Govt trading ban could have unintended results

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Govt trading ban could have unintended results stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MARCY GORDON and STEVENSON JACOBS | September 19, 2008 05:07 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It

WASHINGTON — The government's unprecedented move Friday to ban people from betting against financial stocks might be a salve for the market's turmoil but could also carry serious unintended consequences.

In a bid to shore up investor confidence in the face of the spiraling market crisis, the Securities and Exchange Commission temporarily banned all short-selling in the shares of 799 financial companies. Short selling is a time-honored method for profiting when a stock drops.

The ban took effect immediately Friday and extends through Oct. 2. The SEC said it might extend the ban _ so that it would last for as many as 30 calendar days in total _ if it deems that necessary.

That window could be enough time to calm the roiling financial markets, with the Bush administration's massive new programs to buy up Wall Street's toxic debt possibly starting to have a salutary effect by then.

The short-selling ban is "kind of a time-out," said John Coffee, a professor of securities law at Columbia University. "In a time of crisis, the dangers of doing too little are far greater than the dangers of doing too much."

But on Wall Street, professional short-sellers said they were being unfairly targeted by the SEC's prohibition. And some analysts warned of possible negative consequences, maintaining that banning short-selling could actually distort _ not stabilize _ edgy markets.

Indeed, hours after the new ban was announced, some of its details appeared to be a work in progress. The SEC said its staff was recommending exemptions from the ban for trades market professionals make to hedge their investments in stock options or futures.

"I don't think it's going to accomplish what they're after," said Jeff Tjornehoj, senior analyst at fund research firm Lipper Inc. Without short sellers, he said, investors will have a harder time gauging the true value of a stock.

Story continues below
advertisement

"Most people want to be in a stock for the long run and want to see prices go up. Short sellers are useful for throwing water in their face and saying, `Oh yeah? Think about this,'" Tjornehoj said. As a result, restricting the practice could inflate the value of some stocks, opening the door for a big downward correction later.

"Without offering a flip-side to the price-discovery mechanism, I think there's a pressure built up in stock prices that only gets relieved in a great cataclysm," he said.

Short selling involves borrowing a company's shares, selling them, and then buying them to return them to the lender later, when the stock falls. The short-seller pockets the difference in price.

Although the practice can make markets more efficient and bring in more capital, the government argues that it has widened the scope of the recent financial crisis and contributed to the collapsing values of investment and commercial bank stocks in particular.

Government officials on both sides of the Atlantic have been denouncing hedge funds and other short sellers they say have swarmed over the limp bodies of venerable investment banks and other big companies. New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo likened them to "looters after a hurricane," and his office is investigating a possible conspiracy among short-sellers to spread negative rumors to pound down companies' stock prices.

The turmoil in recent weeks has swallowed some of the most storied names on Wall Street. Three of its five major investment banks _ Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch _ have either gone out of business or been driven into the arms of another bank. Many contend that short-selling played a key role in forcing the collapse of these institutions.

SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, who with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke had met with lawmakers at the Capitol Thursday night, acknowledged that such extraordinary measures would not be necessary in a well-functioning market and said they are only temporary.

Cox said Friday his agency "is committed to using every weapon in its arsenal to combat market manipulation that threatens investors and capital markets." He said the temporary ban "will restore equilibrium to markets."

The SEC also imposed a new requirement, also temporary, for investment managers to publicly report their new short sales of stocks. And the agency eased restrictions on the ability of companies to buy back their own shares, also through Oct. 2, another move aimed at helping restore liquidity to the distressed and volatile market.

Over the summer, the SEC imposed a 30-day emergency ban on "naked" short selling _ where sellers don't actually borrow the shares they sell _ in the stocks of mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and 17 large investment banks. But Friday's ban expanded to all short selling, not just the more aggressive naked variety, and to a much wider universe of companies.

