But you see, I didn't say that they were wrong or right. I merely was pointing out the fact that they put in their disclaimer that they did in fact have short positions on GE prior to publication.
You didn’t “merely point it out”, you described it as “hilarious”. This implies that you view the disclosure as some sort of evidence of impropriety, as if you discovered what game they were truly playing or something.
As others have told you, this is standard practice for short sellers, and the financial industry as a whole.
What would you rather them do? Simply claim that GE is a fraud without having any stake in GE, long or short? Don’t you lend their claim more weight given that they’ve taken a financial position based on their belief? I would think that would be a more rational view.
As others have told you, this is standard practice for short sellers, and the financial industry as a whole.
What would you rather them do? Simply claim that GE is a fraud without having any stake in GE, long or short? Don’t you lend their claim more weight given that they’ve taken a financial position based on their belief? I would think that would be a more rational view.