Over a third of ENER shares outstanding have been legally shorted, at this time: i.e. borrowed and then sold with the agreement to replace them at some time. I don't have a problem with that. I don't short stocks but used to short commodity futures, both as a speculation (equivalent to a "naked" short) and as a hedge (because I had the goods to deliver at a future time and wanted to lock in a profit and eliminate market risk). The short sellers have had the upper hand with this stock for over a year. That has allowed me to accumulate a huge long position (for me, anyway)at below book value. The problem I see is with "naked" shorting, and I don't know that that has occured here, but suspect it has. Naked shorting of equities, with mass collusion or high speed computer trading, with the resourses of a financial behemoth (govt.funded) such as Goldman Sachs, can influence markets in disregard of fundamentals, including the veracious supply and demand for shares, which is needed to arrive at fair valuations. Also, it is hidden from public view, and thus deprives investors of critical information. This discourages and alienates investors through insane volatility and irrational price movements and unduly enriches the prime brokers who are not constrained by legal niceties. I've seen a lot more evidence in other stocks, lately: SPWRA, GLW, CPO, XTO, to name a few, and have lost some big parts of my long awaited gains when the bad boys with black boxes trashed the stock price immediately after earnings, despite positive earnings surprises and forward guidance. Ultimately, the longs will win this dispute regarding the value of ENER, I think, but at a cost to the system that will ultimately prove disastrous. It only appears to contribute to liquidity, by showing up as high volumes of shares traded. That is an illusion. It does not really contribute to liquidity, it drives real investors away from the stock market. IMHO
Bubs