary trading by commercial banks to separate those institutions from investment banks.
Obama said Thursday that without these regulations, the financial system will continue to operate under the same rules that led to its near collapse.
The announcement comes as Obama renews his calls for financial regulatory reform, which is being negotiated on Capitol Hill.
Obama’s announcement comes as the White House renewed Obama’s demand that any overhaul of banking regulations contain an independent consumer financial protection agency. The proposed agency is one of the major sticking points in the Senate and the central focus of negotiations between Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee.
"The president is not going to compromise because lobbyists tell somebody that we shouldn’t have an agency that protects consumers," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said. "That’s something the president’s not willing to give up."
The tougher measures to be announced Thursday aim to limit speculation by commercial banks and to keep financial institutions from becoming so big that they pose a risk to the overall economic system.
In focusing attention on Wall Street,however, the administration is also seeking to halt a wave of public anxiety that is benefiting Republicans and undermining Obama’s agenda.
News of the announcement came shortly after Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner had a private dinner Wednesday night with chief executives from some of the top Wall Street banks.
There was also a new urgency in the Senate to move on the legislation — an attempt to respond to voter anger at Wall Street and bank bailouts that helped propel Republican Scott Brown to victory in a contest for the seat formerly held by the late Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy.
Brown’s victory gave Republicans 41 votes in the Senate, enough to mount successful filibusters and prevent Democratic legislation on health care or climate change from getting final votes.
Welcome to Baruch at Ultimi Barbarorum.* In this post, Baruch revisits the alleged, insider trading of 3Com options, casting doubt as to whether the calls were bought by persons with inside information prior to the takeover. More likely, scared shorts were trying to hedge their positions. - Ilene
The blogosphere made the catch! The Interweb protects the rest of us from evil doers! The world is ablaze with the news that prior to the 3Com buyout announced by HP last week, there was an unusual amount of volume in the $5 november call in 3Com. We’re all pretty sensitised to insider trading at the moment, and so this looks as clear cut and beautiful a case of evil-doers caught with their hands in the till as we are likely to see in our time on earth. As Tyler Durden puts it:
This is so blatant it is sufficiently stupid that even the SEC will presumably catch the perpetrator. Here’s to hoping the trader ends up being Galleon’s Raj Raj buying options from his E-Trade account while on bail. Of course, we fully expect any prosecution case against the perpetrator to fall apart at the seams courtesy of a completely inept legal team at the SEC and the Justice Department.
Oh really? Before the Zero Hedge folks get the pitchforks out, let’s stop and think a bit. Let us be splitters, and not lumpers, and we might see that would be quite reasonable for the SEC and DoJ not to prosecute anyone at all. Using the principle of Occam’s Razor, they may well tend to conclude that no insider trading took place.
Let’s get technical here. Do forgive Baruch if you get lost (because it may be that you’re not actually all that bright and that’s not his fault). In the case of the unusual volume in the 3Com options, you should know that incredibly unusual volumes in options is not terribly unusual, if you follow me. It is in fact the case that the volume of a particular option resides, as Taleb would have it, in Extremistan. It is subject to many many days of low and limited trading, and very few days of extremely high volume, orders of magnitude above the norm, where most of the total volume traded in the life of the option takes place. This occurs most notably in the…
Tonight we witnessed a watershed event in financial blogging, and it concerns The Case of Who Front-Ran the 3Com Takeover.
By now, the only people out there still trying to use options contracts to profit from inside information are the brain-dead and the citizens of non-extradition countries. As is well known, I am a huge proponent of the financial blogosphere and this evening’s 3Com options bust just gave me goosebumps.
The story is this:
At 4pm, shares of telco equipment company 3Com (COMS) were halted followed by the announcement of an acquisition by Hewlett-Packard at a 40% premium. The financial blogosphere sprang into action, immediately pointing out that today’s trading volume in 3Com’s options was triple its 4-week daily average. Options are the weapon of choice for the inside information crook as they give you the most bang for your buck on a near-term jump in a stock.
OptionMonster.com’s Jon Najarian picked this 3Com options activity up, probably first, and posted the below via Twitter:
(click image to embiggen)
From OptionMonster.com
Najarian’s revelation was immediately followed by separate but equally incisive comments from some of the biggest and most influential market commentators out there. None of this was coordinated by a producer at CNBC nor was it orchestrated by the editorial staff at the Wall Street Journal.
Rather, it was an organic meme that spread around the financial web by means of Twitter, WordPress, Blogspot and Typepad.
The mainstream media picked up on this insider trading angle only AFTER the bloggers nailed it, at least from what I’ve seen based on the times of the articles and posts.
Now we don’t know for sure whether or not illegal activity took place, but if it quacks like a duck…
Congratulations to Jon Najarian of OptionMonster.com, Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge, Andrew Ross Sorkin of DealBook and Karl Denninger of Market-Ticker.
UPDATE: Reader MarketAddict informs me that:
OptionRadar on StockTwits tweeted the unusual call volume during the day today:
3Com’s acquisition by Hewlett Packard for $7.90/share after the close today came as a surprise to many, but not all. Because someone bought 3 times the open interest in November $5 calls and 15 times the open interest of the December calls. In summary: 3,961 Nov $5 calls were purchased today (964 open interest) for $0.65, as were 3,269 December $5 Calls (210 open interest) for $0.85. The profit, assuming the insider action was by one entity, is about $870,000 on the Novembers and $650,000 on the December strikes, for a not too shabby illegal daily P&L of $1.5 million. This is so blatant it is sufficiently stupid that even the SEC will presumably catch the perpetrator. Here’s to hoping the trader ends up being Galleon’s Raj Raj buying options from his E-Trade account while on bail. Of course, we fully expect any prosecution case against the perpetrator to fall apart at the seams courtesy of a completely inept legal team at the SEC and the Justice Department.
