|
|
|
|
|
by breatheoften
1969 days ago
|
|
Interesting I suppose I didn't realize the exact definition of "naked" -- I was regarding "not naked" a bit more abstractly as "protected from inability to purchase the share when required" with "naked" implying that you did not have that protection ... To me the deviation from the abstract definition above almost Seems like a bug in the "borrow checker" ... I'm not totally clear on why the system is designed allow the same stock to be "loaned" multiple times in this manner ... Why is this (not particularly sound) definition of "borrow" desirable ...? I suppose this scheme has the effect of making assets appear more liquid than they might actually be -- but -- why is that good? Doesn't it seem like there's a kind of bias introduced by this "illusion of more liquidity". Saying this mechanism "increases liquidity" feels almost like putting grease on a slope and saying "the slope is steeper" ... |
|