The 799 companies covered by the SEC ban are an A-to-Z of the nation's financial institutions, including the powerhouse investment banks such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley and commercial banks running the gamut from Bank of America Corp. to Cape Fear Bank Corp. SLM Corp., which is known as Sallie Mae and is the biggest U.S. student lender is on the list, as are Charles Schwab Corp., Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and Principal Financial Group Inc.

Washington Mutual Inc., the nation's largest thrift, which has lost billions from subprime mortgage exposure and seen its shares plunge in recent weeks, also is on the SEC list. So is the NYSE Euronext, the biggest stock exchange, and foreign financial companies whose stock is traded on U.S. exchanges, such as Lloyds TSB Group PLC of Britain and China Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

However, investors still have ways to place bearish bets: by trading in options that turn profitable when a stock drops.

Jim Chanos, a prominent short seller and president of a $7 billion hedge fund, Kynikos Associates, called short-selling a "vital investment strategy" and said banning the practice "will not enhance long-term market integrity."

He argued that investment banks' bad bets on risky assets _ not predatory short-sellers _ were the true cause of the steep declines in the stock price of financial firms.

"Far from being the cause of the crisis, many short sellers were warning months and years ago about problems in this area," Chanos said in a statement.

The new SEC ban also touched smaller investors. Two popular funds that specialize in short selling and are traded on stock exchanges _ ProShares' Short Financials and UltraShort Financials _ were temporarily halted Friday due to the ban. Trading resumed later in the day, but ProShares said it has suspended creating new shares in the funds until further notice.

ProShares Chairman Michael Sapir called the ban "extraordinary" and said it remains to be seen whether it has the intended effect of calming the markets.

"I don't think anyone sees the action today as a long-term solution," Sapir said. "It's a way to calm things down, but it isn't consistent with a free and open market."

The SEC's ban came in concert with Britain's Financial Services Authority, which announced a similar ban there Thursday. Some British politicians had claimed that short-selling was partly responsible for HBOS PLC's abrupt takeover by banking rival Lloyds TSB PLC on Thursday. The ban there was met with a similar reaction as the SEC move _ a mix of relief and skepticism.

"Banning short selling is just a part of a solution," said Nic Clarke, banking analyst at Charles Stanley Stockbrokers. "We view this as a side issue. It doesn't stop the underlying reason for the credit crunch and it doesn't get to the heart of the problem."

___

AP Business Writer Emily Flynn Vencat in London contributed to this report. Stevenson Jacobs reported from New York.

WASHINGTON — The government's unprecedented move Friday to ban people from betting against financial stocks might be a salve for the market's turmoil but could also carry serious unintended cons...
WASHINGTON — The government's unprecedented move Friday to ban people from betting against financial stocks might be a salve for the market's turmoil but could also carry serious unintended cons...
Filed by Dave Burdick  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
230
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
- research I'm a Fan of research 274 fans permalink

Let's outlaw the entire futures market.

Is a compulsive obsessive investors time sink. We don't need it.

Lets permanently outlaw Leveraging.

10% or ZERO down to gamble with other gamblers coincidentally, using Share in The Bedrock Companies of our world and country.

Ya think Vegas would let them bet 10 times the chips they have?

With No Chips?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:40 PM on 09/21/2008
- Wingit I'm a Fan of Wingit 8 fans permalink

Short selling to come back Oct 4th. And still there is no reinstatement of the uptick rule. In other words they are prepared to make the same mistake all over again. Doesn't anyone understand that the uptick rule prevents the vultures from piling on when a stock reveals bad news? As it stands now, for example, if WAMU says it can't come up with a buyer the short sellers will immediately jump in with short sales. If the uptick rule was in effect, their order would not even be processed until WAMU makes a fraction point gain. In this example that would be a very long time, if at all. That rule keeps the market orderly, but that is the last thing this administration wants. There is profit in the panic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:21 AM on 09/20/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

why stop at banning short selling.

Ban selling altogether. If you are selling stocks you are being unpatriotic !!

