Some of the SLI shareholders have or are in the process of taking actual reciept of the share certificates for SLI. We have discussed this before on this forum in depth and most of you know the reasons behind this type of move. The more shares that are in certificate and out of the hands of the institutions that hold your shares for you in a digital account, the less available shares for shorters to borrow to short with. Also, as some institutions/banks have gone under, 2 recent examples of this is MF Global and Peregrine, investors shares in stocks are at risk, especially with all the problems surfacing with the financial system lately. Nobody knows how deep this will go or what may come out of it.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/2...HB20120726

Your institution may tell you that your shares in these digital accounts cannot be lent out for shorting, but if they are part of a pool that an institution has, this puts these shares in a street form status that may be able to be lent out to shorters. Myself and a few other shareholders have been talking in the past to certain institutions on this subject and have found different contradictory responses from some and not really answering our question, "can our shares be lent out for shorting". Apparently some institutions will tell you that there is a box to tick if you do not want your shares lent out for shorting and the institution has to comply with your request. This can be checked by adding up an institutions holding of a particular stock at days end in street form and weighing it against what was allowed to be lent out for shorting, an audit if you will. But, on the end of day tally of shorts, something could be missed in this age of computer run programs where the same stock can change hands so many times per day, a intra day shorting which is settled before days end, and doesn,t get registered as a short. Also, trade settlement is 3 days, so some shorts covered within the 3 days never get registered and can take a stock down seriously in that time frame. This is totally unfair to the retail investor and gives all the power to anyone using this tactic to drive an sp down. MM,s and PO,s are allowed to do it, but there will be paper trails to these sort of tactics and if used on us,these records can be accessible if needed. Stock manipulation is supposed to be illegal, but if these guys are able to do it legally, how can it be justified that the rest of the market is not allowed? Changes will be coming, or has to, for the integrity of any market to be upheld in the protection of the little guy.

Naked shorting is supposed to be illegal in Canada, but it still happens and I suspect there must be some in SLI. I say this because I cannot figure sometimes where some of the shares come from that are being sold and I don,t really see them being bought back. This is a very tightly held stock with it getting more tightly held by the day, with shareholders buying more and adding to their positions. The sp,under this type of circumstance, should not have ever been drove down to these levels. All the trading records clearly show a lot of cross trading in which the sp got stepped down by using the same shares back and forth to different accounts by someone who had the luxury to do it.

http://conservapedia.com/Naked_short_selling

I was hoping that when the new directors came on board, Donald Bastien with his ties to the MEDIA, indirectly BNN, and Paul Macdonalds contacts with exchanges, that this aspect of our stock could be looked at if it was a problem. Since they have come on board, our sp has nose dived, and we don,t hear a word from them. Surely they must see how us shareholders are wondering why our sp is ridiculously low and how the sp circumstance seems to be contradicting rationale? When they joined as directors, they must have had a good idea that this company was worthwhile getting into because they joined 3 days AFTER the first results came out that the market thought was bad?

In the event of a buy out down the road, at present we have around 130 million shares fully diluted. Hypothetically, lets say there is 20 million shares naked shorts that are out there adding to the existing and registered 130 million shares. Lets say the buyout is for $10 a share which should make the total buyout price $1.3 billion.BUT, where a 20 million surplus of shares may be out, the shareholders would get $8.67 per share. You would then think, that whoever allowed the naked shorting to happen, could/should be held liable and pay restitution to the shareholders. If this happened, it could be the securities commission, the exchange perhaps, the institutions that allowed the naked shares to be sold via accounts under their watch, or perhaps all 3 responsable.Here is a company that has a current naked short out on them from Canada, and if they ever get a buyout, it will be very interesting to see what happens.

http://www.barkerminerals.com/s/NewsRele...view-of...

We are not allowed to make up 100k shares out of thin air and put them in our accounts, so why should these naked shorters be allowed to profit off shares that they have created out of thin air?

Its because of these reasons and more that I believe it a good idea to get share certificates for at least some of your stock. At least that way, it has the most chance of being honered should something happen to the financial system or we are faced with the above hypothetical situation. If you are here for the long run in SLI, it may be a good idea to secure part of your holdings in certifiate form in these somewhat precarious times.
IMO