Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8060 posts, RR: 54 Posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 9630 times:
In the week before 9/11, huge "put options" speculated on a big drop in share price for American (AMR) and United (UAL) - several times the entire yearly trades. So did they talk to the investor? This is the most suspect part of the official 9/11 story for me by far, such disproportionate volumes of trading surely point to an insider, and there must be a paper trail to the person who ordered it. Not saying 9/11 was done to make money with shorting / put option trading, it wasn't THAT much of a windfall, but the person or people who did it must have known what was in the works, to a fairly high degree of detail (there were no similar trades on, say, Delta, Continental or LUV stock). Has anyone claimed the money? Surely there must be a paper trail? The trader or broker can't say it's an "anonymous investor", I mean, perhaps to the press or for some small scale legal breach but the murder of 3,000 people, the US gov't or any official investigator can surely beat it out of them? A confidentiality agreement or something wouldn't stand in the way of a murder investigation (eg 9/11 commission) or military enquiry, surely. I asked someone about this once and he said it was probably sitting in an account with the brokerage firm or bank as "unclaimed funds" - and the bank or brokerage firm pay out seperately to the client who placed the order. So if the money's unclaimed, there still has to be a papertrail for the initial order of "sell" or "buy" or "put" or whatever. Any financial industry people know more about this?
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
N844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 9473 times:
Sorry to quote myself, but as I responded in the other thread where you asked this question:
Quote: Something like 3500 put options were put on UAL in the days before the attacks. Higher than average, yes. But at other points in the first nine months of that year, more than 8000 put options had been placed on a single day. So I don't know what you're trying to say by "several times the entire yearly trades," but if you're saying what I think you're saying, that's simply incorrect.
Plus, CAL, DAL, and LUV all got battered once the markets opened back up. Surely the evil minds that created and implemented this plan would have been sophisticated enough to know that all airline stocks would crater, if they were smart enough to know that UAL and AMR would go down and these put options were placed with foreknowledge of the attacks.
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
Two points to mention in regards to your opening post.
First, the government doesn't need to "beat it out" of anyone. Every brokerage firm is required by law to keep a "daily blotter" of trading activity. It lists each transaction, the price, volume, and the customer. The SEC can, without prior notice, walk into any brokerage office, ask for the Compliance Officer, and review the blotters. Any brokerage firm who refuses to provide access to blotters would face an immediate suspension of their licenses to operate along with appropriate fines.
Secondly, in the month prior to the 9/11 attacks, one of the major brokerages, Goldman Sachs if memory serves me correctly, came out with strong "buy" recommendations on airline stocks, based upon high traffic and yields that summer. It would not be out of the realm of possibility for institutions or individuals who bought into risky stocks to protect their downside risk by purchasing put options as the airlines entered the softer fall and winter seasons.
There are any number of reasons options are bought or sold as a trading strategy. Anything outside of the norm would cause the market makers in options to alert the SEC on their own, in most cases, to protect their own asses in the event there was unscrupulous activity going on which could cause them financial ruin.
It's been nearly 6 years since 9/11--if there had been anything unsavory going on, you can bet the authorities would have been on it like white on rice long ago.
Tango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3803 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9275 times:
Quoting Dc863 (Reply 2): The trading was just a coincidence, nothing more.
The U.S. legacy airlines, in the weeks and months immediately preceding 9/11/01, were into yet another of their "bust" cycles following a "boom" cycle that had been driven largely by the dot com bubble that had burst at around the same time. So while the timing of the anticipated drop in AA and UA share prices in the week before 9/11/01 may raise questions, it was altogether consistent with the direction U.S. legacy airline share prices were heading at the time. It seems that U.S. legacy-lovers conveniently deny the reality that the objects of their affections were in trouble financially months before 9/11/01.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9248 times:
Quoting MD80fanatic (Reply 5): As far as I know the profits from the deals have yet to be redeemed
And how far do you know?
As far as I know, none of this happened, since I never checked into it.
"As far as I know" is a copout to be able to imply anything you want since if someone proves you wrong, you can say you didn't know.
But honestly, even if there were puts that were tied to the attacks, what makes you think it was anyone but the terrorist organizations, specifically Al Qaeda, who were trying to profit off of it? Are they not 'savvy' enough to do that?
And, if it is actually true that the puts were never collected, well, that might indicate that gee, those were the terrorists and now it's become impossible to collect on it.
But I doubt all of it. The puts were not out of the ordinary. Or are we to assume that every time there are puts against a company, someone is trading illegally based on advance knowledge of a tragedy or other bad news?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
MD80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 9190 times:
If al Queda was involved.....don't you think the government would have coughed up that info (with complete documentation) post haste?
"Or are we to assume that every time there are puts against a company, someone is trading illegally based on advance knowledge of a tragedy or other bad news?"
One has to go with the assumption that, yes, something is being done illegally. When a sudden historic tragedy befalls the major players in an industry, and large numbers of bets that it will occur are placed in advance.....it is highly suspicious. Like Westy said......I am sure someone was looking closely at this trend before, during, and after the event.
Why we haven't heard anything about this from the major media outlets is startling to say the least. If it's ALL b.s., why not simply do a special report on it in the evening news and put it to rest for good?
Do you think the trading on Menu Foods (user of raw components for pet foods) was looked closely after it become clear that tainted ingredients forced a major recall of their products? It would make sense to give any Chinese trading anomalies a second look during this period.....right?
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 9184 times:
There are no "unclaimed funds." A brokerage account is like a bank account. It belongs to someone.
I bought LH puts, just outside the money and soon to expire, as soon as I received word of the first tower getting hit, before the second one was hit, minutes before the markets closed in Europe. I closed the position 3 days later at a 78% profit. Is that suspicious? Should I be investigated? How did I know that it was terrorism and not just an accident?
MD80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2660 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 9133 times:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 9): How did I know that it was terrorism and not just an accident?
Oh come on. Elementary statistics can easily remove the chance for twin airliners crashing into twin towers 25 minutes apart. Had you initiated the transactions prior to AA11 crashing into the north tower I would say yes.....a keen eye should be placed on you.