Follow-Up NY Times Article

Also, with the large open put options, the market makers that sold them are forced to short the stock to hedge themselves against the puts they sold going in the money if they are not appropriately hedged. Many may have thought they were more in the clear yesterday, but the additional story on OPEX friday definitely adds more fuel to the fire.

As a side note, machines can trade on fundamentals too, and almost every fundamental trader uses some form of technicals whether they realize it or not. All are perfectly rational ways to invest (or trade, whatever your timeframe is). They are just different tools, and different blends of each suit people and trading strategies differently. But it does help to be aware of how the other players play.

Now, if only the markets disallowed the HFT frontrunning like the fantasy sports sites are starting to do…

Folks trading on fundamental analysis face a tough row to hoe

I guess I see it differently. If you mean literally trade, like short term, then maybe. But I think it’s exactly all of the volatility and craziness with respect to the fundamentals that gives us our ability to outperform. What’s going on with BOFI right this moment is a perfect example: assuming you believe all is okay with the business, it can now be bought for 40% less than a week ago. That’s a huge boon to long-term investors who are willing to ride out this bout of volatility. Short-term pain leads to long-term gain :wink:

So while I’ll never understand the short-term craziness, I think it makes long-term success for us much easier than it otherwise would be, not harder, because it results in such amazing long-term opportunities being offered.

Just my 2 cents, of course!

Neil

15 Likes

Neil:

“Remember, options expire today, and the short sellers have a lot of them. They have enormous financial incentive to do everything possible to push down the price today to make sure their options are as profitable as they can be.”

I am pretty green to options and I learned a bit. Can you explain to me how this would drive down the stock price and so much?

I don’t see any news today (aside from that follow up article) regarding BOFI. It not only unsettling but strange that this stock price drop rebound and drop again like this.

What do you do when you see this kind of movement? you wait for news or you move out?

tj

1 Like

Hi tj,

Can you explain to me how this would drive down the stock price and so much?

I can’t claim to know exactly what the short sellers are doing, but I’ve seen this exact kind of behavior happen on other stocks I’ve owned that were targeted by short sellers. Sometimes they’re successful, sometimes they’re not.

Basically, they buy a lot of options that become more valuable as the share price drops. Options for a given month expire on the 3rd friday of the month (which is today for October options). They target small companies where the volume they’re able to generate will be enough to move the share price. Then they begin releasing articles that insinuate bad things are happening, usually picking some very obscure aspect of the company where it’ll be very hard to disprove their allegations. They especially like financial companies, because they are naturally a bit opaque anyway.

They will release multiple articles, under multiple names. They’ll tell their story to anyone who will listen, always looking for a gullible reporter at a mainstream publication. For one of my other companies, they got Barron’s to publish their article. In this case, it’s some guy at the NYT that fell for it. Once those guys publish their first article, their reputation is on the line and they become “invested” in being right (if they don’t actually have money on the line). So they continue to give the short sellers the benefit of the doubt, telling their story in follow-up articles.

These articles are often timed to be released just before options expire, looking to drive down the prices. Then they’ll pile on and sell shares (my guess is they accumulate them ahead of time, knowing that a short-sale restriction will go into place), intentionally setting lower and lower prices with each small sale to move the bid/ask down and down. That attracts momentum traders, who begin jumping in (they don’t care at all about the business, but just picking up a few bucks as the stock keeps moving) and driving it down more. As it drops enough, people begin getting scared and selling too, driving the price down lower and lower, and it eventually becomes self-fulfilling: people assume the market “knows something” and begin panic selling, driving the price down even further, causing more people to panic. All of this plays right into the hands of the short sellers.

I would speculate that the short sellers made two big runs of it this week. I think the first, they shorted a lot of shares and purchased a lot of options that would otherwise have been considered long shots, and so were extremely cheap, but would appreciate massively in value on a large drop in the stock. I think they did this in preparation for the filing of the lawsuit and the NYT piece, and made a huge amount of money on Wednesday. Then I would guess they covered their short positions and began buying shares on Thursday, helping with the big pop we saw, so that they could become sellers today and help drive the price way down again – maybe they even bought more options yesterday (I don’t know and haven’t looked). They will almost always try to get a negative piece published on the day their options expire, ideally with a major outlet (like NYT today), otherwise at least on SeekingAlpha or somewhere else they can make some noise, frighten people, and bait the momentum traders.

