prototype_101
10 hours ago
Is LWLG working with TSMC/Nvidia on their Next-gen technology project in Taiwan? the following are reasons why this may quite likely be the case!!
- Yves recent Asia trip included a stop in Taiwan coincident with recent collaborations of TSMC and Nvidia
- Yves spending the first 5-10 minutes of the 2025 ASM on Nvidia's new strategy, you can watch the 2025 ASM replay here
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176203906
- Tom saying LWLG is now Establishing Sales and Distribution channels in Asia, why would this be being done now if there was not a need for it developing for LWLG's technology in Asia currently
- Eoptolink and Foxconn added to Yves 2025 ASM presentation after his recent trip to Taiwan, obviously one would assume he met with TSMC
https://irp.cdn-website.com/a5f8ef96/files/uploaded/2025_ASM_Presentation_-_FINAL-40e13d6a.pdf
- SemiVision articles tagging LWLG along with TSMC and Nvidia
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176198177
-Nvidia in GTC 2025 Keynote disclosing they will be using MRR's in their next-generation technology, and it has been proven that LWLG's technology is the solution to the issues that silicon MRR's have with temperature sensitivity that require individual temperature IC's for each and every MRR!!! read all about it in this post of mine
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176202947
- Nvidia Patents including Polymers as materials being used
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176159796
- the Lebby exchange with Nvidia VP of R&D who commented directly back to Lebby "some startups are clinging too tightly to their IP" Note: perhaps this is the actual reason Lebby was replaced by Yves, Lebby likely was being too controlling in relationship developing the devices in-house where the recent LWLG shift in business strategy in now allowing the Customer to control the device developments with LWLG technical support and PDK's available to them as needed
- 2024 ASM slides 13 and 14 including the quote from Nvidia executive
----- Quote from Slide 13 >> “in many ways polymers will be an ideal enabler of the growth expected in Infiniband usage”
----- Infiniband is a key enabler for NVIDIA à higher speeds are required now
----- Slide 14 showing the Infiniband Roadmap showing how LWLG would be able to enable with their Polymers
- Jim's 2024 ASM comment regarding working with Nvidia
- Yves LeMaitre asked $LWLG shareholders to do some homework and watch the GTC 2025 hardware presentation of Jensen Huang on copacked optics. Because presentations can be long, Steve Schiets made an AI podcast with NotebookLM. Great listen, imo.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/steve-schiets-1016aa21_ai-photonics-cpo-activity-7329210816216403968-StF4/
Marco commented, This podcast summary of what came out of Jensen"s Huang's talk on co-packaged optics is absolutely great! It pieces together what Nvidia wants and sees the industry moving towards while pointing out the things that will allow LWLG's polymers to meet the checklist of requirements without each company talking about the other. A match made in heaven so to speak. The critical concept of moving the optics as close as possible to the compute functions can be facilitated using polymers as part of the device configuration. Accomplishing this either using tiny MRRs with polymers inside or using co-packaged optics with polymers incorporated the goal is obtained. Either way, it looks like Lightwave's polymers will become critical enablers of the marriage of optics and compute.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=176202918
prototype_101
13 hours ago
MANY BIG BUYS 30k, 20k, 10k etc at 1.32 and 1.33 being covered up with DINKY LITTLE 100 or 200 share trades lower !!!!
TOTAL BULLSHIT MANIPULATION!!!!
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN) versus LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
Performance
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN)
- r33 intrinsically capped at ~ 31 pm/V at 1310 nm
- n = 2.2, er = 30 (high dispersion across frequencies)
LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
- No intrinsic cap on r33 (> 200 pm/V at 1310 nm easily achieved)
- n ˜ 1.9, er ˜ 3-6 (low dispersion across frequencies)
Integration
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN)
- Integration with Si/SiN very low yielding & basically still in R&D stage
- Limited wafer size (150 mm)
- Large device footprint (sub-cm scale)
- High material cost w/ only one supplier (NanoLN)
LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
- Fully Si compatible
- Easily scalable to 300 (+) mm wafer
- Very small device footprint (sub-mm scale)
- Low material cost
Processing
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN)
- Thin film uniformity becomes difficult as wafer size scales up
- Specialized processing/tools needed – leads to higher costs
associated with processing, QC, etc.
LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
- Spin-coating produces films with high uniformity
- No specialized processing/tools needed (completely compatible
with existing Si foundry processes/tools) – reduces costs
associated with processing, QC, etc
Slide 13 from 2025 LWLG ASM presentation found here,
https://irp.cdn-website.com/a5f8ef96/files/uploaded/2025_ASM_Presentation_-_FINAL-40e13d6a.pdf
Where are you Mark Lutkowitz? Here I even DETAILED the differences Yves pointed out on Slide 13 here for you!!!!
pitcook
13 hours ago
Yes, that’s amazing at the end we went up three whole pennies! I sold a share at the end so I could buy a pack of chewing gum, but I still had to borrow a quarter to pay for it. 3 Pennie’s yes, yes, yes. Oh, by the way, the government decided pennies are so worthless. They’re gonna quit making them.
DanM51
13 hours ago
I've been trying to do the math on X's claim that he started "investing" in 1972....Was he a child investing prodigy also?......Anyhoo, DOA, I think you misspoke when you said Astro will be the victim. He already was, in 2023, and then parts were used as bait in the ferral pig shoot. I know, time stands
still here in lightwaveland. X has something he wants to show Sparky and Rikkie in the bottom of his freezer. Just lean right in......
prototype_101
14 hours ago
52,000 Buy at 1.32 immediately 100 share trades drops it to 1.28x1.29 MANIPULATION GAMES!!!!!!!!!
Robert Blum's Arrival@LWLG: Glimpse Behind the Curtain
Robert Blum’s recent appointment at Lightwave Logic has triggered an impressive wave of congratulations on LinkedIn — but beyond the celebration lies something more telling: a strategic snapshot of where LWLG might be headed.
As someone closely tracking the company and its ecosystem, I see these reactions not just as polite gestures, but as early signals of industry alignment, partner readiness, and cross-domain anticipation.
🔍 Here are some standout commenters and what they suggest:
🚀 Key Industry Executives Who Congratulated Robert:
Daniel Zhu (NVIDIA) – Director of Photonic Design
Signals potential relevance of LWLG's polymer platform in high-speed GPU or AI interconnects.
Babak Sabi (AWS Annapurna Labs) – VP
AWS is deeply invested in silicon photonics and custom AI infrastructure.
Manish Mehta (Broadcom) – VP, Optical Systems
Broadcom is a giant in CPO (co-packaged optics). A strategic nod?
Takashi Saida (NTT) – VP, Head of Device Innovation
Could reflect testing, R&D collaboration, or foundry-level engagement.
Jens Dieckroeger (ADTRAN) – Sr. Director Governance
ADTRAN has engaged with polymer-based solutions; may already be in exploratory talks.
Susmita Joshi, PhD (Photonics & Connectivity)
Highly respected voice in silicon photonics, DWDM, and high-speed AI fabrics.
Preet Virk (Celestial AI) – COO
A potential technology convergence: photonic AI compute meets next-gen interconnects.
Chris Pfistner (Avicena Tech) – VP Sales & Marketing
Active in photonic links for AI – market overlap or parallel momentum.
Paul Diglio (GlobalFoundries) – Principal Engineer
May indicate contact with manufacturing partners to align with foundry capabilities.
Vincent Di Caprio (ICAPS) – VP, Advanced Packaging
Points to polymer relevance in advanced chip packaging ecosystems.
Faraz Monifi (Intel) – Photonics Design Lead
Intel's ecosystem interest is particularly telling, considering historic skepticism.
Dieter Hoffend (imec Automotive) – Business Director
imec as a potential European integration partner or validator?
Jeroen Duis (PHIX Photonics Assembly) – CTO
PHIX plays a role in photonic chip packaging — relevant for commercial rollout.
