I looked at the volume to see where the possible start was to this short. Volume was low most of this June period. It had spiked on May 31 for no reason. Settled back down but was higher on several days. I figure that the average share price sold would have been around $19.75 based upon these higher volume days, 25 cents below the buyout price. At no time during this period, did the price rise above $19.86. If the buyout would have continued, there was no reason that I can think of to short at $19.75. I figure that they did short on May 31 and the time period afterwards while others were covering. Whoever that was could have shorted over 1.5 million shares or more above those who covered. If the buyout would have succeeded at $20, they could have lost has much as $400,000 to cover all costs, and even greater if there was a higher offer in the remaining go shop period. The buyout had to fail for them to gain on this short. Otherwise they would incur a loss since the price would certainly rise as the time to the buyout shortened.
The short's whistleblower to the U.S. Attorney General had to have told the short that the letter was being written and would soon be on its way (prior to May 31?). Their whistleblower has ties to the SEC, IRS, FBI, Department of Justice, and it looks like now to be at least one U.S. Attorney General's office.
Otherwise, does anyone here have an idea why anyone would short a buyout below the buyout price? I could see a short doing it above the buyout price but never below the buyout price unless they were very sure that the buyout would fail. If they used information obtained from the U.S. Attorney's office that would be illegal insider information. If they whistleblowed to manipulate a stocks price, again this would be illegal stock manipulation if falsely accused, it is intent to do harm and others have gone to jail for the same.
Its anyones guess what happened. It could be news about the SEC probe of Apple's taxes which resulted in little change in reporting. It could be news that the lawsuit in Georgia could be dismissed soon. It could be probes by government authorities into the activity of shorts. It could be that the cost for shorting Ebix has increased. It could be that shorts found better opportunity elsewhere. It could be a new buyer. Any number of things or combination.
What I do find interesting is the lack of coverage of Gotham City Research's last hit piece, "New Problems Emerge In Singapore, Sweden And India". There was Seeking Alpha's publication of the article and no other major coverage. No Greg Farrell and Bloomberg back-up article, just a half dozen minor blog sites picking it up. What caused Greg Farrell's sudden lack of interest?
Ruling on the second Ebix filing requesting that the class action case be dismissed based on the recent Meyer decision coming? I've been expecting it for some time now. The case has nothing to keep it going; it should have been dismissed on the first request. Some on the internet say that this appointed judge doesn't know law. Ebix argument was done 8/21/2013; the ruling should be coming soon.
People either don't think that your jokes are funny or don't get them. Or longs don't like being called sheep. Try again with a better punch line. I'll give you a thumbs up for effort.
I had a feeling that the money laundry story could have been Greg Farrell's last Ebix hit piece. Either Bloomberg pulled the plug or Greg got cold feet to write more. At least I hope so. Bloomberg gives these hit pieces more credibility than Mr Yu can give.
It's all about who blinks first. I don't blink when I feel that I am right. The longer the wait, the less likely anything important was found. The SEC has had information by subpeona for nearly 10 months. More than enough time to take action.
It's about intent. It was not Mr Yu's intent to publish opinion but to do harm to the company and Mr Raina. In his blog he wrote about writing anonymous articles to create problems for any company that he or anyone for that matter intended to short. These problems included disrupting normal operations and hurting business prospects and making every effort to include government agencies. This article in his blog is dated well before he even created Gotham City. Publishing opinion isn't illegal, but intent to do harm for profit is illegal. Especially the intentional use of false accusations. When the SEC hasn't proceeded with actions against Ebix after 2 subpeanaes and almost 10 months with their collected records shows to me that they have found nothing to very little. The short's organizations whisteblowers were beating on the SEC doors with their accusations until they got those subpeanaes. Then they turned to the FBI and beat on their door. It's sufficient evidence for the SEC to investigate this organized short and procecute for doing intentional harm for profit. I also believe that the shares have been too hard to borrow to get to this point without somehow manipulating the rules for naked shorting. That would be illegal too.
I guess that I should have warned people that I thought that it was coming soon. Marc Cohodes and Sam Antar have been making fun of Mr Raina again, a sign to me that they had something up their sleeve once more. And I saw this that Gotham posted at 8:12am September 17:
Gotham City Research@GothamResearch17 Sep
We will be releasing an exposé on a company whose financial statements are materially incorrect, and whose shares we believe are worthless.
I surmised that another attack was probable on Ebix and not some other company. I got sidetracked and didn't investigate further. Sorry that I didn't post so that it would not have been a surprise, but at least no long term damage from the attack so far. And oh yes, these guys do read this message board and others. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them is posting here too.
I really liked this tweet, he's gained a lot of respect:
Gotham City Research@GothamResearch17 Sep
The threatening e-mails , and attempts to hack into the account are all cute. Thanks!