They’ll usually make multiple attempts at it over time. Sometimes investors become wise to what’s going on and further attempts are less and less effective (that ultimately happened with the other company I owned): but sometimes, after hearing enough allegations over and over again, investors begin to become nervous and eventually capitulate (“where there’s smoke there’s fire” mentality, though in this case I think it’s noise, not smoke). Others simply aren’t comfortable with the volatility and will sell. Regardless of the reasons, it’s all beneficial for the short sellers, and they’ll continue to make attack after attack over time as long as they can make a lot of money from it.

So anyway, that’s how I view today’s events. I don’t think it had anything to do with a bunch of very rational investors suddenly deciding the allegations were true: I think the short sellers were simply very good and very determined, and had another very successful day.

My hope is that the negative pressure will ease off a bit now that the options have expired, and we’ll see a bit of a rebound over the coming weeks. But who knows: some people who otherwise were buyers will now simply avoid the stock and move on to something else, so it may take time.

Again, this is all just my opinion, and much of it is pure speculation. It’s just how I tend to connect the dots that I’ve seen play out time and time again with companies I own that have been targeted.

I bought more today at $100.78, right before the close, when I figured they’d be making their final push. That’s just me, though. Please come to your own conclusions.

Neil
Long BOFI

45 Likes

Neil:

that’s an interesting game that most cannot play. Could that be illegal?

To recap- tell me if that s right:
they bought PUTs when the price was higher and shorted the stock at the same time. They synch up their short with the PUT expiration to get the max profit from their PUTs (no more time value).

From where could they borrow enough stocks to short to trigger such a move in the price (they do not move it all by this single action but triggers others to sell)?
usually who can lend short sellers stocks? Would for example my online brokerage firm be able to take my BOFI shares and lend them to the short sellers? can I say no you cannot?

There are some stocks that cannot be borrowed hence shorted. Why wouldn’t small companies like BOFI not be able to make their stock un-borrow-able?

tj

“Please come to your own conclusions.”

No thanks Neil. I’ll use yours. They are much better than mine. I wasn’t watching the market today and didn’t notice BOFI going down. However, I could use a few more shares. It was 7:50pm when I finished reading your writings. I checked the charts and bought the last 100 shares offered at 100.87 before 8PM market closing. Thank you. Rob.

1 Like

Neil: that may just be noise but wanted to ask your opinion about the following from Cramer:

"BofI Holding: “You have to understand the way I work. I leave here, I see the stock down $40, I try to do profiles. I read things, I try to figure it out. And I have to tell you the other day I had no idea. So I would be a fool to tell you it’s a buy or a sell. Because I could not understand a word about why it was down $40 or up $20. That’s no-go for me.”

My idea of Cramer is that he is a pretty good trader. Why do you think he didn’t have his own little theory about what has happened to BOFI stock price these past days?

tj

tj, it’s just my opinion. FWIW, Cramer used to do the same thing when he ran a hedge fund. Here’s an interview with him where he talks about it:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GOS8QgAQO-k

Neil

11 Likes

Why do you think he didn’t have his own little theory about what has happened to BOFI stock price these past days?

Because he’s not as knowledgeable/clever as he thinks he is?

2 Likes

“Please come to your own conclusions.”

No thanks Neil. I’ll use yours

Rob, Saul has posted that he liquidated the bulk of his position today, and he’s a much, much better investor than I am, and has a talent for sniffing out trouble to boot.

I wouldn’t recommend that anybody use my conclusions without doing their own analysis and very carefully considering the risks. I could be terribly wrong about what’s going on, and even if I’m right and BOFI eventually goes on to do well, Saul has pointed out many times that it doesn’t matter what the stocks you sold do as long as you’re happy with the performance of the stocks you own.

It’s very easy to get attached to stocks you own, which can make it hard to recognize the investment as a mistake. Saul is very good at spotting and ruthlessly correcting his mistakes, and I personally believe that’s a big part of his outperformance. I’m pretty muleheaded, on the other hand, and would like to see some real evidence of wrongdoing in this case. I’ve been through this before, and have seen how the shorts can throw their weight around, and this looks suspiciously familiar to me (as I posted). But that doesn’t mean it’s a good investment decision: I could be very wrong, and things could go very south from here, and there may be other perfectly good places for your capital. Nobody should stay invested just because I am. Please, do come to you own conclusions.

This is going to be my last post about BOFI for a while.