The chart below summarizes the trading action in COMS $5 near term calls.
And here one can see what a blazing outlier today’s volume action was in December $5 calls.
h/t ever vigilant momo chaser C-Mac
*****
Zero Hedge later issued the following report on the squidy tentacled Goldman Sachs’ possible involvement.
Following up on our earlier disclosure about potential insider trading in 3Com stock, we have uncovered something interesting. Did Goldman (in)advertently tip off clients that 3Com was potentially in strategic negotiations? 3Com was previously supposed to present at Goldman’s Data Center Techtonics Conference today at the Sheraton Hotel in New York(Agenda below). In a limited distribution note, Goldman yesterday advised selected clients that 3Com had withdrawn at the last minute from the Conference. As those in the industry are well aware, any last minute switches of this kind are indicative of imminent good or bad news dissemination, and more often than not are associated with some strategic announcement.
While the person buying the calls (if indeed this was not a calendar spread) may have been provoked to do so as a hedge against anything crazy out of the firm, it…
It happened almost every earnings season. Our hedge fund would own a million shares in some company and two weeks before it was to report quarterly earnings, its stock would start dropping. There was no news to explain it. We were in the dark, even though it was my job to know. Inevitably, the company would report a disappointing quarter, missing Wall Street’s earnings expectations by a penny or two. Someone knew. A salesman’s brother-in-law heard a few deals didn’t close. Or maybe an insider was singing.
The recent arrest of Galleon Group hedge fund’s Raj Rajaratnam on insider trading charges puts a spotlight on this game. Is trading on industry knowledge widespread? Absolutely. That’s how many hedge funds and mutual funds get an edge. Is insider trading also widespread? Only the Securities and Exchange Committee’s wire-tappers know for sure.
It’s a short walk from running an information network to being an insider.
Stock markets trade on information. Millions of people generate billions of trades every day. Each trade contains a tiny piece of information built into it. ("I think Apple is killing Nokia" or "I think GM is toast.") Eventually we are proved right or wrong, and we make money or we don’t. In the long run, the market is always right. On any given day, your guess is as good as mine.
As long there have been markets, there have been those who have tried to get an edge. Whoever could get the first news from a battlefield, of an oil discovery, or figure out that a company’s earnings were better than anyone expected could reap almost instant profits. Edward Calahan invented the stock ticker (later improved by Thomas Edison and Alfred Vail) just so J.P. Morgan could sit in midtown and get stock quotes from the New York Stock Exchange faster than anyone else. Everyone else had to wait for the Dow Jones Customers’ Afternoon Letter with closing prices.
Now it has come to the point where firms are spending millions and putting wicked fast computer servers next to exchanges so they can have an edge and, through a system of high-speed or "flash" trading, figure out which way individual stocks or the markets are heading before anyone else.
Can individual investors compete? Many just buy the whole market with index funds or ETFs, but these investors end up owning all the…
Small Caps and Tech continued their good form. Technicals continue to support the move higher for Small Caps (Russell 2000) with new highs for the MACD and +DI line. The Russell 2000 would have to give up 25 points (or 4%) just to test breakout support at 650.
The prior underperformance of the semiconductors was undone with today's 2% gain.
Here is our latest update on the stock trading technique called 'Buying Dividends'. This is the process of buying stocks before the ex dividend date and selling the stock shortly after the ex date at about the same price, yet still being entitled to the dividend. This technique generally works only in bull markets. In flat or choppy markets, your have to be extremely careful.
In order to be entitled to the dividend, you have to buy the stock before the ex-dividend date, and you can't sell the stock until after the ex date. The actual dividend may not be paid for another few weeks. WallStreetNewsNetwork.com has compiled a ...
Yesterday was a pretty rough day for us. Both of our picks were pretty weak. The Buy Pick of the Day was the Direxion Oil Bear ETF (ERY). We got involved in the early going at 10.47 and saw it d...
EEM - iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF – A contrarian options trader established a large-volume bearish put butterfly spread in the June contract this afternoon even though shares of the emerging markets exchange-traded fund, which looks for investment results that correlate to the price and yield performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets index (an index designed by MSCI as an equity benchmark for international stock performance), are trading 0.65% higher to $41.47 as of 2:30 pm (ET). The massive pessimistic play yields maximum benefits to its owner if shares of the underlying stock plummet more than 15.50% from the current price to $35.00 by June expiration. The investor enacted the butterfly by purchasing 20,000 puts at the June $31 strike for a prem...
The recent uptick in stocks has not been met with much enthusiasm by corporate insiders. In fact, pessimism rules the day in the land of insider buying and selling trends. For the week ending February 26th insiders sold a total of $1.88...
Philip R. Davis is a founder Phil's Stock World, a stock and options trading site that teaches the art of options trading to newcomers and devises advanced strategies for expert traders...
Ilene is editor and affiliate program
coordinator for PSW. She manages the Favorites backup site
(blogroll, archives,
more).
Contact Ilene to learn about our affiliate and
content sharing
programs.
del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Yahoo
Facebook
Twitter
German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
Chinese
Philip R. Davis is a founder Phil's Stock World, a stock and options trading site that teaches the art of options trading to newcomers and devises advanced strategies for expert traders...
Ilene is editor and affiliate program
coordinator for PSW. She manages the Favorites backup site
(