​
https://preview.redd.it/zjch56hnw04d1.jpg?width=2550&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=98d0733797746125238fc27127d7857d2013550c
Wider than NYC, at 2.5 miles, built in the 1950's by the Royal Family.... This is a photo of my parents home. My mother's name is Arlene, and so also is the shape of the streets inside Philadelphia 19115. It also says, #Orleans if you switch the last two letters, the "NE" in Arlene to "AN" ...as in the #HouseofOrleans. It spans 2 miles, bigger than Central Park and wider than Manhattan, NYC. Starting at Pennypack Park on Pine Rd. at Kingsfield Rd and concluding at Red Line Road. My parents were the inaugural homeowners in the 1960s, the 1st owners.
Within this neighborhood, the streets are named after distinguished military figures from England, spanning various eras from the American Revolution to World War II. Streets like Lockart, Darlington, Welsh, and Clinton allude to espionage and historical military significance.
British Commander-in-Chief during the #Revolution Clinton Rd 19006 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Clinton_(British_Army_officer,_born_1730))
Lockhart Rd & Place 19115 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Lockhart
Darlington Rd. 19115 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Darling
Welsh Rd. 19115 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Welsh_(East_India_Company_officer)) - - or - - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunt_Walsh
Grant Ave 19115 - There's Ulysses S. Grant, and then the British have 7 different British Military leaders named Grant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Grant_(British_Army_officer)) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Keir_Grant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Grant_(colonial_administrator)) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Grant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hope_Grant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Grant_(19th_century_British_Army_officer)) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Grant_(British_Army_officer,_born_1720))
Contrary to what one might assume, the street name is unrelated to Ulysses S. Grant and instead commemorates British military leaders.
In the 1950's Grant Ave. was named and mostly completed, as prior it had many different names. Frankford Ave. aka The King's Highway was built by #King George II from 1682 to the late 1790's. http://kingshighwayfilm.com - Those dates were all before The American #Revolution and Civil War, so regardless of the construction date of Grant Ave, I would still say the name Grant Ave. has absolutely nothing at all to do with Ulysses S. Grant.
We also have Portis Rd. which is a combination of 2 words = La Porte + Paris = Portis - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnaud_II_de_La_Porte - La Porte was named Intendant of the Civil List (Minister of the Royal Household) in December 1790 which gave him direct control of the large sums of #money that were considered the private wealth of the King of France and so not subject to public audit.
Across the street from my home is Durand Road. Durand was the name of the fake ID they gave to the King of France during the #French Revolution when the King of #France and his family tried to escape with Barron Batz. See p24 hosted on the University of Chicago's website: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/ThayeE/GazetteePlaces/Europe/France/_Texts/CROROY/Fuite_de_Varennes*.html - More on Barron Batz can be found in your local library, or here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean,_Baron_de_Batz - Keep in mind, Louis XVI's grandfather Louis XIV had 30 children.
When my parents moved in, the area was all farmlands. Directly across the street from us at 1855 Melmar Road 19006 was the country home of Nicholas Biddle w/ 33 Rooms, & 9 Bathrooms. Though, there was nothing in between us except empty fields, there house was about 1,000 feet away. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Biddle - He was the President of the Second Bank of the United States. It is now called the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. That's where everybody gets there monthly $600 social security checks from... and, there still located here very close to this zip code printing checks for the majority of #America. His original home is still there, but... In the 1980's, they turned his land into a development of multi-million dollar homes now called Biddle Estates.
His brother, married a #Falcone girl, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Biddle_(Michigan_politician)) and members of their family built Drexel University and also Lippincott Medicine, who are book publishers, and also the name of the next street across from me, Lippincott Rd. 19006.
A lot of the homes here go for over 1 million dollars. My house was right there in the middle, on Pine Road at the top the shape of the "L" that looks exactly like the Boston Red Sox logo. We're on the city line, so I'm inside #Philadelphia, but the homes on the other side of Pine are not. Were on very high elevation here. At the bottom of the hill is Huntingdon Valley aka Lower Moreland. Bryn Athyn, and #Hollywood, PA are at the top of the valley.
On the other side of the valley, at the top of that hill, is Abington, PA. Coincidently, also the same place based on the TV show, The Goldbergs.
Additionally, The Golden Girls which aired on NBC from September 14, 1985, to May 9, 1992 also talk about us in every episode, "Shady Pines" was the retirement home Rose burnt down... as in Shady Lane & Pine Rd located at Fox Chase Farm, and the World Headquarters for the Medical Mission Sisters, who bring justice and healing to women, children and men in 17 countries on five continents. Their 2nd office is in London. www.medicalmissionsisters.org They also speak frequently inside the United Nations.
Previously, that property belonged to the oldest home in Pennsylvania, the Ury House, & it was located here. Built in 1640 it frequented visitors such as: John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and even George Washington slept here. The school located on the grounds, has now relocated as the Valley Forge Military Academy. https://hiddencityphila.org/2017/10/ury-house-demo-in-the-1970s-erased-oldest-home-in-pa
In addition, one of the 4 main actresses in the show, Blanch Devereaux, coincidently the United States DoD - Department of Defense is located on Devereaux St & Oxford Ave, about 10 minutes from here, as Pine Road changes names to Oxford Ave & Rising Sun Ave at a 5 points. This DoD site encompasses over 134 acres, in which its warehouse offices and other buildings amount to 2,250,000 square feet.
The rap group N.W.A Music w/ Dr Dre sings about us in a lot of songs, in "Straight out of Compton" They say, "Until them dumb motherf*ckers see clearly, that I'm down with the Capital C-P-T" ...and, at the same time in the video, they keep showing a picture of map with areas marked out in red marker. (That's C-P-T as in #Capet, as in Louis Capet XVI) https://youtu.be/TMZi25Pq3T8?t=62
There's a lot going on here, too much for me to type on Facebook.
ABC daytime soap opera "All My Children" with Kelly Ripa, which aired January 5, 1970, to September 23, 2011, is based in "Pine Valley" PA, a suburb of Philadelphia, the same name as my neighborhood, but in the soap opera, they are actually located on the other side of Philadelphia. https://www.soapoperanetwork.com/2021/01/all-my-children-reboot-pine-valley-abc-kane-santos-family
Get it? "All My Children" as how Louis XIV had 30 children.
In 2023, the TV series "Pine Valley" aired as a prime time spin-off of the daytime drama soap opera “All My Children.” Their description reads as, "Set in a fictional Philadelphia suburb called Pine Valley, it delves into the dark and murderous history of the town." It also starred the same cast, Kelly Rippa & Susan Lucci again from "All My Children." https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13561428
Unrelated, but the first 10 years of "All My Children" ...The original recordings from the 1970's were destroyed in a fire.
The highest elevation inside #Paris & oldest Military Base in #Paris is Montfaucon - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbet_of_Montfaucon now called the Parc des Buttes Chaumont - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parc_des_Buttes_Chaumont as in my name, Mont Faucon / Matt Falcone. The word Falcon in English translates to Faucon in French.
Also, the City of MonFalcone in Italy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monfalcone
Also, the City of Falcone, in Sicily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcone,_Sicily
Also, the Falcone International Airport in Italy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcone_Borsellino_Airport
Billionaire Empire, The Falcone Group in the USA - https://falconegroup.info
A different entity, Billionaire Empire, Phillip Falcone - with 20% ownership of the The New York Times - plus owner of 5,000 different Television Station Networks, and 5,000 Satellites in space, & 5,000 Satellite repeaters on land, such as the Hollywood Sign in Los Angeles California. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Falcone - In addition he owned & controlled Harbinger Capital aka HRG Group which was created by former President George H. W. Bush Senior - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HRG\_Group#Glazer\_era\_and\_the\_birth\_of\_Harbinger\_Group\_Inc.
In 2019, he sold one of his homes in NYC. It went for a record breaking most ever paid for a residential townhouse in New York City - https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/hedge-fund-founder-john-griffin-buys-most-expensive-nyc-townhome-1.1270334
and https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-07/hedge-fund-founder-john-griffin-buys-most-expensive-ny-townhouse
9643 pill (My address 9643 Pine Rd.) = Prochlorperazine is a phenothiazine (FEEN-oh-THYE-a-zeen) antipsychotic medicine that is used to treat #schizophrenia. It is supplied by Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. https://www.drugs.com/mtm/prochlorperazine-oral-injection.html
9643 PILL IMPRINT - https://www.drugs.com/imprints.php?imprint=9643&color=&shape=0
https://ruger.com/products/pcCarbine/specSheets/19115.html - - Ruger® PC Carbine™ Autoloading Rifle Model 19115 < - - - 19115
Royal Pine Litte Tree's Air Freshener's since 1952 - https://www.littletrees.com/fragrances/royal-pine
On the east side of the words, in the "E" in Arlene, or the "N" in Orlean on the map of 19115, we have Geiger Road. A Geiger Counter is an instrument that measures radioactive levels.
In the 1990's Lockheed Martin had a factory here on Geiger Road. They are a leading American aerospace and defense corporation, specializing in cutting-edge technology and solutions for air, land, sea, space, and cybersecurity challenges. www.lockheedmartin.com
On Red Line Road, we had "The Budd Company" who specialized in manufacturing Railroad Cars. They were a 20th-century metal fabricator, a major supplier of body components to the automobile industry, and a manufacturer of stainless steel passenger rail cars, airframes, missile and space vehicles, and various defense products. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budd_Company - During WW2, they switched production from rail cars to war heads & various Military Equipment. During their tenor, they left behind contaminated land, from PCB's oil leakage, and Radioactive Waste. Though, I had the radioactive reports 5 years ago before covid, which described the radioactivity levels, stretching as far south as Bustleton Road, via an underground creak, that crosses Red Line Rd just about 100ft north of Bustleton Ave, I do not have those links anymore, ...maybe on an old computer.
I did recently find the reports where the NCR, The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has terminated the license held by the Budd Company for another facility in Philadelphia, which may have occurred at both locations, as this location, which consisted of 75 acres was their main manufacturing facility, and the other may have been primarily used for offices, mailing address, and smaller manufacturing. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0037/ML003702451.pdf -
The Budd Company operated a hot cell facility in Philadelphia from l956 through l967 to manufacture sealed sources for use in industrial radiography. (A hot cell is a heavily shielded enclosure in which radioactive materials are handled by persons using remote manipulators, such as mechanical arms, and viewed through shielded windows or periscopes.) A small amount of unsealed cesium-137 was also used for a brief time at the facility.
In addition, we also have Laramie Road. I always wondered what the meaning of Laramie meant, as I have seen roads all over the world with the same name, such as in Canada.
The Laramie Mountains in Black Hills / Paha Sapa, USA was one of the largest Uranium mining sites in the USA. https://www.nuclear-risks.org/en/hibakusha-worldwide/black-hillspaha-sapa.html
The Black Hills are considered a sacred place by the Lakota people and are representative of the entire four-state region of South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota, where thousands of uranium mines or exploration wells are located. For more than 40 years, the local population has been exposed to the radioactive legacy of the former uranium rush.
Behind my house at 9643 Pine Rd. inside Buckley Place, and also Buckley Terrace, Almatt Place, Almatt Terrace, Myers Circle, Mark Place, Johnathin Place, Kismet Place, etc... etc... and so on, whatever... we have various dead end streets, which the locals refer to as a "cul-de-sacs" as they strikingly resemble a cement covered missel silo's, aka launch sites, in which the process requires the cement cover to be blown off by explosives, so the missile underneath can launch intercontinentally.
We also have, "Flagstaff Rd." ...Get it? Flag, like the American Flag & Staff.
In the 1985 movie, Back to the Future, Marty Visits Hill Valley, as in Pine Valley / Huntingdon Valley - https://youtu.be/i9-4phPA_mQ?feature=shared
Also, in Back to the Future, the Mall Scene where the Libyans arrive to get back their stolen Plutonium, the name of the mall is "Twin Pines" ...there is also a "Lone Pine" Mall in the movie. So, the Twin Pines Mall in the movie, is almost an exact replica of the Plymouth Meeting Mall, which is about 25 minutes away from Pine Rd. Though, the mall had a makeover in around the year 2010. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfLPiMPAReU or here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AChCcVIJaCE
Also, in Back to the Future, Marty's mom's name is Lorraine. As a play on words in French, "Reine" means "King" in France, So, Lorain would translate in French to King Louis, Lou, Lo.
In the South Park SE 8 EP 1 2004 Paris Hilton inserts a Pine Apple up her vagina. Get it, Paris as in France, like how the streets here are shaped into the words: Arlene & Orlene, ....and, a Pine Apple like Pine Rd. https://youtu.be/HS5_opSMxDc?t=91 and/or https://southpark.cc.com/video-clips/n0cqud/south-park-the-whore-off
https://youtu.be/XkvIlrLiy9o - The 1993 movie, the Coneheads as in Falcone, Fal-cone, in this clip, ...they say, "Were from France" and also their homes look identical to ours.
In addition, as explained above + http://www.LaserLightShow.ORG as myself... also in the movie, plus many more: https://youtu.be/56XbBVUuwl4?feature=shared
Eminem - Slim Shady like Shady Lane Road & Pine Rd. https://youtu.be/BBY4-BqR08o
In the movie, Trading Places Movie with Eddie Murphey, that was filmed in Philadelphia, ....his name is Billy Ray Valentine, but, it sounds like Billy Revel on Pine, as in the French Revolution.
Did you ever hear the saying, "We'll that's the word on the street?" or... "The word on the street is..."
My parents were my best friends. I bought my 1st home in 2004, in the 19115, When they got old & sick, I had to move back in w/ them & keep my home vacant. We wanted to prevent them from going into a nursing home, and also having the nursing home take away their home. We had nurses, round the clock for 24 hours. I was not embarrassed living with my parents. I actually enjoyed it very much. We would eat dinner together every day. We never argued. My whole life I was never yelled at. They were a lot older than me, and as their age progressed, things became tough. I had to cook for them 3 meals a day, and do everything for them... because I didn't want to put them in a nursing home. One time, my vegan diet gave my father low iron, low hemoglobin (which requires a blood transfusion to fix immediately), it makes you weak, and you can't move.... So, I had to sleep on the floor next to him for a month. I didn't know about the Nutrition Tracking Meal Diary Cell Phone Free App called www.cronometer.com at that time. I miss them very much, and think about them all the time.
My father was a prominent Book Publisher, similar to myself also a publisher. He was the VP at Ruttle, Shaw & Wetherill. One of their notable works that they published was the Merck Manual Professional // Merck Manual Consumer, an indispensable resource for medical professionals; it was the most popular reference guide for Medical Professionals, on how to treat hospital patients. It's what Hospitals used before the internet & computers.
My mother worked at Orleans Technical College & also the School District of Philadelphia as a part time substitute #teacher, and hemy friends worked in operations. They also owned a printing company specializing in medical forms. They both retired around 1990.
I think this is the best home in #America. I don't care about those big homes in California or Florida nor Donald Trump's home in Key Largo.... I don't think his home is better than mine. I only mention that b/c I hear it in the news every day for the past 5 years... but, maybe that's why the Donald Trump National Golf Club Philadelphia in New Jersey is located in a city, with the same name as mine, Pine Hill / Pine Valley. Here, we have the Fox Chase Farm, it's 117 acres, 1 hour walk to loop it.
The only homes or Cities that might even come close, might be Dubai, United Arab Emirates - World Islands, or Dubai Palm Island ....but, we did this in the 1950's, and they just started.
#WhatOnEarth
"l'état, c'est moi"
Capet XXI (My Grandmother's Maiden Last Name)
http://www.LouisXXVI.com
🔴🔴🔴🔴 ⚡ Louis XVI & The American Revolution
Louis XVI's financial support to the United States during the American Revolutionary War primarily came in the form of loans and supplies. The financial assistance was crucial for the American colonists in their fight against British rule. Here are the details of how the money was distributed:
Financial Agreements: In February 1778, France and the United States signed the Treaty of Alliance, formally allying France with the American colonists. As part of this agreement, France pledged its support, including financial aid, to the United States.
Loans: France provided substantial loans to the United States to fund their war efforts. The most significant loan came in 1778 when the French government arranged a loan of 2 million livres (a French currency) from the French banking house of Le Couteulx et Cie. This initial loan was followed by additional loans, including a total of 10 million livres in 1779 and 24 million livres in 1780.
Supplies and Military Aid: In addition to financial assistance, France also provided military supplies and aid to the American colonists. The French Navy played a crucial role in the war by assisting in naval blockades and engaging in key battles, such as the Battle of Yorktown in 1781, which was a decisive victory for the Americans. The French military support included troops, warships, weapons, and ammunition.
Benjamin Franklin's Role: Benjamin Franklin, the American envoy to France, played a significant role in negotiating and securing French support. He worked closely with the French government to secure financial aid and other resources for the American cause. Franklin's diplomacy and influence were instrumental in obtaining French assistance.
Distribution of Funds: The funds received from France were primarily managed by the Continental Congress, the governing body of the American colonies during the Revolutionary War. Congress used the funds to pay for various war-related expenses, such as purchasing supplies, equipping troops, and maintaining military operations. Some funds were also used to pay off existing debts.
It is important to note that while Louis XVI and France's support was crucial for the American cause, the financial aid alone did not guarantee victory in the war. The American colonists faced numerous challenges throughout the conflict, and the outcome of the war was determined by a combination of factors, including military strategy, perseverance, and the support of other nations such as Spain and the Netherlands.
🔴🔴🔴🔴
⚡ Family Relationships of France & England
Louis XVI's wife, Marie Antoinette, and King George III's wife, Queen Charlotte, were sisters-in-law as they both came from the House of Habsburg-Lorraine through their mother, Maria Theresa. This made Louis XVI and King George III brothers-in-law by marriage.
In addition, there were also related by blood by former ancestors.
The British and French royal families have a long history of intermarriage, resulting in blood connections between the two dynasties. Here are some key relationships that link the British and French royal families:
The House of Stuart and the House of Bourbon: One significant connection between the two royal families was through the marriage of Mary, Queen of Scots, a member of the Stuart dynasty, to Francis II of France, who belonged to the House of Valois-Bourbon. Their son, James VI of Scotland (later James I of England and Ireland), became the first monarch of the Stuart dynasty to rule over England and Scotland, effectively uniting the crowns from 1567 to 1625.
The House of Hanover and the House of Bourbon: The Hanoverian dynasty in Britain began with the accession of George I in 1714. The Hanoverians were related to the French Bourbon dynasty through Sophia of Hanover, whose mother was Elizabeth Stuart, daughter of James VI and I. Sophia's uncle, Charles I of England and Scotland, married Henrietta Maria of France, a member of the House of Bourbon. Therefore, there was a blood connection between the Hanoverians and Bourbons through the Stuart lineage.
The House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and the House of Orléans: In the 19th century, the British royal family, known as the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (later renamed the House of Windsor), had a connection to the French royal family through Queen Victoria. In 1840, Victoria married Prince Albert, who was a member of the German noble House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Their daughter, Princess Victoria, married Prince Louis of Battenberg, whose mother was a member of the House of Orléans, a branch of the French royal family.
Edward III and Isabella of France: Edward III of England, who reigned from 1327 to 1377, was married to Philippa of Hainault. However, a significant blood connection between the British and French royal families came through Edward III's mother, Isabella of France. Isabella was the daughter of King Philip IV of France, making Edward III a grandson of a French king.
These are only a few examples of how the British and French royal families were related.
While these connections highlight the historical ties between the British, The Royal Family, and French royal families, it is important to note that they represent a small portion of the complex web of intermarriages among European royal houses throughout history. The relationships between the two dynasties were often influenced by political considerations, diplomatic alliances, and the desire to strengthen familial connections among European monarchies.
Matt Falcone - http://LouisXXVI.com