ONLY go long on american stocks. short everything else. thats patriotic

---------------- end of sarcasm ----------------

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:22 AM on 09/20/2008

Maybe we can bail ourselves out of this mess my short selling the entire US economy. We'll be out of this in no time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 PM on 09/19/2008

Uh... not much left to sell.... most of our factories have already been moved to China....

The US economy has been built on CONSUMPTION - which relied on CREDIT ..... we don't report Gross National PRODUCT anymore - We report Gross Domestic CONSUMPTIO­N....

lots of luck selling 'consumption' to foreign bond holders as 'collateral'

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:42 AM on 09/20/2008
- Gary47 I'm a Fan of Gary47 15 fans permalink

Great! After the short-sellers made off with tanker-loads of cash and the taxpayer's are called on to cover for it. Now, it's banned. Thanks guys.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 PM on 09/19/2008
- cfreedom I'm a Fan of cfreedom 3 fans permalink

Shorts are simply the other side of the story.

Generally a bull here, but you can't make a market without short sellers. They don't drive stocks down any more than longs drive them up (see today's action), and as for shenanigans and rumors and the like, that happens on both sides.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:51 PM on 09/19/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

longs are just as likely to start rumours as shorts are. no argument there.

But shorts have to do more due diligence than the longs (just by virtue of the nature of the transaction) than a long. i am generalizing here but a short has to know more and be more sure than the long to make that trade.

reason: remember, the upside for a short is limited (stock can only go down to zero) and downside is unlimited (theoretically if they dont cover). so they gotta be more sure than the longs

shorts work as a whistle blower in the market when there is a bubble forming. but what do i know.

if you believe that this SEC decision was for the benefit of the investors, more power to you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:06 PM on 09/19/2008
- KBAR I'm a Fan of KBAR 28 fans permalink
photo

Do short sellers have to wait for an UP Tick before the trade is executed?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 PM on 09/19/2008
- AllenD I'm a Fan of AllenD 36 fans permalink
photo

I agree. It is ironic that the part of the market that is most responsible for short selling (the brokerage houses, financial institutions and hedge funds they control) are the runs crying for help. Where was the outrage against short sellers when the airlines, home builders, auto makers, tech and other stocks were getting hammered?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 PM on 09/19/2008

I don't know where you live or what you've been smokin, but the shot sellers and the longs ALWAYS DRIVE the stock today. ALWAYS! THEY RUN THEM UP AND DOWN AT THEIR WHIM. they got BS for a song!
What is a derivative? Can you spell it or explain it? If you can't explain it, why do we need it? What Harvard Economist came up with it? Alan Greenspan? What about all those pooled and wrapped in foil, and sold and resold around the world, Mortgages?
Why should someone be allowed to short or long a stock on margin? That's betting with imaginery money! Why bet the market? Why should a person put their life savings into Off Track Betting called the Stock Market? What is the market when this kind of Betting supercedes industry, or supply demand theory? Is that a true model anyway? Ask your nearest Indian managed and run Casino! They will give you better odds. This is not Free trade, this is free Market theory unchecked by LAW.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:44 PM on 09/19/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

if you think derivative is a product of today, you are so mistaken. the roots of derivatives go back to the middle ages my friend.

Farmers would sell forward contracts on their crops in annual fairs for next year during the middle ages. i could go on more, but this topic has been beaten to death.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:20 AM on 09/20/2008

As you can see from above I don't know what I am talking about. But I know enough to know that with all their fancy degrees and cool as cucumber airs, the suits on Wall Street were nothing more then a bunch of shills by the end of the day. I don't want to pay for their houses in the Hamptons and the private schools for their kids, but if I don't we will roll over into a Depression that will make 1929 look like a day in the park.
They cannot get away without being prosecuted for this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:33 PM on 09/20/2008
- marbou888 I'm a Fan of marbou888 3 fans permalink