Neil

9 Likes

That’s just the way it is. That’s why I choose the stocks I wish to own based on the financial metrics, but why I study charts carefully (technical analysis) to determine entry/exit points.

Machine trades don’t do fundamental analysis. They’re focused on the technicals. The distinction is important to know/understand.

Amen. The market reminds me of the old multi-purpose stadiums that used to host a football game one day and a baseball game the next. Except in today’s markets, the two games are being played at the same time, using the same ball.

1 Like

WHOA!!! Mind-blowing Cramer link.

tj, it’s just my opinion. FWIW, Cramer used to do the same thing when he ran a hedge fund. Here’s an interview with him where he talks about it:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GOS8QgAQO-k

Neil

Thanks for posting this link, Neil! I have heard people describe this process and always believed it does happen, but never knew how much that kind of attack could really move the market. He mentions using a measily $5M to $20M just for the purposes of moving the stock price and at the very end says you can get a good 1% to 2% move using this technique. We’ve had daily 20% moves which shows a lack of commitment to BOFI by a much larger portion of the market. This second drop also shows a complete lack of trust for the CEO. I sold 90% of my position when the drop broke 113 because if the market had confidence in BOFI it wouldn’t have broken that support level set early in the morning. I completely agree with your view as the timing of this lawsuit is EXACTLY as stated in that 5 year old Cramer video. He said he must control the market in the last 6 days before the option expiration. I’m still Long on BOFI until it is proven to not have the earnings growth, but want to let the market get it’s fear out before the next earnings announcement. Since CEO already preannounced the great quarter though it may not make a difference to the market. Shows how much TRUST in the CEO matters.

2 Likes

This second drop also shows a complete lack of trust for the CEO. I sold 90% of my position when the drop broke 113 because if the market had confidence in BOF

Not necessarily, at all. As Neil mentioned in an earlier thread, Friday was option expiration and you can get artificial movements as the expiration cliff approaches.

If you do some research into Option Pinning, you can find plenty of articles explaining the phenomenon. It is usually more precise when there is a preponderance of Calls, and in the case of BOFI, the Put open interest was about 10x, with 2xxx at 105 and 1xxx at 100. So a close at 100 and change is entirely consistent with Pinning, as well as with a structured short attack.

Absent any new news, consistent behavior on Monday morning would be a Pop up, probably to north of 105.

For now, I am putting this down to a short attack, aided by a disgruntled former employee. It reminds me a lot more of AFSI than EBIX.

Looking forward to earnings, and quite happy for the volatility to stick around for a few months to generate some options income.

Cham

7 Likes

Of course, it could be options pinning and nothing more than a good ole bear attack, which is what I suspect. But is everyone ruling out the possibility of these stories and investigations having real substance?

Not many bear attacks have insiders or regulatory agencies involved. This one seems to have both, with auditors being fired or chased out of the company. NYT is probably a puppet in this case, but they have a large readership. Coordinating an options pinning at that level is significantly more involved than running a hit piece on Seeking Alpha.

Yesterday’s volume was almost 4x the average. The volume on Thursday was almost 2x Friday’s volume, and the volume Wednesday at 5 million shares is 12x the average. The good news in that volume pattern is the selling pressure seems to be running out of steam.

I’ll have to see how the market reacts Monday morning, this may be setting up for a nice 10% pop next week if you have the stomach for it.

-----
Invest wisely my friends
CMFSoloFool
Ticker Guide: NTGR and OTEX

1 Like

One could look at this as a simple one of odds.

Short attacks are fairly easy to arrange for a pro (or usually several acting in concert) all it takes is some skill, some partners, and news source. The news source can be just stupid, gullible ,or bribed, or writing everything through a thick filter of ideology. let’s face it ,reporters are not know for digging very deep into issues, they have neither the time nor the inclination.

The more prestigious the news source the better. NYT is nearly perfect with great distribution, and read by almost all in the market, especially those influential investment bankers and analysts in New York City. It really doesn’t matter that the media outlet has long since lost objectivity, perception is everything.

Somebody can make a lot of money in a short attack .Which apparently is legal even if it is all a pack of lies. Even price manipulation by big money interests is legal. But then it is not a small investors that are making all those fat donations to politicians.
The golden rule- He who has the gold makes the rules.

What percentage of these short attacks turn out to be true? What percentage turn out to be false? How many are launched after the stock has had a big run up and therefore has lots of stockholders uneasily sitting on big profits. or lots of option holders near expiration?.