Click my username for previous entries! These are only films in my collection so blind spots are inevitable. Also I know which of these blu-rays have 4K upgrades available you don’t have to tell me to get them lol. Feel free to post your own favorites! 30) Midnight Run: Robert DeNiro shows a lighter side perfectly playing a professional bounty hunter who has to wrangle Charles Grodin’s high strung mob accountant across the U.S. in this buddy action-comedy. Like Planes, Trains, and Automobiles with guns. 29) The Last Temptation of Christ: Martin Scorsese’s highly controversial passion project starring Willem Dafoe as a more humanized Jesus Christ remains a deeply moving examination of faith and spirituality. 28) After Hours: Martin Scorsese’s darkly comic masterpiece runs Griffin Dunne’s lonely office drone through a Kafka’esque wringer in the definitive “Up All Night” New York movie. 27) The Killer: John Woo’s singular blend of kinetic action and melodrama was perfectly engineered in this masterpiece of heroic bloodshed starring Chow Yun Fat as an assassin with a code of honor. 26) Die Hard: The most influential action film of the decade, John McTiernan’s perfectly directed thriller features a great script and two amazing performances from Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman. Also a Christmas classic. 25) This Is Spinal Tap: Rob Reiner’s fake rockumentary about the titular British metal band is quite simply one of the funniest movies ever made. 24) Amadeus: Milo’s Forman’s Best Picture winner about the professional-turned-deeply personal rivalry between court composer Salieri and the young genius Mozart is a world class drama. Triumphant, enthralling, a masterpiece. 23) The Road Warrior: George Miller’s post apocalyptic action opus is a film of pure, unrelenting violence and brutality, realized with astonishing craft and a mythic grandeur. 22) Aliens: James Cameron’s more action oriented sequel to Ridley Scott’s sci-fi horror classic brilliantly expands on its predecessor strengths while cementing Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley as an all time great cinematic heroine. 21) The Terminator: Two years before Aliens James Cameron proved himself with another perfectly engineered sci-fi thriller on an even tighter budget, elevating a glorified B-movie premise about a killer robot from the future into a work of incredible pop art. To be continued!

Sorry, this got so long, that seems to happen when I write a DD. I wanted to get this out last week, but it kept growing. I’ll try and answer questions, but I also kind of need a break.
THE DEADPOOL THEORY: TWO POOLS
None of this is financial advice. I’m just a stranger on the internet. Please do your own research.
https://preview.redd.it/el2krne9t03d1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=d823372cd89bb5bba0b3efe29255a7ef6b1e4cbb
SUMMARY
I did a deep dive into the rules a year or so ago and wrote a long DD. I think it’s still relevant.
Options are most likely not used as locates for naked shorting. ETFs are the likely culprit. Bullet Swaps would likely be used for insurance or leverage, I don’t think they’re as important as some people think – they are scary as fuck though.
You need at least two parties to naked short. A Market Maker and a Hedge Fund. Market Maker pulls naked shares out of ETFs for Hedge Fund to naked short. Market Maker insures with Futures Contract or Options (probably LEAPS).
That insurance means that if the Market Maker sends X naked shares to the Hedge Fund then the Market Maker also bought enough contracts to buy X numbers of shares from the Hedge Fund on or possibly by some date far in the future. MMs practice CYA!
SEC: Where are the shares?
MM: I don’t know! I definitely sold this Hedge Fund real shares a long time ago. I have a contract for shares back and he doesn’t seem to have any. Isn’t that crazy?!
SEC: Yeah… Are you hiring?
Two Pools Theory is based around the idea that Naked Shorters likely have many reasons to naked short to one another and could potentially naked short large amounts of naked shares through the market to one another in a desperate time of need. Naked shorters didn’t get this far on wall street by trusting others – sell some naked shorts to your “buddy”, and you also get a contract that your “buddy” owes you those “shares” back at some point. CYA!
Too bad it’s impossible to CYA when you’re naked shorting. Duh. “Smart Money” my ass.
I call the pool of naked shares that naked shorters might be holding the deadpool. Maybe superstonk can come up with something better.
If the naked shorters built a huge pool of naked shares between themselves (the deadpool), a large portion of it in 2021, then how many of those naked shares have been closed/rolled? Is it possible the expiration date of some of those naked shorts was based around a witching date/LEAP date roughly three years in the future?
And my biggest question of all, if naked shorters could delay delivery of naked shorts to one another three years into the future, could they also delay the splividend to one another? What if they owe 4 shares for every 1 on a toxic mess they’re holding between themselves?
If I was a naked shorter in this situation then I’d want out. If I also knew I and every other naked shorter needed shares soon then I’d either try and buy real shares from the company or as many call options as I possibly could. GME did just sell some shares and a bunch of call options have been bought recently. Is a big expiration date coming due and someone is trying to get out?
I sadly don’t have answers to a lot of the questions I raise in this paper. I’d mostly just like you to think about these questions with me.
Now here’s another thing to think about because I’ve hyped myself up, and it’s good to stay level headed. If that’s all true, then naked shorters have also had three years to come up with a plan to survive another day.
If there’s naked shorting, then eventually DRSing will uncover it, if it fucking has to.
In the mean time, I think it’s fun to think about naked shorters building a deadpool that might be coming back to fuck them.
THE TWO POOL THEORY
This theory covers a lot and I’m hesitant to even put it out there because it could have big implications and it could also be completely wrong. It’s also based on some speculation. There’s a lot of speculation about June swirling around with LEAPS and Bullet Swaps. I haven’t seen any proof that anyone actually knows expiration dates on any bullet swaps or LEAPS that naked shorters may or may not be holding. There’s also some speculation on some rules in this write-up because I’ve been unable to find anything worthy of a citation that says naked shorters can delay delivery of a dividend to one another. I also haven’t found any citations on how splividends would work with naked shorting.
The gist of the theory is that there are two pools of naked shares. One pool is held in the hands of retail and one pool is held in the hands of the naked shorters themselves. I believe the naked shares in those pools could be handled in different ways. Naked shorting would need to be done between two parties: a Market Maker and a Hedge Fund. The Market Maker would most likely pull naked shares out of ETFs for the Hedge Fund and the Hedge Fund would then sell the naked shares into the market.
The Market Maker likely would want insurance on a risky naked shorting play. The Market Maker could enter into Futures Contracts or LEAPS with the Hedge Fund. These contracts mean on or sometimes before the expiration date the Market Maker can go to the Hedge Fund with the cash and demand shares.
Now, the obvious reason you naked short is to hopefully drive the price of a stock down, the company goes bankrupt, and you never have to buy the naked shares back. Pure profit. Sure, maybe at some point you might get found out and become an infamous slimey asshole, but you could be a rich slimey asshole! You embrace it and naked short a bunch of shares to retail investors. Asshole.
Here’s where the two pool theory comes in, you need to be the hedge fund to a market maker or the mm to a hf to naked short. Do you also naked short to your “buddy”? Your “friend”?
Hedge Fund: Why are you saying it like that?
Space Debris: Saying what what way?
Hedge Fund: “Friend” With the things. MM and I are buddies! Right, MM?
MM:
Hedge Fund: MM?
Do the MM and the HF create a naked pool between themselves? What could be the advantages of that?
Could those naked shares be used as locates for a legitimate short sale? They should look and act like real shares, right? Could they move them around in dark pools? Could they be used for margin? Again, they should look like real shares that their “buddy” sold them? Meanwhile they’re toxic garbage.
If the Stock you’re trying to crush isn’t moving, no one is buying, no one is selling, could you naked short a bunch of shares out into the market to your buddy to get the price moving down?
If everyone is buying and no one is selling, could you naked short a bunch of shares through the market to your buddy to try and drop the price?
Hedge Fund: That would get people selling, right? That would get the price dropping, right?
Plus, those shares don’t end up in the hands of bulls. They end up in your “buddies” hands. He also wants to crush this stock.
Hedge Fund: Retail is selling, right?
MM:
Hedge Fund: MM?
Now, let’s say you have a huge naked short pool in the hands of retail you have to deal with and you have a huge pool with your buddy. Which are you going to deal with first? Probably the retail pool.
So, I’m not saying you did this, but what exactly would happen if say….

• You have two monstrous naked share pools. One with retail and one pool with your naked shorting buddies

Hedge Fund: Well, I….
Space Debris: Let me fucking finish.