Well Pupster, you seem to know a lot, so don't you agree that if someone sells short, he then hopes that that share value goes down? And if the price of that share does not go down, a little rumor starting about the balance sheet of that bank will help get that price down.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:43 PM on 09/19/2008
- marbou888 I'm a Fan of marbou888 3 fans permalink

OK, just read your comment below. Thank you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:51 PM on 09/19/2008
- KBAR I'm a Fan of KBAR 28 fans permalink
photo

Can you say Chuck Schumer?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:38 PM on 09/19/2008
- AllenD I'm a Fan of AllenD 36 fans permalink
photo

Not necessarily. I have held a 10-20% position in exchange traded funds that "short" the different indexes. I have this as a hedge in case the market goes to hell in a handbasket. However, I am long in 80-90% of my portfolio and I don't root for the short position at the expense of my long position.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 PM on 09/19/2008
- CFAmick I'm a Fan of CFAmick 4 fans permalink

Excatly, short selling is a "hedge" against risk. It is an important part of the market, as long as someone owns the physical shares that are being traded.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 AM on 09/20/2008
- AmandaBC I'm a Fan of AmandaBC 584 fans permalink
photo

Ordinary people will go back to putting all their savings in mattresses and under floor tiles... And hopefully they will dump all their credit cards...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:23 PM on 09/19/2008
- Furby I'm a Fan of Furby 66 fans permalink
photo

That's the best place for it BUT once the buck is only worth 20 cents, the mattress money won't get you far.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:01 PM on 09/19/2008
- AmandaBC I'm a Fan of AmandaBC 584 fans permalink
photo

Ordinary people will go back to putting all their savings in mattresses and under floor tiles... And hopefully they will trash all their credit cards...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:22 PM on 09/19/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

it only buys the govt time while they draw a plan to let the banks unload their toxic mortgage debt onto the Fed. hahah. otherwise, when the rules expire, shorts will be on this full force.

you think the tech bubble in 2000 wouldnt have crashed if there were no shorts. if shorts drive something valuable down to unreasonable levels, and the longs felt that the depressed companies were on sale, they would scoop em up. we arent seeing that are we.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:10 PM on 09/19/2008
photo

So, short selling is agreeing to buy a stock and pay later, but you still get control of the stock which you then sell immediately and then hope when you have to pay for the share of stock the price has fallen, or something like that. You "borrow" the shares and then repay the loan at the future stock price, you may win or lose. Naked Shorting is a little harder to grasp, it seems you sell shares you don't even have with a promise to deliver these shares at a later date at which time you buy them, hopefully for less, and then deliver them and of course, keep the difference or actually pony up the overage if the stock price were to rise.
I think I get it, but it's a little hard to explain it here, others I'm sure have explained it better. But, how can this SEC fix do anything for financial companies whose actual values have plummetted from too much accumulated bad debt? This rule change simply excludes a "class" of investors from exploiting a situation, that clearly they had no direct role in creating. It's also a red herring for politicians and establishment banking types to hide behind as they try and wriggle out of this disaster, which in fact THEY created. Typical, I just love the "candidates" posturing out there on this, using this fiasco to try and get votes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:54 PM on 09/19/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

also for people who say that the short didnt put up any money(skin in the game) is not right. the proceeds from the sale is a collateral for the position. You cant use it for anything else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:58 PM on 09/19/2008
- Pupster I'm a Fan of Pupster 12 fans permalink

For most participants (market makers are an exception), when you "borrow" stock you usually have to "pay" for it by putting up collateral, usually cash. There is usually a carry charge as well, the amount to owe to the stock's owner for "interest" (and any dividends, etc.).