I wish I had some firm statistics on this. I don’t. But experience has taught me to be wary of events like this , events that seem very staged. Most are phony, a few are real.

There is no way for an outsider to know the truth at this point.

Banks are one of the most obscure investments around, annual reports tell very little, the real value of their loans is unknown. So I certainly can’t disagree with Saul decision to sell, he is very good at getting out quickly. The odor from this attack will remain behind for quite a while , so even if BOFI turns out to be legit, the “magic” is gone . So the stock price growth will be restrained even if earnings go up.

I am unconcerned if the CEO does not seem to be a nice guy. We all know where nice guys are supposed to finish. But the company may have outgrown him. Some executives are good only in a small company, as it gets bigger they need more process.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/09/02/why-im-taki…
reasons to avoid BOFI

Chart wise BOFI is back to testing the fat even number 100 support level. Will it hold? My guess is yes. The shorts seldom overstay. But it is not a guess that I would bet much money on.

I am still trying to figure out why I ignored my rule to never invest in banks. Even if all but one of my purchases was below $101.

7 Likes

“This second drop also shows a complete lack of trust for the CEO. I sold 90% of my position when the drop broke 113 because if the market had confidence in BOFI it wouldn’t have broken that support level set early in the morning.”

Isn’t that move just playing in the hands of short sellers? I read Saul also liquidated the bulk of his position. Again isn’t that what the short sellers want?

What new information or observation is causing this (almost) 180deg.c turn in view in such a short time? Didn’t you think that:’ I am satisfied with what the CEO said-albeit I didn’t like so much the way he came out to say it’. If that last bit really is the reason then wouldn’t you have sold on Thursday?
No. You sold on Friday because you see another big move down and you are thinking that the people who sold knows something which you don’t. They do not know something you don’t.

When someone say that someone has intuition about these things. What does that mean? Intuition is pattern recognition.
So what pattern triggered the sell action? Others selling. What else is there? We all have the same information, don’t we?

So we are back to the flock of birds. A few get spooked by some random noise and the entire flock is flying off.

Sure we all can be wrong about these things because we do not really know what the market would do next about this stock in the short term, and we do not know how the business will turn out in the longer term future.

But if we invest in the business we should feel somewhat comfortable about this business moving forward unless we think the CEO is lying about his business and have made up the numbers all along or for a while.

tj

9 Likes

What new information or observation is causing this (almost) 180deg.c turn in view in such a short time? Didn’t you think that:’ I am satisfied with what the CEO said-albeit I didn’t like so much the way he came out to say it’. If that last bit really is the reason then wouldn’t you have sold on Thursday?

Anybody, even Saul, is allowed to change their mind. It could have been the next NYT article with the unnamed source talking about Mr. Ball’s departure that caused Saul to change his mind. However, let’s remember that Saul had a very large portion of his portfolio in BOFI. Even the slightest whisper of a problem can be reason enough to reduce exposure of such a large position.

If you are going to have such a large position, you had better be rock solid confident in that position.

My position in BOFI is relatively small in comparison (4%). I’m holding pat and may increase my position slightly given the current discount.

Take care all.
A.J.

4 Likes

Isn’t that move just playing in the hands of short sellers? I read Saul also liquidated the bulk of his position. Again isn’t that what the short sellers want?

While it is annoying to know that short sellers can manipulate share price, my ‘job’ is to protect my gains; not fight shorts.

Once the dust settles I can reevaluate reestablishing a position in a company from the safety of the sidelines.

3 Likes

" Isn’t that move just playing in the hands of short sellers? I read Saul also liquidated the bulk of his position. Again isn’t that what the short sellers want?"

If we knew for sure that it was just a short attack then you would be right but given the fact that their is uncertainty as to whether or not this is a short attack vs the uncovering of an issue that could seriously unwind the company exiting or reducing a position is not necessarily playing into their hands but rather doing what you feel is right with the info you have at hand. Some of us feel that there is just too many flags to call this a pure unwarranted short attack.

Unfortunately even if this has no merit the stock will probably not immediately shoot back to $140 and then resume its skyward march to $200, what is more likely is a lot of back and forth with up and down days and so even if it is all fictitious BS it is possible that those exiting will have a chance to rebuild even if it is at slightly higher prices than the current price.

I would rather repurchase at $130 then wake up and find it is $20 because the little twerp was actually a correct little twerp.

To each their own according to their level of comfort.

3 Likes