• On a stock of a company with potential, that’s not going bankrupt anytime soon

Hedge Fund: That’s debat….
Space Debris: Shut the fuck up

• That stock also has a large group of retail investors who have been DRSing for the past three years…

Hedge Fund: Well, then why does the price keep dropping?
Space Debris: There’s this little film from 1944 I’d like you to watch. You like Ingrid Bergman?
What would happen if say you had that huge retail pool of naked shorts that you’ve been successfully rolling for three years, but you also have a huge pool of naked shorts with your buddy that you created in a time of desperation? A time of desperation, say about three years ago?
Now, say a big part of that pool of naked shorts you have with you friend is coming due finally? You’ve been putting most or maybe all of it off just trying to tread water and roll your retail naked shorts. You’ve been crushing the price, desperately hoping retail will sell, but now you and your buddy need to roll the toxic pool you hold between yourselves. The way to roll an old naked short into a new one is by: 1. Creating a new naked share. 2. Buying a real share to close the old naked share.
If you keep reading I’ll dive into the mechanics a bit more (not as much as my old DD), but basically the Naked Shorting Market Maker will need to have special privileges (be an Authorized Participant) to rip open ETFs. The Market Maker rips open a bunch of ETFs that shouldn’t exist – which could be why you see ETFs with such high short interest and such high Failure-To-Delivers (FTDs). The MM then has a bunch of naked shares that he pulled out of the ETF and those are used to naked short the stock.
Here’s an image I want you to picture that might help. When naked shorters crush a company through naked shorts, most of the time they’re not just flushing more and more naked shorts into the market. Most of the time it’s rolling over the market in a wave. They would be closing old naked shorts as they open new ones. If a naked shorter started naked shorting against a company at $20 10 years ago then they will no longer have naked shorts opened at $20. The naked share could have been rolled at 19, 18, 17 or 15, 10, 5. In other words, a naked share was sold to Bob for $20 in the past. A real share is now bought from Suzy for $19 and sent to Bob, then a new naked share is sent to John for $19. There’s still only one naked short in the market, but the expiration date, price, and location has changed. Bob never knew he had a fake and now neither does John. The naked shorter scraped $1 off the play and is still crushing the stock. If you have a super algo that can do this for change constantly all day everyday then that change adds up very fast. Ever seen office space?
There are times where it would be beneficial to shoot out more naked shorts than you’re closing. At the beginning, possibly towards what the naked shorter hopes is the end, to get the stock moving, in a time of desperation, etc.
But now a big question I have...
A question I really wish I knew the answer to and sadly I honestly don’t. What if you delayed the delivery of a fuck ton of naked shorts to your buddy, they’re finally coming due, and there was also a split or maybe a splividend sometime in the past three years? Did you delay the delivery of the splividend shares to your “buddy”? Is that allowed?! I’m trying to find out, but the market is so fucking opaque! This seems like something that shouldn’t be allowed, but this market can also be a joke at times. Is this allowed? I’ve been trying to find it somewhere in the rules, but there are too many rules. ChatGPT said it’s allowed, but ChatGPT says a lot of crazy shit.
I need to go over that again. You’re so fucking underwater because GME is sneezing, you just spray a fucking hurricane of naked shorts at the market to crush the price, your naked shorting buddy buys up as many of your naked shorts as he can so they don’t get into retail hands. You’re also exchanging contracts far out in the future as insurance – insurance that you can buy the shares back from your “buddy” at some point. Time to crush retail. If retail doesn’t sell… and if it’s finally time to settle your deadpool with your “friend”? Has some of it been quadrupled in the past three years?
Again, I want to be clear. No one has hard evidence that there are naked shorters holding a fuck ton of LEAPS coming due in June. I also have no evidence that a split or splividend can be delayed between naked shorters. This is all a theory. It does line up nicely with the other DD I wrote over a year ago and does make some puzzle pieces fit nicely in my mind, but I also feel a bit like I’ve been smoking tinfoil and mainlining GME for years now.
So, again, don’t get too hype now….
A bigger question, the splividend is kind of weird. Does the splividend require that the deadpool be closed/rolled by buying real shares? It seems like with a split a deadpool could be closed using cash, is the splividend different?
Hedge Fund: Well… okay, but… why does the price keep dropping? You should sell… AI boom! Artificial Intelligence is here. Sure, you read a book two years ago that AGI would take 50-100 years to develop, but AGI is here! Now! I swear. Buy my AI Stocks!
A DEEPER DIVE – BACK TO THE OLD DD
A little over a year ago I wrote an 89 page DD. You probably haven’t read it. It was long and covered way too much, but there’s a lot to talk about with a stock like GME. I’m going to try and summarize my DD for you, that way you don’t need to go back through it. A lot of it is important to my theory and some of it is just interesting in my opinion. And some of it is wild cohencidences that make me feel like a conspiracy nut.
I honestly originally went on the journey to write that long DD because sometimes I felt like I was in a cult and I needed to do my own research. Fuck, I may have fell farther down the rabbit hole and I keep tumbling down. Yay!
Naked shorting has been around since markets have been around. If you have delayed delivery then it’s easy to sell something and worry about the delivery later. The stock market seemed to reach a fairly good place of stability because of rules and regulations until computers came along. Computers and algorithms have led to an insane advantage for wall street over the common retail investor. Market makers have also had special rules and have had access to different loopholes that allow for even larger delays in delivery.
I sell you 100 shares of Stock A for $10 now. If I can wait to buy then I’ll just wait until it’s cheaper. Also, remember, I have a super fast computer selling huge amounts of shares to other people too. Cheap enough for me might be $9.99. I buy for $9.99, settle my naked short with you, and now I’m selling naked shorts at $9.98. Anyone?! $9.98? I got as many as you need! (the price falls) $9.96? $9.94?
Most retail investors hold shares for less than a year. Naked shorters hate hodlers, they want to constantly be selling to new suckers at lower prices until the company goes bankrupt. They want retail investors churning through the stock in months. Shares constantly moving hands.
So, you can kind of think of naked shorting as delayed delivery. Sell high and delay delivery long enough until you can buy low. Or at the end not even buy at all. “Sorry, product is no longer available, your delivery has been canceled.”
In the past Market Makers had an exemption that made it very easy to naked short and there are some strong signs that they abused that exemption. Back in the day a Market Maker could point to an UN-EXERCISED call option as a locate. I capitalized that un-exercised part because it’s important.
WEIRD COHENCIDENCE 1 – THE OPTIONS LOOPHOLE/MADOFF/2008
So, here’s where I found some weird coincidences writing my old DD that made me really feel like I was losing my mind a bit. So, please, lose your mind along with me.

• Back in the day a Market Maker and Hedge Fund would do this naked shorting using a package of naked shares, put contracts, call contracts, and futures contracts. To the outside world it would look like normal buying and hedging of shares that hedge funds do everyday. The Market Maker side would look like something called a Reverse Conversion and the Hedge Fund side would look like something called a Split-Strike.
  
• Bernied Madoff used to claim that he made all of his money using Split-Strikes.
  
• This Option exemption or Reverse Conversion/Split-Strike strategy was closed through rule changes during the 2008 financial crash.
  
• Bernie Madoff’s fund blew up during the 2008 financial crash.
  

Hopefully, it’s just a coincidence, because, what the fuck. Who’s writing this story?

• Oh, also Bernie Madoff’s friend from prison claims that Madoff admitted to naked shorting and says that Madoff claimed everyone on wall street was doing it.

Wild, am I completely crazy wondering if naked shorting played a part in the 2008 financial crisis?

• Oh, also, the options market lost a lot of steam after 2008, and well, guess what market really started taking off after 2008? Did you guess the ETF market? Because you’d be correct!

Did naked shorters move from the options market to the ETF market around 2008? Options still would have been good for insurance purposes, but not for creating the actual naked shares anymore.
An EXERCISED option can still be used as a locate today in order to short a stock. If you exercise the option, it means you’ve paid for the stock and the stock will be delivered soon. Market Makers have about a month to make good on the delivery. You could probably naked short through exercised options, but it would give you a finite window. I don’t know why you would if you can just use ETFs to naked short instead.
The way those old Reverse Conversion and Split-Strikes were built is very important. Yes, they looked like normal plays any hedge fund might make to regulators, but they also included insurance between thugs. Options and futures contracts can provide insurance to the Market Maker, that way when the MM shows up with cash the Hedge Fund will be forced to deliver shares. CYA! Cover Your ASS! Too bad you’re already naked shorting – that’s a dangerous fucking game.
These days the Market Maker opens up ETFs for the naked shares and sends those to the Hedge Fund. The ETF is the locate. Then the Market Maker can still use futures contracts or options contract with the Hedge Fund to ensure the MM won’t be the one left holding the bag.
BULLET SWAPS
We should also take a quick detour into bullet swaps. Bullet swaps would also not work as a locate for naked shorting.
No shares exchange hands because of a bullet swap. Nobody on wall street can point to a bullet swap as proof that they can get shares. Bullet swaps would primarily be used for hedging (insurance) or leverage.
INSURANCE: If you are short a stock then you can get insurance through a swap deal by entering a swap that is long on the stock. You short the stock and also enter a long bullet swap that expires far in the future. You now have years to crush the stock. In the future if you fail to crush the price of the stock then your long swap will help offset the cost of your failed shorts. With a bullet swap you pay for the insurance at expiration.
LEVERAGE: If you are short a stock, but also want leverage you could add a short bullet swap to your position. This will grow your short position without shorting more of the stock. Also, this will leave less of a sign that you’re shorting the stock. Buying a shit ton of puts might get noticed. And again, with a bullet swap, you pay for the leverage in the future.
Hwang in there. Sorry, this DD is so long.
Let’s say you were a degenerate with a lot of money to play on the stock market. You’re naked shorting a stock and you’re positive you can crush this thing. So you also take out a big bullet swap short position. You’ll make even more money when this stock goes bankrupt and you don’t even have to pay for the bullet swap until the expiration date. You just bought, or just got leverage without buying anything… You pay for the leverage in the future!
Bullet swaps are completely irresponsible! How is this a thing?!
If your naked short position blows up AND you haven’t hedged AND all of the sudden you owe a big lump sum on a short bullet swap, yikes, you’d be fucked.
TWO POOLS – STOCK A
Let’s use a made up story to help illustrate what I’m trying to say here. In this hypothetical scenario, naked shorters decide to naked short Stock A into the ground. Let’s say they start naked shorting on Stock A around 2012 or something.
Hedge Fund: It’s a dying business!
They start pumping naked shares into the market and the price falls.
Hedge Fund: See!
Then some dude looking for deep value comes along in 2019. He buys a bunch of shares and a bunch of call options on Stock A.
Now jump forward to 2021, January is an important time:

1. FUTURES EXPIRING – Naked shares could be insured using Futures Contracts.
   
2. LEAPS EXPIRING – Naked shares could also be insured using LEAPS.
   
3. REGARDS – Also, that deep value dude has some calls expiring January 15th. Retail Investors send their regards. Dude on the internet (not a cat) and a bunch of traders on reddit YOLO hard into Stock A.
   

That means:

1. Naked shares might need to be closed or rolled.
   
2. Naked shares might need to be closed or rolled.
   
3. Retail starts buying shares and call options.
   

In other words,

1. Buy Pressure
   
2. Buy Pressure
   
3. Buy Pressure
   

The price skyrockets. Or sneezes if your prefer.
Naked shorters flood the market with naked shares of Stock A to drive the price back down. A bunch of those naked shares are sold to other naked shorters.
Now, in this scenario there are suddenly bulls and bears fighting over the stock. There’s even talk among some of the bulls of a possible short squeeze. Everyone is buying, but naked shorters need the price to go down. The only way to do that is to sell shares. More supply meets demand = price drops. Obviously, a naked shorter would do that by selling naked shares. But more naked shares into the hands of bulls?
It’s slimey, dark, and disgusting in here, but please, come join me in the mind of a naked shorter for a second. Let’s say as a naked shorter: 1. I need to buy a bunch of shares to roll a big part of my naked position. 2. Bulls are out on parade buying like fucking crazy. 3. There’s talk of a potential short squeeze.
As a naked shorter we would want to flood the market with naked shares to crush the price. A fuckton more supply meets the same demand = big price drop. On the other hand, bulls are buying like crazy. The more naked shares we pump out the more ammo we’re handing to bulls.
I don’t know about you, but if I were a naked shorter then I don’t want to hand a bunch of naked shares to bulls, especially if they’re already talking about a squeeze. I do want to flood the market with naked shares though. I would probably ask one of my naked shorting “friends” to gobble up as many of my naked shares as possible. We’ll both survive and we can settle up with each other later.
We usually use yearly contracts with retail naked shorts because most of retail sells within a year. With one another we could push it to three years. Surely, retail will give up after three years. Retail holding for three years is an anomaly. It just doesn’t happen!
Hedge Fund: That’s right!
Let’s assume naked shorters built a huge pool of naked shares among themselves on Stock A. The huge flood of shares into the market helps crush the price and most of the shares end up with other naked shorters.
Maybe naked shorters also turn off the buy button, which is the rich kid equivalent of overturning the game board. Really just pathetic.
Company A: That was fucking weird….
Retail: Was that naked shorting?
Company A:
To recap, in this scenario, naked shorters now have a large pool of naked shares in the hands of retail that they need to continually roll. I think it’s likely naked shares to retail would be built with yearly expiration dates, most retail investors sell within a year. That gives flexibility to naked shorters to continually settle old naked shares and create new ones. Waves of naked shares being gobbled back up and spewed back out and gobbled back up and spewed back out. The naked shares look and act like the real thing as long as they can find a cheaper real share before expiration. They have a year – retail sells quick, and can be easy to manipulate. Should be easy money. Easy money with a whole lot o’ fucking risk.
Then the naked shorting pool, or the deadpool, are all of the naked shares that naked shorters sell to one another. Again, maybe at a time of desperation a fuck-ton of naked shares get sold through the market from one naked shorter to another. These naked shares have been created from an ETF loophole, then packaged with insurance using a Futures Contract or a LEAP Contract.
For example, on GME (a stock completely unrelated to made-up Stock A), the share price has shown waves in the price around quarterly triple-witching dates in March, June, September, and December. This would make sense if the price is moving because of common expiration dates used for Futures Contracts and LEAPS.
Now, let’s dive back into the grimy mind of a naked shorter. We built a bunch of naked shares and sent those to retail with yearly expiration dates. If we made these naked shares around January, March, June, or December of 2021 then they would expire in January, March, June, or December of 2022. Retail sells quick, a year should be enough time to close or roll.
In a time of desperation you also naked short a butt load of naked shares to your naked shorting “buddy”, he’s also naked shorting the stock and has no interest in calling in those naked shares anytime soon.
If you built a pool of naked shares with your “friend” then why would you give them the same expiration as naked shares sold to retail? That’s just adding to your retail headache. Retail should sell in a year (most usually do), but you can hold this position with your “friend” for a lot longer. Why not sell those naked shares with expiration dates much farther in the future? Maybe three years if you’re using LEAPS.
That gives you plenty of time to scare off retail, close out your retail naked shorts, and then you can worry about settling up with your “buddies”. You have insurance with LEAPS or Futures so settling with your buddies should be pretty easy. You can put that all off for another day far in the future.
Hedge Fund: Retail sells, right?
Space Debris: It’s just a story.
Hedge Fund: But retail sells, right?
Space Debris: No.
Let’s jump back to our fake Stock A scenario, maybe Company A sees some weird shit happening to their stock and think of naked shorters. Maybe Company A even sees the possibility of a huge naked short position being paired with a lot of LEAPS. Maybe Company A then gives naked shorters a year to close their short position, seems fair to me. Or maybe Company A just liked the idea of a splividend for a multitude of other reasons.
In this story, Company A puts out a splividend, it’s a bit different then your normal dividend. Mostly because of the way it’s delivered. Normally, with a split, every share of the Stock is just split. Naked shares look like normal shares so they’d be split and no delivery would be necessary. They would just need to deliver more shares on or before expiration to go with the old naked share. The price has also been split so their naked position should fundamentally be the same.
For ease, let’s say Company A split 4:1. Every share will now become 4. But for the splividend, they’ll actually hand deliver 3 shares to only the real shares. Company A’s people are going to check. If naked shorters have 1 naked share in the hand of a retail investor then they need to add 3 more shares to that hand. Doesn’t matter if the expiration is still a year out on that naked share, they owe 3 shares right now. The rules are convoluted and hard to parse through, but I believe Market Makers would have a few days to deliver splividend shares to retail. They could potentially have a month or so, but I’m not sure on that. I don’t think they would be able to delay retail splividend delivery for much more than a month. Retail splividend delivery. RETAIL….
The Deadpool might be different! With your retail splividends you could just create new naked shares to send as your dividend fulfillment. With your deadpool could you just agree to wait?
For, ease let’s assume for every 1 naked share sent out into the market, naked shorters also sent 1 to each other. These are made up numbers. It would be impossible to see the size of a naked short position or where it’s hidden. Naked shares look just like the real thing… until they don’t.
For every 1 naked share of Stock A in the Retail Pool, there is 1 naked share in the Deadpool.
Other stocks could be different, Stock A is a hypothetical.
Let’s assume naked shorters have been rolling, but unable to close their Retail naked short position in Stock A. These naked shorters would most likely have also held onto a lot of their naked short position with one another. The stock has also been split.
If naked shorters have the ability to delay delivery of the splividend to one another then they may not have settled a bunch of dividends yet. Every 1 naked share in the deadpool could now be 4 naked shares.
Now if you’re hoping Company A will squeeze because of a huge deadpool that needs to be closed then calm down, it might not be that easy.
THE DEADPOOL
Let’s look at all of the advantages of creating a deadpool with your naked shorting friends:

1. Those naked shares don’t end up in the hands of bulls and the naked shares drive the price of the stock down.
   
2. Your naked shorting “friend” is good at hiding naked shares. If there’s a limit to how many naked shares you can shit into retails’ hands, then a deadpool could be a place to go if you start hitting the retail limit.
   
3. Those naked shares look like real shares so they could potentially be used for margin.
   
4. You could potentially move them around in a dark pool to your “friend”, just match them with a short term option or future depending on when you want them back.
   

SEC: “Where are these locates?”
MM: “Right here, got them out of the deadpool.”
SEC: “The what?”
MM: “The darkpool.”
SEC: “Oh, cool. Are you hiring?”
MM:
SEC: MM?
MM:

1. Extra Insurance with your naked shorting “friends”? “We all close our retail naked shorts and then we close these.” OR “Fine! I was naked shorting! But… but… he also sent me this huge pile of naked shares!”

1. THE MAIN ADVANTAGE – I’m gonna hit you with some minor fud. This hypothetical deadpool might (I’m not positive) be able to be closed with cash. Naked shorters don’t want to drive the price up. Buying actual shares to close would drive the price up. I believe Deadpool naked shares could and would most likely be closed using cash when the time came. I have some questions about this because of the splividend that I’ll talk about below. Basically, does the splividend change that? Can splividend naked shares be settled with cash? I really wish I knew.

The deadpool could also be rolled and they would keep some of the other benefits, but it would likely be opened the normal way, and the old naked shares would still likely be closed using cash.
Now, I’m not positive, but I do believe rolling an old deadpool position using cash could cause upward movement in the shorted stock. It could also be very expensive, but if you’re rolling and your “buddy” also naked shorts an even amount of “shares” back to you then you’re basically just breaking even.
If the Deadpool exists then it would be just another hidden festering pile of naked shares slowly dragging naked shorters down. If it was grown by the splividend then it’s like a cancerous pile of naked shares and it’s reckoning day could be coming soon. Time to close or roll. I think Deadpool is a fitting name. The Deadpool would be zombie shares (that shouldn’t exist) pulled out of zombie ETFs that were conjured out of nothing. There are no real (living) shares hanging out in the Deadpool.
Not to be confused with the comic book character. He would DRS and hodl.
STOCK A – THE DEADPOOL & “FRIENDS”
First off, there has been a lot of conjecture about a stock called GME. It’s all conjecture. No one knows dates. No one knows how many naked shares there could potentially be. No one here knows. Unless Kenny G is lurking. He might know something. No one gets that good at the sax without knowing a thing or two. Totally unrelated, but could you imagine if you were a naked shorter who had been griftin’ the market for years and your last name was Griffin.
Some of this DD is based on research into the rules, but some is also based on conjecture and theories. Take everything with a grain of salt.
Let’s go back to Stock A.
Let’s say a hedge fund naked shorted a bunch of Stock A with his friends. Then that hedge fund also entered bullet swap deals to get even more leverage on his short position. January 2021 rolls around, he blows up. He can’t roll all of his retail naked shares and can’t make good on shares with his Market Maker. Oh, and because of those bullet swaps, instead of making extra money, he owes a big lump sum.
The Hedge Fund evaporates and someone else takes over his position. Maybe someone who is not “friends” with the naked shorters and doesn’t want to be naked.
Now, Company A is smart, there were some signs that maybe your company was being naked shorted, but naked shorting is illegal. A year after all of the craziness, Company A does a splividend. A splividend could really make a naked shorting position even more of a nightmare, but naked shorting is illegal. Plus, shorters said they closed a year ago. Company A has many reasons to do a splividend that don’t involve naked shorting at all.
Company A then puts it out there that they want to sell a lot of shares. They have bright plans for the future and they need money. It costs money to make money! Or is it whisky? Again, naked shorting is illegal so there shouldn’t be any naked shares, but an offer like that could look like a lifeline if someone was naked shorting.
Seems like it would also be a good way to protect Company A from any litigation in the future that says they purposely tried to start a squeeze on their own stock. Or a MOASS. How could they start a squeeze? Company A put it out there that they wanted to sell a nice chunk of shares. You didn’t try to get any of those shares?
Company A: How many shares did you need?
MM:
Company A: How many shares did you need, MM?
MM:
Like Five Fancy Lawyers in Unison: Our client pleads the fifth.
Back to the lifeline though, you just absorbed someone’s toxic bag of naked shorts and you want out. Company A just put up a flashing sign that says, we’d like to sell some shares. Seems like a pretty good opportunity to me, doesn’t hurt to ask.
Market Maker: I just absorbed some toxic shit, got any shares you’d sell me?
Company A: Maybe
If you inherited a bag of toxic naked shorts and you know or have a strong feeling there are many more out there then trying to close by buying real shares through the market will run the price up. Can you close before you get out? If Company A sells you as many shares as they’re willing then that might cut your naked short position down or completely close it. If it doesn’t close it then what’s the next best option? You likely know that buying power is about to crank up because your toxic bag is expiring and so are a lot of other toxic bags.
Your next best option? Options…
If there’s a scenario where you’re trying to maybe not be the first one out, but insure that you make it out, this is the best play in my opinion. Again, Company A said they want to sell shares. You need real shares. If you’re unable to get enough shares directly from Company A then you turn to options. Options allow you to lock in a price for the shares you’re comfortable with, if the price drops then you can buy some shares for cheaper on the open market. If the price rises then you can still buy shares for the cheaper strike price by exercising the options contract.
Again, if you start buying at market then the price could start taking off and you’re cost basis could get blown out of the water. For example, you need 1 million shares of Company A at $20. If company is at $19, then with a big buy order your 1 millionth share might actually get bought at $21 or $25 or way higher. If you buy 10,000 $20 Calls then you can buy 1 million shares at $20 until the Calls expire.
The other advantage, you don’t have to be the first naked shorter to go to the market and start smashing the buy button. If Company A goes through some sort of Mother of All Short Squeezes then you won’t be the one who started it. To regulators, you just luckily bought some call options before this all started happening and now you’re exercising. Really wild stuff going on. Good thing you’re not naked short on that stock…. anymore… You go home and cry.

Sorry, this got so long, that seems to happen when I write a DD. I wanted to get this out last week, but it kept growing. I’ll try and answer questions, but I also kind of need a break.
THE DEADPOOL THEORY: TWO POOLS
None of this is financial advice. I’m just a stranger on the internet. Please do your own research.
https://preview.redd.it/ois441oqs03d1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=feac96d888cfe5795a917b254ad8fb80abaf859b
SUMMARY
I did a deep dive into the rules a year or so ago and wrote a long DD. I think it’s still relevant.
Options are most likely not used as locates for naked shorting. ETFs are the likely culprit. Bullet Swaps would likely be used for insurance or leverage, I don’t think they’re as important as some people think – they are scary as fuck though.
You need at least two parties to naked short. A Market Maker and a Hedge Fund. Market Maker pulls naked shares out of ETFs for Hedge Fund to naked short. Market Maker insures with Futures Contract or Options (probably LEAPS).
That insurance means that if the Market Maker sends X naked shares to the Hedge Fund then the Market Maker also bought enough contracts to buy X numbers of shares from the Hedge Fund on or possibly by some date far in the future. MMs practice CYA!
SEC: Where are the shares?
MM: I don’t know! I definitely sold this Hedge Fund real shares a long time ago. I have a contract for shares back and he doesn’t seem to have any. Isn’t that crazy?!
SEC: Yeah… Are you hiring?
Two Pools Theory is based around the idea that Naked Shorters likely have many reasons to naked short to one another and could potentially naked short large amounts of naked shares through the market to one another in a desperate time of need. Naked shorters didn’t get this far on wall street by trusting others – sell some naked shorts to your “buddy”, and you also get a contract that your “buddy” owes you those “shares” back at some point. CYA!
Too bad it’s impossible to CYA when you’re naked shorting. Duh. “Smart Money” my ass.
I call the pool of naked shares that naked shorters might be holding the deadpool. Maybe superstonk can come up with something better.
If the naked shorters built a huge pool of naked shares between themselves (the deadpool), a large portion of it in 2021, then how many of those naked shares have been closed/rolled? Is it possible the expiration date of some of those naked shorts was based around a witching date/LEAP date roughly three years in the future?
And my biggest question of all, if naked shorters could delay delivery of naked shorts to one another three years into the future, could they also delay the splividend to one another? What if they owe 4 shares for every 1 on a toxic mess they’re holding between themselves?
If I was a naked shorter in this situation then I’d want out. If I also knew I and every other naked shorter needed shares soon then I’d either try and buy real shares from the company or as many call options as I possibly could. GME did just sell some shares and a bunch of call options have been bought recently. Is a big expiration date coming due and someone is trying to get out?
I sadly don’t have answers to a lot of the questions I raise in this paper. I’d mostly just like you to think about these questions with me.
Now here’s another thing to think about because I’ve hyped myself up, and it’s good to stay level headed. If that’s all true, then naked shorters have also had three years to come up with a plan to survive another day.
If there’s naked shorting, then eventually DRSing will uncover it, if it fucking has to.
In the mean time, I think it’s fun to think about naked shorters building a deadpool that might be coming back to fuck them.
THE TWO POOL THEORY
This theory covers a lot and I’m hesitant to even put it out there because it could have big implications and it could also be completely wrong. It’s also based on some speculation. There’s a lot of speculation about June swirling around with LEAPS and Bullet Swaps. I haven’t seen any proof that anyone actually knows expiration dates on any bullet swaps or LEAPS that naked shorters may or may not be holding. There’s also some speculation on some rules in this write-up because I’ve been unable to find anything worthy of a citation that says naked shorters can delay delivery of a dividend to one another. I also haven’t found any citations on how splividends would work with naked shorting.
The gist of the theory is that there are two pools of naked shares. One pool is held in the hands of retail and one pool is held in the hands of the naked shorters themselves. I believe the naked shares in those pools could be handled in different ways. Naked shorting would need to be done between two parties: a Market Maker and a Hedge Fund. The Market Maker would most likely pull naked shares out of ETFs for the Hedge Fund and the Hedge Fund would then sell the naked shares into the market.
The Market Maker likely would want insurance on a risky naked shorting play. The Market Maker could enter into Futures Contracts or LEAPS with the Hedge Fund. These contracts mean on or sometimes before the expiration date the Market Maker can go to the Hedge Fund with the cash and demand shares.
Now, the obvious reason you naked short is to hopefully drive the price of a stock down, the company goes bankrupt, and you never have to buy the naked shares back. Pure profit. Sure, maybe at some point you might get found out and become an infamous slimey asshole, but you could be a rich slimey asshole! You embrace it and naked short a bunch of shares to retail investors. Asshole.
Here’s where the two pool theory comes in, you need to be the hedge fund to a market maker or the mm to a hf to naked short. Do you also naked short to your “buddy”? Your “friend”?
Hedge Fund: Why are you saying it like that?
Space Debris: Saying what what way?
Hedge Fund: “Friend” With the things. MM and I are buddies! Right, MM?
MM:
Hedge Fund: MM?
Do the MM and the HF create a naked pool between themselves? What could be the advantages of that?
Could those naked shares be used as locates for a legitimate short sale? They should look and act like real shares, right? Could they move them around in dark pools? Could they be used for margin? Again, they should look like real shares that their “buddy” sold them? Meanwhile they’re toxic garbage.
If the Stock you’re trying to crush isn’t moving, no one is buying, no one is selling, could you naked short a bunch of shares out into the market to your buddy to get the price moving down?
If everyone is buying and no one is selling, could you naked short a bunch of shares through the market to your buddy to try and drop the price?
Hedge Fund: That would get people selling, right? That would get the price dropping, right?
Plus, those shares don’t end up in the hands of bulls. They end up in your “buddies” hands. He also wants to crush this stock.
Hedge Fund: Retail is selling, right?
MM:
Hedge Fund: MM?
Now, let’s say you have a huge naked short pool in the hands of retail you have to deal with and you have a huge pool with your buddy. Which are you going to deal with first? Probably the retail pool.
So, I’m not saying you did this, but what exactly would happen if say….

• You have two monstrous naked share pools. One with retail and one pool with your naked shorting buddies

Hedge Fund: Well, I….
Space Debris: Let me fucking finish.

• On a stock of a company with potential, that’s not going bankrupt anytime soon

Hedge Fund: That’s debat….
Space Debris: Shut the fuck up

• That stock also has a large group of retail investors who have been DRSing for the past three years…

Hedge Fund: Well, then why does the price keep dropping?
Space Debris: There’s this little film from 1944 I’d like you to watch. You like Ingrid Bergman?
What would happen if say you had that huge retail pool of naked shorts that you’ve been successfully rolling for three years, but you also have a huge pool of naked shorts with your buddy that you created in a time of desperation? A time of desperation, say about three years ago?
Now, say a big part of that pool of naked shorts you have with you friend is coming due finally? You’ve been putting most or maybe all of it off just trying to tread water and roll your retail naked shorts. You’ve been crushing the price, desperately hoping retail will sell, but now you and your buddy need to roll the toxic pool you hold between yourselves. The way to roll an old naked short into a new one is by: 1. Creating a new naked share. 2. Buying a real share to close the old naked share.
If you keep reading I’ll dive into the mechanics a bit more (not as much as my old DD), but basically the Naked Shorting Market Maker will need to have special privileges (be an Authorized Participant) to rip open ETFs. The Market Maker rips open a bunch of ETFs that shouldn’t exist – which could be why you see ETFs with such high short interest and such high Failure-To-Delivers (FTDs). The MM then has a bunch of naked shares that he pulled out of the ETF and those are used to naked short the stock.
Here’s an image I want you to picture that might help. When naked shorters crush a company through naked shorts, most of the time they’re not just flushing more and more naked shorts into the market. Most of the time it’s rolling over the market in a wave. They would be closing old naked shorts as they open new ones. If a naked shorter started naked shorting against a company at $20 10 years ago then they will no longer have naked shorts opened at $20. The naked share could have been rolled at 19, 18, 17 or 15, 10, 5. In other words, a naked share was sold to Bob for $20 in the past. A real share is now bought from Suzy for $19 and sent to Bob, then a new naked share is sent to John for $19. There’s still only one naked short in the market, but the expiration date, price, and location has changed. Bob never knew he had a fake and now neither does John. The naked shorter scraped $1 off the play and is still crushing the stock. If you have a super algo that can do this for change constantly all day everyday then that change adds up very fast. Ever seen office space?
There are times where it would be beneficial to shoot out more naked shorts than you’re closing. At the beginning, possibly towards what the naked shorter hopes is the end, to get the stock moving, in a time of desperation, etc.
But now a big question I have...
A question I really wish I knew the answer to and sadly I honestly don’t. What if you delayed the delivery of a fuck ton of naked shorts to your buddy, they’re finally coming due, and there was also a split or maybe a splividend sometime in the past three years? Did you delay the delivery of the splividend shares to your “buddy”? Is that allowed?! I’m trying to find out, but the market is so fucking opaque! This seems like something that shouldn’t be allowed, but this market can also be a joke at times. Is this allowed? I’ve been trying to find it somewhere in the rules, but there are too many rules. ChatGPT said it’s allowed, but ChatGPT says a lot of crazy shit.
I need to go over that again. You’re so fucking underwater because GME is sneezing, you just spray a fucking hurricane of naked shorts at the market to crush the price, your naked shorting buddy buys up as many of your naked shorts as he can so they don’t get into retail hands. You’re also exchanging contracts far out in the future as insurance – insurance that you can buy the shares back from your “buddy” at some point. Time to crush retail. If retail doesn’t sell… and if it’s finally time to settle your deadpool with your “friend”? Has some of it been quadrupled in the past three years?
Again, I want to be clear. No one has hard evidence that there are naked shorters holding a fuck ton of LEAPS coming due in June. I also have no evidence that a split or splividend can be delayed between naked shorters. This is all a theory. It does line up nicely with the other DD I wrote over a year ago and does make some puzzle pieces fit nicely in my mind, but I also feel a bit like I’ve been smoking tinfoil and mainlining GME for years now.
So, again, don’t get too hype now….
A bigger question, the splividend is kind of weird. Does the splividend require that the deadpool be closed/rolled by buying real shares? It seems like with a split a deadpool could be closed using cash, is the splividend different?
Hedge Fund: Well… okay, but… why does the price keep dropping? You should sell… AI boom! Artificial Intelligence is here. Sure, you read a book two years ago that AGI would take 50-100 years to develop, but AGI is here! Now! I swear. Buy my AI Stocks!
A DEEPER DIVE – BACK TO THE OLD DD
A little over a year ago I wrote an 89 page DD. You probably haven’t read it. It was long and covered way too much, but there’s a lot to talk about with a stock like GME. I’m going to try and summarize my DD for you, that way you don’t need to go back through it. A lot of it is important to my theory and some of it is just interesting in my opinion. And some of it is wild cohencidences that make me feel like a conspiracy nut.
I honestly originally went on the journey to write that long DD because sometimes I felt like I was in a cult and I needed to do my own research. Fuck, I may have fell farther down the rabbit hole and I keep tumbling down. Yay!
Naked shorting has been around since markets have been around. If you have delayed delivery then it’s easy to sell something and worry about the delivery later. The stock market seemed to reach a fairly good place of stability because of rules and regulations until computers came along. Computers and algorithms have led to an insane advantage for wall street over the common retail investor. Market makers have also had special rules and have had access to different loopholes that allow for even larger delays in delivery.
I sell you 100 shares of Stock A for $10 now. If I can wait to buy then I’ll just wait until it’s cheaper. Also, remember, I have a super fast computer selling huge amounts of shares to other people too. Cheap enough for me might be $9.99. I buy for $9.99, settle my naked short with you, and now I’m selling naked shorts at $9.98. Anyone?! $9.98? I got as many as you need! (the price falls) $9.96? $9.94?
Most retail investors hold shares for less than a year. Naked shorters hate hodlers, they want to constantly be selling to new suckers at lower prices until the company goes bankrupt. They want retail investors churning through the stock in months. Shares constantly moving hands.
So, you can kind of think of naked shorting as delayed delivery. Sell high and delay delivery long enough until you can buy low. Or at the end not even buy at all. “Sorry, product is no longer available, your delivery has been canceled.”
In the past Market Makers had an exemption that made it very easy to naked short and there are some strong signs that they abused that exemption. Back in the day a Market Maker could point to an UN-EXERCISED call option as a locate. I capitalized that un-exercised part because it’s important.
WEIRD COHENCIDENCE 1 – THE OPTIONS LOOPHOLE/MADOFF/2008
So, here’s where I found some weird coincidences writing my old DD that made me really feel like I was losing my mind a bit. So, please, lose your mind along with me.

• Back in the day a Market Maker and Hedge Fund would do this naked shorting using a package of naked shares, put contracts, call contracts, and futures contracts. To the outside world it would look like normal buying and hedging of shares that hedge funds do everyday. The Market Maker side would look like something called a Reverse Conversion and the Hedge Fund side would look like something called a Split-Strike.
  
• Bernied Madoff used to claim that he made all of his money using Split-Strikes.
  
• This Option exemption or Reverse Conversion/Split-Strike strategy was closed through rule changes during the 2008 financial crash.
  
• Bernie Madoff’s fund blew up during the 2008 financial crash.
  

Hopefully, it’s just a coincidence, because, what the fuck. Who’s writing this story?

• Oh, also Bernie Madoff’s friend from prison claims that Madoff admitted to naked shorting and says that Madoff claimed everyone on wall street was doing it.

Wild, am I completely crazy wondering if naked shorting played a part in the 2008 financial crisis?

• Oh, also, the options market lost a lot of steam after 2008, and well, guess what market really started taking off after 2008? Did you guess the ETF market? Because you’d be correct!

Did naked shorters move from the options market to the ETF market around 2008? Options still would have been good for insurance purposes, but not for creating the actual naked shares anymore.
An EXERCISED option can still be used as a locate today in order to short a stock. If you exercise the option, it means you’ve paid for the stock and the stock will be delivered soon. Market Makers have about a month to make good on the delivery. You could probably naked short through exercised options, but it would give you a finite window. I don’t know why you would if you can just use ETFs to naked short instead.
The way those old Reverse Conversion and Split-Strikes were built is very important. Yes, they looked like normal plays any hedge fund might make to regulators, but they also included insurance between thugs. Options and futures contracts can provide insurance to the Market Maker, that way when the MM shows up with cash the Hedge Fund will be forced to deliver shares. CYA! Cover Your ASS! Too bad you’re already naked shorting – that’s a dangerous fucking game.
These days the Market Maker opens up ETFs for the naked shares and sends those to the Hedge Fund. The ETF is the locate. Then the Market Maker can still use futures contracts or options contract with the Hedge Fund to ensure the MM won’t be the one left holding the bag.
BULLET SWAPS
We should also take a quick detour into bullet swaps. Bullet swaps would also not work as a locate for naked shorting.
No shares exchange hands because of a bullet swap. Nobody on wall street can point to a bullet swap as proof that they can get shares. Bullet swaps would primarily be used for hedging (insurance) or leverage.
INSURANCE: If you are short a stock then you can get insurance through a swap deal by entering a swap that is long on the stock. You short the stock and also enter a long bullet swap that expires far in the future. You now have years to crush the stock. In the future if you fail to crush the price of the stock then your long swap will help offset the cost of your failed shorts. With a bullet swap you pay for the insurance at expiration.
LEVERAGE: If you are short a stock, but also want leverage you could add a short bullet swap to your position. This will grow your short position without shorting more of the stock. Also, this will leave less of a sign that you’re shorting the stock. Buying a shit ton of puts might get noticed. And again, with a bullet swap, you pay for the leverage in the future.
Hwang in there. Sorry, this DD is so long.
Let’s say you were a degenerate with a lot of money to play on the stock market. You’re naked shorting a stock and you’re positive you can crush this thing. So you also take out a big bullet swap short position. You’ll make even more money when this stock goes bankrupt and you don’t even have to pay for the bullet swap until the expiration date. You just bought, or just got leverage without buying anything… You pay for the leverage in the future!
Bullet swaps are completely irresponsible! How is this a thing?!
If your naked short position blows up AND you haven’t hedged AND all of the sudden you owe a big lump sum on a short bullet swap, yikes, you’d be fucked.
TWO POOLS – STOCK A
Let’s use a made up story to help illustrate what I’m trying to say here. In this hypothetical scenario, naked shorters decide to naked short Stock A into the ground. Let’s say they start naked shorting on Stock A around 2012 or something.
Hedge Fund: It’s a dying business!
They start pumping naked shares into the market and the price falls.
Hedge Fund: See!
Then some dude looking for deep value comes along in 2019. He buys a bunch of shares and a bunch of call options on Stock A.
Now jump forward to 2021, January is an important time:

1. FUTURES EXPIRING – Naked shares could be insured using Futures Contracts.
   
2. LEAPS EXPIRING – Naked shares could also be insured using LEAPS.
   
3. REGARDS – Also, that deep value dude has some calls expiring January 15th. Retail Investors send their regards. Dude on the internet (not a cat) and a bunch of traders on reddit YOLO hard into Stock A.
   

That means:

1. Naked shares might need to be closed or rolled.
   
2. Naked shares might need to be closed or rolled.
   
3. Retail starts buying shares and call options.
   

In other words,

1. Buy Pressure
   
2. Buy Pressure
   
3. Buy Pressure
   

The price skyrockets. Or sneezes if your prefer.
Naked shorters flood the market with naked shares of Stock A to drive the price back down. A bunch of those naked shares are sold to other naked shorters.
Now, in this scenario there are suddenly bulls and bears fighting over the stock. There’s even talk among some of the bulls of a possible short squeeze. Everyone is buying, but naked shorters need the price to go down. The only way to do that is to sell shares. More supply meets demand = price drops. Obviously, a naked shorter would do that by selling naked shares. But more naked shares into the hands of bulls?
It’s slimey, dark, and disgusting in here, but please, come join me in the mind of a naked shorter for a second. Let’s say as a naked shorter: 1. I need to buy a bunch of shares to roll a big part of my naked position. 2. Bulls are out on parade buying like fucking crazy. 3. There’s talk of a potential short squeeze.
As a naked shorter we would want to flood the market with naked shares to crush the price. A fuckton more supply meets the same demand = big price drop. On the other hand, bulls are buying like crazy. The more naked shares we pump out the more ammo we’re handing to bulls.
I don’t know about you, but if I were a naked shorter then I don’t want to hand a bunch of naked shares to bulls, especially if they’re already talking about a squeeze. I do want to flood the market with naked shares though. I would probably ask one of my naked shorting “friends” to gobble up as many of my naked shares as possible. We’ll both survive and we can settle up with each other later.
We usually use yearly contracts with retail naked shorts because most of retail sells within a year. With one another we could push it to three years. Surely, retail will give up after three years. Retail holding for three years is an anomaly. It just doesn’t happen!
Hedge Fund: That’s right!
Let’s assume naked shorters built a huge pool of naked shares among themselves on Stock A. The huge flood of shares into the market helps crush the price and most of the shares end up with other naked shorters.
Maybe naked shorters also turn off the buy button, which is the rich kid equivalent of overturning the game board. Really just pathetic.
Company A: That was fucking weird….
Retail: Was that naked shorting?
Company A:
To recap, in this scenario, naked shorters now have a large pool of naked shares in the hands of retail that they need to continually roll. I think it’s likely naked shares to retail would be built with yearly expiration dates, most retail investors sell within a year. That gives flexibility to naked shorters to continually settle old naked shares and create new ones. Waves of naked shares being gobbled back up and spewed back out and gobbled back up and spewed back out. The naked shares look and act like the real thing as long as they can find a cheaper real share before expiration. They have a year – retail sells quick, and can be easy to manipulate. Should be easy money. Easy money with a whole lot o’ fucking risk.
Then the naked shorting pool, or the deadpool, are all of the naked shares that naked shorters sell to one another. Again, maybe at a time of desperation a fuck-ton of naked shares get sold through the market from one naked shorter to another. These naked shares have been created from an ETF loophole, then packaged with insurance using a Futures Contract or a LEAP Contract.
For example, on GME (a stock completely unrelated to made-up Stock A), the share price has shown waves in the price around quarterly triple-witching dates in March, June, September, and December. This would make sense if the price is moving because of common expiration dates used for Futures Contracts and LEAPS.
Now, let’s dive back into the grimy mind of a naked shorter. We built a bunch of naked shares and sent those to retail with yearly expiration dates. If we made these naked shares around January, March, June, or December of 2021 then they would expire in January, March, June, or December of 2022. Retail sells quick, a year should be enough time to close or roll.
In a time of desperation you also naked short a butt load of naked shares to your naked shorting “buddy”, he’s also naked shorting the stock and has no interest in calling in those naked shares anytime soon.
If you built a pool of naked shares with your “friend” then why would you give them the same expiration as naked shares sold to retail? That’s just adding to your retail headache. Retail should sell in a year (most usually do), but you can hold this position with your “friend” for a lot longer. Why not sell those naked shares with expiration dates much farther in the future? Maybe three years if you’re using LEAPS.
That gives you plenty of time to scare off retail, close out your retail naked shorts, and then you can worry about settling up with your “buddies”. You have insurance with LEAPS or Futures so settling with your buddies should be pretty easy. You can put that all off for another day far in the future.
Hedge Fund: Retail sells, right?
Space Debris: It’s just a story.
Hedge Fund: But retail sells, right?
Space Debris: No.
Let’s jump back to our fake Stock A scenario, maybe Company A sees some weird shit happening to their stock and think of naked shorters. Maybe Company A even sees the possibility of a huge naked short position being paired with a lot of LEAPS. Maybe Company A then gives naked shorters a year to close their short position, seems fair to me. Or maybe Company A just liked the idea of a splividend for a multitude of other reasons.
In this story, Company A puts out a splividend, it’s a bit different then your normal dividend. Mostly because of the way it’s delivered. Normally, with a split, every share of the Stock is just split. Naked shares look like normal shares so they’d be split and no delivery would be necessary. They would just need to deliver more shares on or before expiration to go with the old naked share. The price has also been split so their naked position should fundamentally be the same.
For ease, let’s say Company A split 4:1. Every share will now become 4. But for the splividend, they’ll actually hand deliver 3 shares to only the real shares. Company A’s people are going to check. If naked shorters have 1 naked share in the hand of a retail investor then they need to add 3 more shares to that hand. Doesn’t matter if the expiration is still a year out on that naked share, they owe 3 shares right now. The rules are convoluted and hard to parse through, but I believe Market Makers would have a few days to deliver splividend shares to retail. They could potentially have a month or so, but I’m not sure on that. I don’t think they would be able to delay retail splividend delivery for much more than a month. Retail splividend delivery. RETAIL….
The Deadpool might be different! With your retail splividends you could just create new naked shares to send as your dividend fulfillment. With your deadpool could you just agree to wait?
For, ease let’s assume for every 1 naked share sent out into the market, naked shorters also sent 1 to each other. These are made up numbers. It would be impossible to see the size of a naked short position or where it’s hidden. Naked shares look just like the real thing… until they don’t.
For every 1 naked share of Stock A in the Retail Pool, there is 1 naked share in the Deadpool.
Other stocks could be different, Stock A is a hypothetical.
Let’s assume naked shorters have been rolling, but unable to close their Retail naked short position in Stock A. These naked shorters would most likely have also held onto a lot of their naked short position with one another. The stock has also been split.
If naked shorters have the ability to delay delivery of the splividend to one another then they may not have settled a bunch of dividends yet. Every 1 naked share in the deadpool could now be 4 naked shares.
Now if you’re hoping Company A will squeeze because of a huge deadpool that needs to be closed then calm down, it might not be that easy.
THE DEADPOOL
Let’s look at all of the advantages of creating a deadpool with your naked shorting friends:

1. Those naked shares don’t end up in the hands of bulls and the naked shares drive the price of the stock down.
   
2. Your naked shorting “friend” is good at hiding naked shares. If there’s a limit to how many naked shares you can shit into retails’ hands, then a deadpool could be a place to go if you start hitting the retail limit.
   
3. Those naked shares look like real shares so they could potentially be used for margin.
   
4. You could potentially move them around in a dark pool to your “friend”, just match them with a short term option or future depending on when you want them back.
   

SEC: “Where are these locates?”
MM: “Right here, got them out of the deadpool.”
SEC: “The what?”
MM: “The darkpool.”
SEC: “Oh, cool. Are you hiring?”
MM:
SEC: MM?
MM:

1. Extra Insurance with your naked shorting “friends”? “We all close our retail naked shorts and then we close these.” OR “Fine! I was naked shorting! But… but… he also sent me this huge pile of naked shares!”

1. THE MAIN ADVANTAGE – I’m gonna hit you with some minor fud. This hypothetical deadpool might (I’m not positive) be able to be closed with cash. Naked shorters don’t want to drive the price up. Buying actual shares to close would drive the price up. I believe Deadpool naked shares could and would most likely be closed using cash when the time came. I have some questions about this because of the splividend that I’ll talk about below. Basically, does the splividend change that? Can splividend naked shares be settled with cash? I really wish I knew.

The deadpool could also be rolled and they would keep some of the other benefits, but it would likely be opened the normal way, and the old naked shares would still likely be closed using cash.
Now, I’m not positive, but I do believe rolling an old deadpool position using cash could cause upward movement in the shorted stock. It could also be very expensive, but if you’re rolling and your “buddy” also naked shorts an even amount of “shares” back to you then you’re basically just breaking even.
If the Deadpool exists then it would be just another hidden festering pile of naked shares slowly dragging naked shorters down. If it was grown by the splividend then it’s like a cancerous pile of naked shares and it’s reckoning day could be coming soon. Time to close or roll. I think Deadpool is a fitting name. The Deadpool would be zombie shares (that shouldn’t exist) pulled out of zombie ETFs that were conjured out of nothing. There are no real (living) shares hanging out in the Deadpool.
Not to be confused with the comic book character. He would DRS and hodl.
STOCK A – THE DEADPOOL & “FRIENDS”
First off, there has been a lot of conjecture about a stock called GME. It’s all conjecture. No one knows dates. No one knows how many naked shares there could potentially be. No one here knows. Unless Kenny G is lurking. He might know something. No one gets that good at the sax without knowing a thing or two. Totally unrelated, but could you imagine if you were a naked shorter who had been griftin’ the market for years and your last name was Griffin.
Some of this DD is based on research into the rules, but some is also based on conjecture and theories. Take everything with a grain of salt.
Let’s go back to Stock A.
Let’s say a hedge fund naked shorted a bunch of Stock A with his friends. Then that hedge fund also entered bullet swap deals to get even more leverage on his short position. January 2021 rolls around, he blows up. He can’t roll all of his retail naked shares and can’t make good on shares with his Market Maker. Oh, and because of those bullet swaps, instead of making extra money, he owes a big lump sum.
The Hedge Fund evaporates and someone else takes over his position. Maybe someone who is not “friends” with the naked shorters and doesn’t want to be naked.
Now, Company A is smart, there were some signs that maybe your company was being naked shorted, but naked shorting is illegal. A year after all of the craziness, Company A does a splividend. A splividend could really make a naked shorting position even more of a nightmare, but naked shorting is illegal. Plus, shorters said they closed a year ago. Company A has many reasons to do a splividend that don’t involve naked shorting at all.
Company A then puts it out there that they want to sell a lot of shares. They have bright plans for the future and they need money. It costs money to make money! Or is it whisky? Again, naked shorting is illegal so there shouldn’t be any naked shares, but an offer like that could look like a lifeline if someone was naked shorting.
Seems like it would also be a good way to protect Company A from any litigation in the future that says they purposely tried to start a squeeze on their own stock. Or a MOASS. How could they start a squeeze? Company A put it out there that they wanted to sell a nice chunk of shares. You didn’t try to get any of those shares?
Company A: How many shares did you need?
MM:
Company A: How many shares did you need, MM?
MM:
Like Five Fancy Lawyers in Unison: Our client pleads the fifth.
Back to the lifeline though, you just absorbed someone’s toxic bag of naked shorts and you want out. Company A just put up a flashing sign that says, we’d like to sell some shares. Seems like a pretty good opportunity to me, doesn’t hurt to ask.
Market Maker: I just absorbed some toxic shit, got any shares you’d sell me?
Company A: Maybe
If you inherited a bag of toxic naked shorts and you know or have a strong feeling there are many more out there then trying to close by buying real shares through the market will run the price up. Can you close before you get out? If Company A sells you as many shares as they’re willing then that might cut your naked short position down or completely close it. If it doesn’t close it then what’s the next best option? You likely know that buying power is about to crank up because your toxic bag is expiring and so are a lot of other toxic bags.
Your next best option? Options…
If there’s a scenario where you’re trying to maybe not be the first one out, but insure that you make it out, this is the best play in my opinion. Again, Company A said they want to sell shares. You need real shares. If you’re unable to get enough shares directly from Company A then you turn to options. Options allow you to lock in a price for the shares you’re comfortable with, if the price drops then you can buy some shares for cheaper on the open market. If the price rises then you can still buy shares for the cheaper strike price by exercising the options contract.
Again, if you start buying at market then the price could start taking off and you’re cost basis could get blown out of the water. For example, you need 1 million shares of Company A at $20. If company is at $19, then with a big buy order your 1 millionth share might actually get bought at $21 or $25 or way higher. If you buy 10,000 $20 Calls then you can buy 1 million shares at $20 until the Calls expire.
The other advantage, you don’t have to be the first naked shorter to go to the market and start smashing the buy button. If Company A goes through some sort of Mother of All Short Squeezes then you won’t be the one who started it. To regulators, you just luckily bought some call options before this all started happening and now you’re exercising. Really wild stuff going on. Good thing you’re not naked short on that stock…. anymore… You go home and cry.

Sorry, this got so long, that seems to happen when I write a DD. I wanted to get this out last week, but it kept growing. I’ll try and answer questions, but I also kind of need a break.
THE DEADPOOL THEORY: TWO POOLS
None of this is financial advice. I’m just a stranger on the internet. Please do your own research.
https://preview.redd.it/qvwkvpfwr03d1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=a260c85e681f39d3edf08141503f69cbb67ab30f
SUMMARY
I did a deep dive into the rules a year or so ago and wrote a long DD. I think it’s still relevant.
Options are most likely not used as locates for naked shorting. ETFs are the likely culprit. Bullet Swaps would likely be used for insurance or leverage, I don’t think they’re as important as some people think – they are scary as fuck though.
You need at least two parties to naked short. A Market Maker and a Hedge Fund. Market Maker pulls naked shares out of ETFs for Hedge Fund to naked short. Market Maker insures with Futures Contract or Options (probably LEAPS).
That insurance means that if the Market Maker sends X naked shares to the Hedge Fund then the Market Maker also bought enough contracts to buy X numbers of shares from the Hedge Fund on or possibly by some date far in the future. MMs practice CYA!
SEC: Where are the shares?
MM: I don’t know! I definitely sold this Hedge Fund real shares a long time ago. I have a contract for shares back and he doesn’t seem to have any. Isn’t that crazy?!
SEC: Yeah… Are you hiring?
Two Pools Theory is based around the idea that Naked Shorters likely have many reasons to naked short to one another and could potentially naked short large amounts of naked shares through the market to one another in a desperate time of need. Naked shorters didn’t get this far on wall street by trusting others – sell some naked shorts to your “buddy”, and you also get a contract that your “buddy” owes you those “shares” back at some point. CYA!
Too bad it’s impossible to CYA when you’re naked shorting. Duh. “Smart Money” my ass.
I call the pool of naked shares that naked shorters might be holding the deadpool. Maybe superstonk can come up with something better.
If the naked shorters built a huge pool of naked shares between themselves (the deadpool), a large portion of it in 2021, then how many of those naked shares have been closed/rolled? Is it possible the expiration date of some of those naked shorts was based around a witching date/LEAP date roughly three years in the future?
And my biggest question of all, if naked shorters could delay delivery of naked shorts to one another three years into the future, could they also delay the splividend to one another? What if they owe 4 shares for every 1 on a toxic mess they’re holding between themselves?
If I was a naked shorter in this situation then I’d want out. If I also knew I and every other naked shorter needed shares soon then I’d either try and buy real shares from the company or as many call options as I possibly could. GME did just sell some shares and a bunch of call options have been bought recently. Is a big expiration date coming due and someone is trying to get out?
I sadly don’t have answers to a lot of the questions I raise in this paper. I’d mostly just like you to think about these questions with me.
Now here’s another thing to think about because I’ve hyped myself up, and it’s good to stay level headed. If that’s all true, then naked shorters have also had three years to come up with a plan to survive another day.
If there’s naked shorting, then eventually DRSing will uncover it, if it fucking has to.
In the mean time, I think it’s fun to think about naked shorters building a deadpool that might be coming back to fuck them.
THE TWO POOL THEORY
This theory covers a lot and I’m hesitant to even put it out there because it could have big implications and it could also be completely wrong. It’s also based on some speculation. There’s a lot of speculation about June swirling around with LEAPS and Bullet Swaps. I haven’t seen any proof that anyone actually knows expiration dates on any bullet swaps or LEAPS that naked shorters may or may not be holding. There’s also some speculation on some rules in this write-up because I’ve been unable to find anything worthy of a citation that says naked shorters can delay delivery of a dividend to one another. I also haven’t found any citations on how splividends would work with naked shorting.
The gist of the theory is that there are two pools of naked shares. One pool is held in the hands of retail and one pool is held in the hands of the naked shorters themselves. I believe the naked shares in those pools could be handled in different ways. Naked shorting would need to be done between two parties: a Market Maker and a Hedge Fund. The Market Maker would most likely pull naked shares out of ETFs for the Hedge Fund and the Hedge Fund would then sell the naked shares into the market.
The Market Maker likely would want insurance on a risky naked shorting play. The Market Maker could enter into Futures Contracts or LEAPS with the Hedge Fund. These contracts mean on or sometimes before the expiration date the Market Maker can go to the Hedge Fund with the cash and demand shares.
Now, the obvious reason you naked short is to hopefully drive the price of a stock down, the company goes bankrupt, and you never have to buy the naked shares back. Pure profit. Sure, maybe at some point you might get found out and become an infamous slimey asshole, but you could be a rich slimey asshole! You embrace it and naked short a bunch of shares to retail investors. Asshole.
Here’s where the two pool theory comes in, you need to be the hedge fund to a market maker or the mm to a hf to naked short. Do you also naked short to your “buddy”? Your “friend”?
Hedge Fund: Why are you saying it like that?
Space Debris: Saying what what way?
Hedge Fund: “Friend” With the things. MM and I are buddies! Right, MM?
MM:
Hedge Fund: MM?
Do the MM and the HF create a naked pool between themselves? What could be the advantages of that?
Could those naked shares be used as locates for a legitimate short sale? They should look and act like real shares, right? Could they move them around in dark pools? Could they be used for margin? Again, they should look like real shares that their “buddy” sold them? Meanwhile they’re toxic garbage.
If the Stock you’re trying to crush isn’t moving, no one is buying, no one is selling, could you naked short a bunch of shares out into the market to your buddy to get the price moving down?
If everyone is buying and no one is selling, could you naked short a bunch of shares through the market to your buddy to try and drop the price?
Hedge Fund: That would get people selling, right? That would get the price dropping, right?
Plus, those shares don’t end up in the hands of bulls. They end up in your “buddies” hands. He also wants to crush this stock.
Hedge Fund: Retail is selling, right?
MM:
Hedge Fund: MM?
Now, let’s say you have a huge naked short pool in the hands of retail you have to deal with and you have a huge pool with your buddy. Which are you going to deal with first? Probably the retail pool.
So, I’m not saying you did this, but what exactly would happen if say….

• You have two monstrous naked share pools. One with retail and one pool with your naked shorting buddies

Hedge Fund: Well, I….
Space Debris: Let me fucking finish.