Most 'naked' shorts are usually hedged with options or other hedging techniques. Rarely do professionals go 'naked' entirely (especially if they work for a reputable firm) because of risk management issues.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 09/19/2008
photo

So it's a bargaining thing, I would assume the "lender" of stock knows what the borrower is up to and is himself making this bet with the shorter hoping himself to win. This SEC ruling is looking more and more like a symbolic gesture. Besides, most professionals tend to cover their shorts with longs or some other deal, most don't put all their eggs in one basket, unless of course they possess an insiders certainty of the outcome.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:35 PM on 09/19/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

already in the news, SEC is deciding (thinking) of making an exception for the market makers of options in who can short during this period. other than that, the options market are going to be crazy with the one side premium sky high.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:09 PM on 09/19/2008
- iambusto I'm a Fan of iambusto 5 fans permalink

this from Barrons:

The short-selling ban put in place by the Securities & Exchange Commission has massively disrupted the options market, which relies on short selling to reduce the risk of market making.

Also, traders can sidestep the ban by creating what are known as synthetic short stock, or selling a call and buying a deep-in-the-money put that mimics the price action of a short stock.

------------
Also, the action would move to futures market, where you can buy and sell indivudual stock futures.
The companies that complained about the short selling to the SEC just got their crosshairs on them in the options/futures market. :)

what happens when the short selling rules expire and the govt. hasnt still let the banks offload their toxic debt.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 09/19/2008
- Pupster I'm a Fan of Pupster 12 fans permalink

Yes, there are ways to be short by putting together coupled trades, but they've gotten a whole lot more expensive to do. For instance, watch the options spreads expand to prohibitive amounts. The options guys don't want to lose their shirts, you know, and not be able to get out of a position.

The government has just kneecapped the other side of trading for all these longs. It's one of the most destructive moves to encourage a free market. Incredibly stupid because it cause people to doubt the market and the prices. This is not good for capitalism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:00 PM on 09/19/2008
- Furby I'm a Fan of Furby 66 fans permalink
photo

There's only one consolation in all this. Everybody loses, not just the little guy. But that's cold comfort ain't it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:02 PM on 09/19/2008

Short-selling is the most explicit form of gambling that financial markets have become.
Betting on companies future, whether its up or down, has nothing to do with INVESTING.

i hope Obama has enough political guts to reverse it when he's elected.

It will send a lot of "financial advisers" to Vegas to advise on winning strategies at the pocker tables but it will create an environment for putting money in real economy.

Financial system needs to cleanse itself from gamblers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:32 PM on 09/19/2008
- Pupster I'm a Fan of Pupster 12 fans permalink

You have no idea what you're talking about. Shorts are beneficial to the market. Those people "betting" on the market provide liquidity (so you can buy and sell when you want) and moderate the share prices from emotional highs and lows. Do you think it's healthy for a rally of 450 points when the fundamentals of the banks balance sheets haven't changed one iota between yesterday and today?

Why don't you rant against leverage, which is a more appropriate target.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:03 PM on 09/19/2008
- marbou888 I'm a Fan of marbou888 3 fans permalink

Short selling is similar to "pump and dump" except the other way around. It encourages the market to go down because of rumors instead of up because of rumors. I could never understand why PUMP AND DUMP was declared illegal while SHORT SELLING is just fine. As for the bail out measures coming up, it's another plaster on the dam. It will hold until the November elections. After that, all HELL will break loose because subprime mortgages are a BOTTOMLESS PIT.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 PM on 09/19/2008
- Pupster I'm a Fan of Pupster 12 fans permalink

You seriously have no idea what you're talking about.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:28 PM on 09/19/2008
- research I'm a Fan of research 274 fans permalink

that's not an argument.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:37 PM on 09/19/2008
- BlueZoo I'm a Fan of BlueZoo 44 fans permalink

Buy a toaster, get a bank! (said on MSNBC this a.m.) That's about as close to the chaos going on in the Street as you can get!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:04 PM on 09/19/2008
- BlueZoo I'm a Fan of BlueZoo 44 fans permalink

Sorry, I misspoke! It was on CNBC!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:08 PM on 09/19/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect