It's possible at least part of what he did was by disregarding the side effects of tending to the banking system. Perhaps it's an alum of an institution being loyal by training and not realizing who gets hurt as a byproduct. Maybe seniors sticking to CD's and other simple interest products were invisible to him. I'm just brainstorming to reply to your question at the moment.
I've been in CELG on both sides and I'm out of my most recent long now. Though I think CELG has peaked, I probably won't short it this week. There are price hurdles, especially internationally. Though there could be a little more upside, there's more uncertainties about competition and price pressures that aren't been discussed enough yet.
Actually, since there is not expectation, even by the company CEO of any real earnings next year, there is no PE. As the expectation for any GAAP gain and reality of increasing GAAP losses gain ground, there could be more selling by CLL longs. IMHO, recent gains have reduced the number of shares shorted and providing more opportunities for shorting as the stock price recedes (Wall Street jargon for stock prices going down).
RIMM's decline started even before the S&P hit 1400 going up. CRM's decline has just started. RIMM had high institutional ownership until it didn't. It was crazy enough that pumpers pushed CRM up so high. Do you really want to attack CRM bears as CRM begins its decline? I didn't even look into RIMM for shorting until it was in the 119-120 area (abd it went up several more points as Cramer was one of its bulls). I became bearish on CRM too early, compared to where I became bearish on RIMM. CRM is more vulnerable than RIMM, IMHO because RIMM had problems as the market in general was soaring. If soaring is being replaced by anything other than soaring, there could be even extra downward pressure on CRM as there was on RIMM as the rest of the market was bullish. Unless you are being paid handsomely to pump CRM, why waste your time?
Is it going up on low volume and down on heavy volume? It's interesting that they couldn't even get the stock up to 55+ on a Friday when other records were broken to the upside.
Heading east, but will check market. Don't worry about pumps. ROST was an insistent pump, but that didn't keep it from going down. Guess who recommended it?
CRM didn't get to 60 when there were higher expectations than the GAAP losses and disappointing revenues that were reported on Monday afternoon. This bounce may be in the expectation of a bounce upt 55, but even that is questionable and won't last even if it happens. The two heaviest days of this week were down and today's bounce was on less than half the volume of the down days. I don't expect an intelligent reply from tmyers28, but this will be understood by benchmarkvit and others.
It would be a surprise tomorrow if CRM dropped to or below 53, but that type of drop will occur soon after tomorrow.
Lower volume accompanied bounce. On every bounce, there's likely to be institutional selling.
Leave the sorority remark out and you may have people agreeing with you.
Don't bother posting incorrect percentages. Intelligent people do the math and know that the listed percentage of shares shorted is incorrect. When the incorrect percentage is repeated over many months, it could make people wonder what's going on.
Yes, it's been discussed here on and off for months that those numbers that appear on the Yahoo Finance site are incorrect. We have discussed it here yesterday and today. Are those who want to convince others that the numbers are correct, when they aren't trying to fool holders and potential buyers. As CRM increases the number of shares (dilution) the percentage of shares shorted becomes smaller.
In August, Guy Adami on Fast Money referred to the high short interest for CRM. Does that mean he didn't do the math? If so, does that question even more what is presented on t.v., etc.?
I don't have a position either way in BA now, but it's tempting to short because Cramer praised BA stock two days ago after bashing it at the low of the year. a few months ago.
That has nothing to do with the ticker.
Though I don't want to go beyond calling it a math error, the fact that the error has not been changed despite it being called out for over 6 months, makes one wonder if the wrong number is there accidentally. There is no doubt that the figure on the Yahoo Finance site is wrong. The math is simple and has been mentioned numerous times by different people on this site.
If CRM isn't around in 2015, it could mean it has imploded. Some mentioned that Enron could be taken over, not long before it began to implode.
I read the article, which arrived in my inbox. I need to leave the computer now, but if there is a discussion, I'll read it later.
It's clear (by simple math that the % short is about 10%). The figure you posted has not been altered over the half year or so that I have posted comments and others have also acknowledged the egregious error.
When the stock had a 4 to 1 split it appeared that either there was carelessness in not doing the math with the new number of shares in the float. After this has been called to the attention on Yahoo Finance several times, it's possible it's either by carelessness or intentional for other reasons.
That may have enabled some short squeezes in the past, but is old garbage now. It's hard to believe that anyone wouldn't do the math or that anyone would deliberately mislead others.
While you may admire the charity of MB when he insists his company can do a major project for the Federal government at no charge, but it's the money and charity of public longs he's offering. CRM insiders would likely consider to receive "equity awards" and stock can be diluted more in order to issue more shares for insiders, who can then sell at market prices.
That recent, public appearance of MB communicates even more that the corporate culture is not in line with the interests of longs..
Regardless of all the pr, whether paid for or not, CEO MB gave an image that undoes much of it. In his animated way he repeated an offer to work for free. That would mean not only giving time, but not getting any revenues for a large endeavor. The image is that MB wants personal fame and appreciation at the huge expense of no revenues for that job. CRM already hasn't made it to have even 1 cent per share of GAAP earnings despite being 13 years older than a start-up. The message I got from his offer of working for nothing (for stockholders while he could dilute the value of each share in order to pay himself and top executives) portrays a disregard for future earnings and for shareholders (other than insiders')
That view of his inner motivation was on t.v. as he said it and at least one other time. Was that the image of a bombastic CEO seeking more "in your face" recognition? Was it also a message that any future earnings aren't a major concern of the CEO?
Will this bounce be sold on higher volume? Will stock bounce closer to price a few days ago before selling off?
It's not about where it closes today. It's about where it will start regular hours trading tomorrow and where it will be by mid day Wednesday, etc..
Someone who posts lies after being corrected numerous times has severe problems or doing his/her job. Many times and to many user names and numbers in a previous year didn't you read the statements that a larger amount of stock shorted around 130 (pre-split) and the much smaller amount of stock shorted at 117 were covered together at 121, as posted then and numerous times.