• On a stock of a company with potential, that’s not going bankrupt anytime soon

Hedge Fund: That’s debat….
Space Debris: Shut the fuck up

• That stock also has a large group of retail investors who have been DRSing for the past three years…

Hedge Fund: Well, then why does the price keep dropping?
Space Debris: There’s this little film from 1944 I’d like you to watch. You like Ingrid Bergman?
What would happen if say you had that huge retail pool of naked shorts that you’ve been successfully rolling for three years, but you also have a huge pool of naked shorts with your buddy that you created in a time of desperation? A time of desperation, say about three years ago?
Now, say a big part of that pool of naked shorts you have with you friend is coming due finally? You’ve been putting most or maybe all of it off just trying to tread water and roll your retail naked shorts. You’ve been crushing the price, desperately hoping retail will sell, but now you and your buddy need to roll the toxic pool you hold between yourselves. The way to roll an old naked short into a new one is by: 1. Creating a new naked share. 2. Buying a real share to close the old naked share.
If you keep reading I’ll dive into the mechanics a bit more (not as much as my old DD), but basically the Naked Shorting Market Maker will need to have special privileges (be an Authorized Participant) to rip open ETFs. The Market Maker rips open a bunch of ETFs that shouldn’t exist – which could be why you see ETFs with such high short interest and such high Failure-To-Delivers (FTDs). The MM then has a bunch of naked shares that he pulled out of the ETF and those are used to naked short the stock.
Here’s an image I want you to picture that might help. When naked shorters crush a company through naked shorts, most of the time they’re not just flushing more and more naked shorts into the market. Most of the time it’s rolling over the market in a wave. They would be closing old naked shorts as they open new ones. If a naked shorter started naked shorting against a company at $20 10 years ago then they will no longer have naked shorts opened at $20. The naked share could have been rolled at 19, 18, 17 or 15, 10, 5. In other words, a naked share was sold to Bob for $20 in the past. A real share is now bought from Suzy for $19 and sent to Bob, then a new naked share is sent to John for $19. There’s still only one naked short in the market, but the expiration date, price, and location has changed. Bob never knew he had a fake and now neither does John. The naked shorter scraped $1 off the play and is still crushing the stock. If you have a super algo that can do this for change constantly all day everyday then that change adds up very fast. Ever seen office space?
There are times where it would be beneficial to shoot out more naked shorts than you’re closing. At the beginning, possibly towards what the naked shorter hopes is the end, to get the stock moving, in a time of desperation, etc.
But now a big question I have...
A question I really wish I knew the answer to and sadly I honestly don’t. What if you delayed the delivery of a fuck ton of naked shorts to your buddy, they’re finally coming due, and there was also a split or maybe a splividend sometime in the past three years? Did you delay the delivery of the splividend shares to your “buddy”? Is that allowed?! I’m trying to find out, but the market is so fucking opaque! This seems like something that shouldn’t be allowed, but this market can also be a joke at times. Is this allowed? I’ve been trying to find it somewhere in the rules, but there are too many rules. ChatGPT said it’s allowed, but ChatGPT says a lot of crazy shit.
I need to go over that again. You’re so fucking underwater because GME is sneezing, you just spray a fucking hurricane of naked shorts at the market to crush the price, your naked shorting buddy buys up as many of your naked shorts as he can so they don’t get into retail hands. You’re also exchanging contracts far out in the future as insurance – insurance that you can buy the shares back from your “buddy” at some point. Time to crush retail. If retail doesn’t sell… and if it’s finally time to settle your deadpool with your “friend”? Has some of it been quadrupled in the past three years?
Again, I want to be clear. No one has hard evidence that there are naked shorters holding a fuck ton of LEAPS coming due in June. I also have no evidence that a split or splividend can be delayed between naked shorters. This is all a theory. It does line up nicely with the other DD I wrote over a year ago and does make some puzzle pieces fit nicely in my mind, but I also feel a bit like I’ve been smoking tinfoil and mainlining GME for years now.
So, again, don’t get too hype now….
A bigger question, the splividend is kind of weird. Does the splividend require that the deadpool be closed/rolled by buying real shares? It seems like with a split a deadpool could be closed using cash, is the splividend different?
Hedge Fund: Well… okay, but… why does the price keep dropping? You should sell… AI boom! Artificial Intelligence is here. Sure, you read a book two years ago that AGI would take 50-100 years to develop, but AGI is here! Now! I swear. Buy my AI Stocks!
A DEEPER DIVE – BACK TO THE OLD DD
A little over a year ago I wrote an 89 page DD. You probably haven’t read it. It was long and covered way too much, but there’s a lot to talk about with a stock like GME. I’m going to try and summarize my DD for you, that way you don’t need to go back through it. A lot of it is important to my theory and some of it is just interesting in my opinion. And some of it is wild cohencidences that make me feel like a conspiracy nut.
I honestly originally went on the journey to write that long DD because sometimes I felt like I was in a cult and I needed to do my own research. Fuck, I may have fell farther down the rabbit hole and I keep tumbling down. Yay!
Naked shorting has been around since markets have been around. If you have delayed delivery then it’s easy to sell something and worry about the delivery later. The stock market seemed to reach a fairly good place of stability because of rules and regulations until computers came along. Computers and algorithms have led to an insane advantage for wall street over the common retail investor. Market makers have also had special rules and have had access to different loopholes that allow for even larger delays in delivery.
I sell you 100 shares of Stock A for $10 now. If I can wait to buy then I’ll just wait until it’s cheaper. Also, remember, I have a super fast computer selling huge amounts of shares to other people too. Cheap enough for me might be $9.99. I buy for $9.99, settle my naked short with you, and now I’m selling naked shorts at $9.98. Anyone?! $9.98? I got as many as you need! (the price falls) $9.96? $9.94?
Most retail investors hold shares for less than a year. Naked shorters hate hodlers, they want to constantly be selling to new suckers at lower prices until the company goes bankrupt. They want retail investors churning through the stock in months. Shares constantly moving hands.
So, you can kind of think of naked shorting as delayed delivery. Sell high and delay delivery long enough until you can buy low. Or at the end not even buy at all. “Sorry, product is no longer available, your delivery has been canceled.”
In the past Market Makers had an exemption that made it very easy to naked short and there are some strong signs that they abused that exemption. Back in the day a Market Maker could point to an UN-EXERCISED call option as a locate. I capitalized that un-exercised part because it’s important.
WEIRD COHENCIDENCE 1 – THE OPTIONS LOOPHOLE/MADOFF/2008
So, here’s where I found some weird coincidences writing my old DD that made me really feel like I was losing my mind a bit. So, please, lose your mind along with me.

• Back in the day a Market Maker and Hedge Fund would do this naked shorting using a package of naked shares, put contracts, call contracts, and futures contracts. To the outside world it would look like normal buying and hedging of shares that hedge funds do everyday. The Market Maker side would look like something called a Reverse Conversion and the Hedge Fund side would look like something called a Split-Strike.
  
• Bernied Madoff used to claim that he made all of his money using Split-Strikes.
  
• This Option exemption or Reverse Conversion/Split-Strike strategy was closed through rule changes during the 2008 financial crash.
  
• Bernie Madoff’s fund blew up during the 2008 financial crash.
  

Hopefully, it’s just a coincidence, because, what the fuck. Who’s writing this story?

• Oh, also Bernie Madoff’s friend from prison claims that Madoff admitted to naked shorting and says that Madoff claimed everyone on wall street was doing it.

Wild, am I completely crazy wondering if naked shorting played a part in the 2008 financial crisis?

• Oh, also, the options market lost a lot of steam after 2008, and well, guess what market really started taking off after 2008? Did you guess the ETF market? Because you’d be correct!

Did naked shorters move from the options market to the ETF market around 2008? Options still would have been good for insurance purposes, but not for creating the actual naked shares anymore.
An EXERCISED option can still be used as a locate today in order to short a stock. If you exercise the option, it means you’ve paid for the stock and the stock will be delivered soon. Market Makers have about a month to make good on the delivery. You could probably naked short through exercised options, but it would give you a finite window. I don’t know why you would if you can just use ETFs to naked short instead.
The way those old Reverse Conversion and Split-Strikes were built is very important. Yes, they looked like normal plays any hedge fund might make to regulators, but they also included insurance between thugs. Options and futures contracts can provide insurance to the Market Maker, that way when the MM shows up with cash the Hedge Fund will be forced to deliver shares. CYA! Cover Your ASS! Too bad you’re already naked shorting – that’s a dangerous fucking game.
These days the Market Maker opens up ETFs for the naked shares and sends those to the Hedge Fund. The ETF is the locate. Then the Market Maker can still use futures contracts or options contract with the Hedge Fund to ensure the MM won’t be the one left holding the bag.
BULLET SWAPS
We should also take a quick detour into bullet swaps. Bullet swaps would also not work as a locate for naked shorting.
No shares exchange hands because of a bullet swap. Nobody on wall street can point to a bullet swap as proof that they can get shares. Bullet swaps would primarily be used for hedging (insurance) or leverage.
INSURANCE: If you are short a stock then you can get insurance through a swap deal by entering a swap that is long on the stock. You short the stock and also enter a long bullet swap that expires far in the future. You now have years to crush the stock. In the future if you fail to crush the price of the stock then your long swap will help offset the cost of your failed shorts. With a bullet swap you pay for the insurance at expiration.
LEVERAGE: If you are short a stock, but also want leverage you could add a short bullet swap to your position. This will grow your short position without shorting more of the stock. Also, this will leave less of a sign that you’re shorting the stock. Buying a shit ton of puts might get noticed. And again, with a bullet swap, you pay for the leverage in the future.
Hwang in there. Sorry, this DD is so long.
Let’s say you were a degenerate with a lot of money to play on the stock market. You’re naked shorting a stock and you’re positive you can crush this thing. So you also take out a big bullet swap short position. You’ll make even more money when this stock goes bankrupt and you don’t even have to pay for the bullet swap until the expiration date. You just bought, or just got leverage without buying anything… You pay for the leverage in the future!
Bullet swaps are completely irresponsible! How is this a thing?!
If your naked short position blows up AND you haven’t hedged AND all of the sudden you owe a big lump sum on a short bullet swap, yikes, you’d be fucked.
TWO POOLS – STOCK A
Let’s use a made up story to help illustrate what I’m trying to say here. In this hypothetical scenario, naked shorters decide to naked short Stock A into the ground. Let’s say they start naked shorting on Stock A around 2012 or something.
Hedge Fund: It’s a dying business!
They start pumping naked shares into the market and the price falls.
Hedge Fund: See!
Then some dude looking for deep value comes along in 2019. He buys a bunch of shares and a bunch of call options on Stock A.
Now jump forward to 2021, January is an important time:

1. FUTURES EXPIRING – Naked shares could be insured using Futures Contracts.
   
2. LEAPS EXPIRING – Naked shares could also be insured using LEAPS.
   
3. REGARDS – Also, that deep value dude has some calls expiring January 15th. Retail Investors send their regards. Dude on the internet (not a cat) and a bunch of traders on reddit YOLO hard into Stock A.
   

That means:

1. Naked shares might need to be closed or rolled.
   
2. Naked shares might need to be closed or rolled.
   
3. Retail starts buying shares and call options.
   

In other words,

1. Buy Pressure
   
2. Buy Pressure
   
3. Buy Pressure
   

The price skyrockets. Or sneezes if your prefer.
Naked shorters flood the market with naked shares of Stock A to drive the price back down. A bunch of those naked shares are sold to other naked shorters.
Now, in this scenario there are suddenly bulls and bears fighting over the stock. There’s even talk among some of the bulls of a possible short squeeze. Everyone is buying, but naked shorters need the price to go down. The only way to do that is to sell shares. More supply meets demand = price drops. Obviously, a naked shorter would do that by selling naked shares. But more naked shares into the hands of bulls?
It’s slimey, dark, and disgusting in here, but please, come join me in the mind of a naked shorter for a second. Let’s say as a naked shorter: 1. I need to buy a bunch of shares to roll a big part of my naked position. 2. Bulls are out on parade buying like fucking crazy. 3. There’s talk of a potential short squeeze.
As a naked shorter we would want to flood the market with naked shares to crush the price. A fuckton more supply meets the same demand = big price drop. On the other hand, bulls are buying like crazy. The more naked shares we pump out the more ammo we’re handing to bulls.
I don’t know about you, but if I were a naked shorter then I don’t want to hand a bunch of naked shares to bulls, especially if they’re already talking about a squeeze. I do want to flood the market with naked shares though. I would probably ask one of my naked shorting “friends” to gobble up as many of my naked shares as possible. We’ll both survive and we can settle up with each other later.
We usually use yearly contracts with retail naked shorts because most of retail sells within a year. With one another we could push it to three years. Surely, retail will give up after three years. Retail holding for three years is an anomaly. It just doesn’t happen!
Hedge Fund: That’s right!
Let’s assume naked shorters built a huge pool of naked shares among themselves on Stock A. The huge flood of shares into the market helps crush the price and most of the shares end up with other naked shorters.
Maybe naked shorters also turn off the buy button, which is the rich kid equivalent of overturning the game board. Really just pathetic.
Company A: That was fucking weird….
Retail: Was that naked shorting?
Company A:
To recap, in this scenario, naked shorters now have a large pool of naked shares in the hands of retail that they need to continually roll. I think it’s likely naked shares to retail would be built with yearly expiration dates, most retail investors sell within a year. That gives flexibility to naked shorters to continually settle old naked shares and create new ones. Waves of naked shares being gobbled back up and spewed back out and gobbled back up and spewed back out. The naked shares look and act like the real thing as long as they can find a cheaper real share before expiration. They have a year – retail sells quick, and can be easy to manipulate. Should be easy money. Easy money with a whole lot o’ fucking risk.
Then the naked shorting pool, or the deadpool, are all of the naked shares that naked shorters sell to one another. Again, maybe at a time of desperation a fuck-ton of naked shares get sold through the market from one naked shorter to another. These naked shares have been created from an ETF loophole, then packaged with insurance using a Futures Contract or a LEAP Contract.
For example, on GME (a stock completely unrelated to made-up Stock A), the share price has shown waves in the price around quarterly triple-witching dates in March, June, September, and December. This would make sense if the price is moving because of common expiration dates used for Futures Contracts and LEAPS.
Now, let’s dive back into the grimy mind of a naked shorter. We built a bunch of naked shares and sent those to retail with yearly expiration dates. If we made these naked shares around January, March, June, or December of 2021 then they would expire in January, March, June, or December of 2022. Retail sells quick, a year should be enough time to close or roll.
In a time of desperation you also naked short a butt load of naked shares to your naked shorting “buddy”, he’s also naked shorting the stock and has no interest in calling in those naked shares anytime soon.
If you built a pool of naked shares with your “friend” then why would you give them the same expiration as naked shares sold to retail? That’s just adding to your retail headache. Retail should sell in a year (most usually do), but you can hold this position with your “friend” for a lot longer. Why not sell those naked shares with expiration dates much farther in the future? Maybe three years if you’re using LEAPS.
That gives you plenty of time to scare off retail, close out your retail naked shorts, and then you can worry about settling up with your “buddies”. You have insurance with LEAPS or Futures so settling with your buddies should be pretty easy. You can put that all off for another day far in the future.
Hedge Fund: Retail sells, right?
Space Debris: It’s just a story.
Hedge Fund: But retail sells, right?
Space Debris: No.
Let’s jump back to our fake Stock A scenario, maybe Company A sees some weird shit happening to their stock and think of naked shorters. Maybe Company A even sees the possibility of a huge naked short position being paired with a lot of LEAPS. Maybe Company A then gives naked shorters a year to close their short position, seems fair to me. Or maybe Company A just liked the idea of a splividend for a multitude of other reasons.
In this story, Company A puts out a splividend, it’s a bit different then your normal dividend. Mostly because of the way it’s delivered. Normally, with a split, every share of the Stock is just split. Naked shares look like normal shares so they’d be split and no delivery would be necessary. They would just need to deliver more shares on or before expiration to go with the old naked share. The price has also been split so their naked position should fundamentally be the same.
For ease, let’s say Company A split 4:1. Every share will now become 4. But for the splividend, they’ll actually hand deliver 3 shares to only the real shares. Company A’s people are going to check. If naked shorters have 1 naked share in the hand of a retail investor then they need to add 3 more shares to that hand. Doesn’t matter if the expiration is still a year out on that naked share, they owe 3 shares right now. The rules are convoluted and hard to parse through, but I believe Market Makers would have a few days to deliver splividend shares to retail. They could potentially have a month or so, but I’m not sure on that. I don’t think they would be able to delay retail splividend delivery for much more than a month. Retail splividend delivery. RETAIL….
The Deadpool might be different! With your retail splividends you could just create new naked shares to send as your dividend fulfillment. With your deadpool could you just agree to wait?
For, ease let’s assume for every 1 naked share sent out into the market, naked shorters also sent 1 to each other. These are made up numbers. It would be impossible to see the size of a naked short position or where it’s hidden. Naked shares look just like the real thing… until they don’t.
For every 1 naked share of Stock A in the Retail Pool, there is 1 naked share in the Deadpool.
Other stocks could be different, Stock A is a hypothetical.
Let’s assume naked shorters have been rolling, but unable to close their Retail naked short position in Stock A. These naked shorters would most likely have also held onto a lot of their naked short position with one another. The stock has also been split.
If naked shorters have the ability to delay delivery of the splividend to one another then they may not have settled a bunch of dividends yet. Every 1 naked share in the deadpool could now be 4 naked shares.
Now if you’re hoping Company A will squeeze because of a huge deadpool that needs to be closed then calm down, it might not be that easy.
THE DEADPOOL
Let’s look at all of the advantages of creating a deadpool with your naked shorting friends:

