yp> [...] common misconception and does not really affect ability of the brokers to locate lenders of the shares [...] most brokers dont' bother with small borrow orders for stocks like PTK [...] so it must be a big customer willing to borrow a large lot.
ca> removing from the available shares will at least make them work harder to find them. If we hadn't, those buy-ins may not have happened
yes, ca that's my theory also. may not be 100%, but every bit helps.
yp, there are 1,641,300 reasons that 'small borrow orders' apparently are worth the bother!
that I know of, there are no exchange rules about what is a 'big customer' with a 'large lot'*
e.g., a person could short sell one (1) share** if they wanted, it still has to be delivered! (or face the buy-in penalty)
the more buy-ins, the greater chance that they will run afoul of UMIR 2.2, and have to deal with the consequences.
eventually, we'll see PTK declared 'pre-borrow' status (ref. section 1.7 of OSC notice 12-0078), and once that happens -- with, by my estimate, nearly two-thirds of the shares tied up by insiders (18%), committed institutions (20%), and true longs (25%) -- it won't be possible to short sell PTK, because its shares can't be pre-borrowed (nearly as easily).
if there's another explanation (than our collective anti-short efforts) for why we now so frequently see buy-in events where before there were none ... I'd really like to hear it.
thanks!
GLAL,
R.
* -- the (retail) client would of course have to have an account type qualified to execute short sells, but that generally just means having a good credit standing and over $25k equity in the account. to most investors, $25k is by no means "large".
** -- well, ok, I suppose 100 shares (board lot) in size, just so it would get a ticker print.