1. Those naked shares don’t end up in the hands of bulls and the naked shares drive the price of the stock down.
   
2. Your naked shorting “friend” is good at hiding naked shares. If there’s a limit to how many naked shares you can shit into retails’ hands, then a deadpool could be a place to go if you start hitting the retail limit.
   
3. Those naked shares look like real shares so they could potentially be used for margin.
   
4. You could potentially move them around in a dark pool to your “friend”, just match them with a short term option or future depending on when you want them back.
   

SEC: “Where are these locates?”
MM: “Right here, got them out of the deadpool.”
SEC: “The what?”
MM: “The darkpool.”
SEC: “Oh, cool. Are you hiring?”
MM:
SEC: MM?
MM:

1. Extra Insurance with your naked shorting “friends”? “We all close our retail naked shorts and then we close these.” OR “Fine! I was naked shorting! But… but… he also sent me this huge pile of naked shares!”

1. THE MAIN ADVANTAGE – I’m gonna hit you with some minor fud. This hypothetical deadpool might (I’m not positive) be able to be closed with cash. Naked shorters don’t want to drive the price up. Buying actual shares to close would drive the price up. I believe Deadpool naked shares could and would most likely be closed using cash when the time came. I have some questions about this because of the splividend that I’ll talk about below. Basically, does the splividend change that? Can splividend naked shares be settled with cash? I really wish I knew.

The deadpool could also be rolled and they would keep some of the other benefits, but it would likely be opened the normal way, and the old naked shares would still likely be closed using cash.
Now, I’m not positive, but I do believe rolling an old deadpool position using cash could cause upward movement in the shorted stock. It could also be very expensive, but if you’re rolling and your “buddy” also naked shorts an even amount of “shares” back to you then you’re basically just breaking even.
If the Deadpool exists then it would be just another hidden festering pile of naked shares slowly dragging naked shorters down. If it was grown by the splividend then it’s like a cancerous pile of naked shares and it’s reckoning day could be coming soon. Time to close or roll. I think Deadpool is a fitting name. The Deadpool would be zombie shares (that shouldn’t exist) pulled out of zombie ETFs that were conjured out of nothing. There are no real (living) shares hanging out in the Deadpool.
Not to be confused with the comic book character. He would DRS and hodl.
STOCK A – THE DEADPOOL & “FRIENDS”
First off, there has been a lot of conjecture about a stock called GME. It’s all conjecture. No one knows dates. No one knows how many naked shares there could potentially be. No one here knows. Unless Kenny G is lurking. He might know something. No one gets that good at the sax without knowing a thing or two. Totally unrelated, but could you imagine if you were a naked shorter who had been griftin’ the market for years and your last name was Griffin.
Some of this DD is based on research into the rules, but some is also based on conjecture and theories. Take everything with a grain of salt.
Let’s go back to Stock A.
Let’s say a hedge fund naked shorted a bunch of Stock A with his friends. Then that hedge fund also entered bullet swap deals to get even more leverage on his short position. January 2021 rolls around, he blows up. He can’t roll all of his retail naked shares and can’t make good on shares with his Market Maker. Oh, and because of those bullet swaps, instead of making extra money, he owes a big lump sum.
The Hedge Fund evaporates and someone else takes over his position. Maybe someone who is not “friends” with the naked shorters and doesn’t want to be naked.
Now, Company A is smart, there were some signs that maybe your company was being naked shorted, but naked shorting is illegal. A year after all of the craziness, Company A does a splividend. A splividend could really make a naked shorting position even more of a nightmare, but naked shorting is illegal. Plus, shorters said they closed a year ago. Company A has many reasons to do a splividend that don’t involve naked shorting at all.
Company A then puts it out there that they want to sell a lot of shares. They have bright plans for the future and they need money. It costs money to make money! Or is it whisky? Again, naked shorting is illegal so there shouldn’t be any naked shares, but an offer like that could look like a lifeline if someone was naked shorting.
Seems like it would also be a good way to protect Company A from any litigation in the future that says they purposely tried to start a squeeze on their own stock. Or a MOASS. How could they start a squeeze? Company A put it out there that they wanted to sell a nice chunk of shares. You didn’t try to get any of those shares?
Company A: How many shares did you need?
MM:
Company A: How many shares did you need, MM?
MM:
Like Five Fancy Lawyers in Unison: Our client pleads the fifth.
Back to the lifeline though, you just absorbed someone’s toxic bag of naked shorts and you want out. Company A just put up a flashing sign that says, we’d like to sell some shares. Seems like a pretty good opportunity to me, doesn’t hurt to ask.
Market Maker: I just absorbed some toxic shit, got any shares you’d sell me?
Company A: Maybe
If you inherited a bag of toxic naked shorts and you know or have a strong feeling there are many more out there then trying to close by buying real shares through the market will run the price up. Can you close before you get out? If Company A sells you as many shares as they’re willing then that might cut your naked short position down or completely close it. If it doesn’t close it then what’s the next best option? You likely know that buying power is about to crank up because your toxic bag is expiring and so are a lot of other toxic bags.
Your next best option? Options…
If there’s a scenario where you’re trying to maybe not be the first one out, but insure that you make it out, this is the best play in my opinion. Again, Company A said they want to sell shares. You need real shares. If you’re unable to get enough shares directly from Company A then you turn to options. Options allow you to lock in a price for the shares you’re comfortable with, if the price drops then you can buy some shares for cheaper on the open market. If the price rises then you can still buy shares for the cheaper strike price by exercising the options contract.
Again, if you start buying at market then the price could start taking off and you’re cost basis could get blown out of the water. For example, you need 1 million shares of Company A at $20. If company is at $19, then with a big buy order your 1 millionth share might actually get bought at $21 or $25 or way higher. If you buy 10,000 $20 Calls then you can buy 1 million shares at $20 until the Calls expire.
The other advantage, you don’t have to be the first naked shorter to go to the market and start smashing the buy button. If Company A goes through some sort of Mother of All Short Squeezes then you won’t be the one who started it. To regulators, you just luckily bought some call options before this all started happening and now you’re exercising. Really wild stuff going on. Good thing you’re not naked short on that stock…. anymore… You go home and cry.

Seller: Griffin Whatsapp: +4407719326472 or Wechat: qq2981794784 or Seller Album- https://s.wsxc.cn/90gE8l Price: $170 for the bag + $54 for the stripe ($40 for shipping a bag and a wallet 2 items) = $264 paid via Paypal (by the way, authentic is over $2000, plus the cost of customization)
Photos: My own pictures: https://imgur.com/a/mWOXnwH Comparison Pictures of Hardy from Aadi vs Griffin (including video): https://imgur.com/a/zZPpFCI
PSPS: https://imgur.com/a/MEWDZUF
Factory pics: None, I was going based on Griffin’s previous track record and he told me that he would guarantee that he found me a Hardy that did not collapse.
Authentic: https://www.goyard.com/us_en/sac-hardy-pm.html#HARDY2PMLTY01CG03P Also play around with their custom simulator on the website if you want to customize some Goyard bags!
QUALITY 10/10:
• I am really happy with the thickness of the goyardine canvas. As you can see my previous Hardy was basically a sad puddle if not stuffed which made it very difficult to use for work. It was like carrying a limp noodle around and I eventually didn’t bother using it. When I saw the customization on the review a month ago though I was inspired to try again and I am so glad I reached out to Griffin for this great rep! • Goyardine canvas has a good gloss/sheen to it. It’s not florescent shiny, but rather has a good gloss that catches the light. The canvas is very much waterproof, water just sits on the surface without really penetrating and I am able to wipe it off with a towel. This helps when I get caught in the rain (a common occurrence where I am from). • Leather components of this bag are soft and supple, The handles are pliable and can stand of their own, very handy when I put the bag down and need to reach for it quickly. The bag has leather feet that give it a bit of structure and protection. • Handle glazing is even and well coated. I don’t see thin spots that could threaten a split in the leather. • The textile interior of the bag is canvas material and the Hardy comes with a removable base shaper that increases the bag’s structured look. You can also remove the base shaper to have a more slouchy look. • The Hardy comes with a small pouch similar to the St. Louis. Instead of an internal pocket this is what the bag has as an extra feature. I am torn on whether I would appreciate an internal pocket more (like the Artois) or a small pouch. Admittedly, I do like the pouch because I use it as a wallet for when I travel, but I also would have appreciated an internal pocket. Can’t we have BOTH? Lol. Alas, dreams don’t often come true. The pouch is detachable from the bag. • I love the leather strap details because I tend to hook my keys onto it and use the pouch separately. • One similarity with the Artois is that both bags have zipper openings. But what I appreciate about the Hardy is that the zipper opening is LARGE. Both sizes of the zipper extend well past the bag and have a leather strip on sides of the bag that keeps the zipper tabs locked in. Zipper quality is amazing, slides like a charm and the double zip makes taking things in and out a breeze. • I can fit in full A4 folders in here with room to spare, so suffice to say, my laptop and all my work components including my lunch box can fit in here. I also bring along a foldable umbrella and coffee thermos. Mind you, the bag can get heavy with all the stuff in here, but as the day progresses, I eat most of my snacks so the bag gets lighter at the end of the day.
ACCURACY 10/10: • All the basics accuracy points of a good Goyardine canvas are checked off for my Hardy. The Ys touch, the 14-16 count also is nailed, the Goyard St Honore/233 Rue looks similar in font and pattern to the auth. • The placement of the Ys and alignment of the Goyard St Honore matches the auth. The color of this Goyardine canvas’s dots actually has the correct copper tone that I read a member saying most reps get wrong. At any rate, I would not have known about this because unless you have an auth side by side it’s really hard to determine. • The canvas has a beautiful glossy sheen to it as I mentioned in my quality section, that coating helps with the water repellence and also makes it more resistant to wear and tear. There was no chemical smell, even right out of the box. • The bag measures exactly the same as the authentic- 31 x 17 x 40 cm and weighs 800 g, a very lightweight bag! The shape is exactly the same and the strap drop on this bag is generous! Another nice thing about the Hardy is that it’s not so commonplace as the St. Louis or even the Artois. That way you don’t have to worry about bumping into someone who has an auth! • All the leather parts of my bag have soft, large grained leather that is not dry or stiff. The zipper slides back and forth very easily, the zipper pulls are shiny and made of real metal. The leather feels similar to my other genuine leather bags. The grain matches the authentic pictures I’ve seen and the details such as the zipper flaps, the strap stitching, the shape of the bag and strap drop are really non distinguishable from the authentic to my eye. • The Goyard logo has the correct font and depth of embossing The silver G engraving on the pouch looks correct and the font of the Goyard St Honore also looks correct. • Interior canvas has the off white look similar to auth, everything looks as it should. The detachable pouch has the correct diameters and shape is consistent with the authentic. The leather strap that attaches the pouch to the bag is soft but not flimsy. • The removable bag base is sturdy and stiff. It has the handle with the the GOYARD logo on it, shape and cololining is correct. • SATISFACTION 10/10: So incredibly satisfied with finding a Hardy bag that a. meets my expectations for the structure/sturdiness of the Goyardine canvas and b. satisfies the inspiration for the stripe customization I wanted! I already knew that the Hardy would be a perfect work tote for me because I did a lot of research before I bought it the first time around, but I was so disappointed with my first attempt so before trying again I really took the time to show sellers what I didn’t want. The shape of this bag, the zipper flaps, leather feet, base insert and strap drop really tick off all my boxes for what I am looking for in a work bag!
SELLER RATING 10/10:
This is my first time buying from Griffin and was slightly hesitant because of the issues I read about last year but when I started seeing the great comments and reviews, I gained a bit more confidence to try him out again. Griffin was very thorough with his selling process, spoke in pretty perfect English, explained to me the customization process and reassured me that he would find me a thicker canvased Hardy. I appreciate when a seller is willing to go above and beyond in helping me find something that has better accuracy.
Payment was smooth and went without a hitch, delivery was fast too! I appreciated that Griffin sent psps before customizing my bag and also warned me that once it was customized it’s really “my bag” so unless the customization goes awry, then I get what I get and can’t get upset. Lol. Prices are very fair though and when I did some price quotes, Griffin came in very competitively.
I also appreciate Griffin having an insurance option and may check that out next time if I do a larger haul. 10% of the price isn’t a lot so that seems to be a very worthy option, especially now that there are so many inspections with shipping!
Highly recommend Griffin based on this experience, I will definitely be back for more!