Ed Baichtal (Data Center Architect)
His excitement suggests attention from hyperscaler design circles.
🧭 What this all points to:
AI, Datacenter & Optical Interconnects: Many well-placed figures in these sectors congratulated Robert — suggesting LWLG's pivot may focus more sharply on high-performance, scalable optical solutions.
Foundry & Packaging Ecosystem Readiness: Involvement of GlobalFoundries, imec, and ICAPS hints at backend alignment for real-world integration.
Go-to-Market Foundations: Multiple VP-level voices from marketing, sales, and operations are engaging — a clue that commercialization is a priority.
prototype_101
14 hours ago
says the Short, too funny, it's already begun!!
Short Interest rose about 2 million shares in the last 2 weeks from about 19.6 million to 21.2 million more shares Shorted, meanwhile in that same period of time the PPS rose from about 0.90 to 1.30, wow, the Shorts must be in trouble if that is the case!!
https://shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=lwlg&submit=Short+Quote%E2%84%A2
If there is any Institutional forced selling that is not negated by Institutions Short shares forced callbacks, those shares will be sopped up by MM's to Cover their Naked Shorting games of the past handful of years here, once MM's clear their books, they will guaranteed be sure to run this up to force the Shorts to Cover, which will be IMPOSSIBLE at any price under $20, Longs will NEVER give up 20 MILLION shares that Shorts NEED to Cover!!!
iBorrow available to Short has dropped, and the rate shot up to 13%, if Yves drops a Tier 1 deal it's GO TIME and Shorts will be TOAST!!
https://www.iborrowdesk.com/report/LWLG
Stay calm..... forced callbacks by the supertankers Vanguard and Blackrock who own combined close to 20 MILLION shares should be no problem for the Shorts, they will just need to PRY those shares out of the hands of the Longs who are NEVER going to give up the shares!!! watch and learn!!
did Institutions already begin to flip the manipulation script? did Shorts bite the hand that fed them? sure looks like it!! Vanguard and Blackrock DON'T LIKE TO LOSE!!! and each of them own close to 10 MILLION shares apiece and their average purchase price is around $8 slightly above the 5 year VWAP near $7, Will there be "forced callbacks" of 20 MILLION Shorted shares? It sure looks like Institutions are beginning to flip the script on the Shorts already!!
1) 21 MILLION SHARES SHORTED
2) ALMOST 20 MILLION SHARES HELD BY VANGUARD AND BLACKROCK COMBINED
Shorts best hope is SCENARIO #1 of these only two possible scenarios, in either case it would be in the best interest of the Shorts to Cover all the shares they can right now ahead of EITHER of these two scenarios playing out
Scenario #1 after Yves inks a Tier 1 deal or two in the next 2 months before final decisions, and the PPS moves up to the $3-$5 range before the final decisions day of adds/deletes that LWLG will not be deleted
Scenario #2 let's say LWLG would be a delete from the index, everybody here knows that it was the Institutions (read Vanguard & Blackrock who don't like to lose!!) that LOANED the shares to the Shorts!!! So do you really think the Institutions are going to be the ones to take the hit dumping their shares at rock bottom prices to aid the criminal Shorts? NO WAY!!! Here's what would happen, the Institutions would call back their loaned shares and watch as the Shorts try and find 20 million shares to Cover, good luck with that!!!! this is why it has held 100% true that the Shorts would never get a volume capitulation from the Longs!!! the criminal Shorts and MM's have been using low volume high frequency manipulation games here routinely for many months!!! So only after the Shorts be forced to Cover by the Institutions driving the share price higher, and then the Institutions would be able to sell their shares unharmed!! That's the way it would work, so Shorts better hope LWLG is NOT going to be a deletion!!!
How quickly would the Shorts be forced to Cover in the event of Scenario #2? from AI on the topic here
General Timeframes:
While there's no strict regulatory standard for recall notice periods, here are some general expectations:
Short Notice (Urgent Recall): In some situations, especially due to client sales, short sellers might only receive notice within the trading day or be required to return the shares by the next day. This can lead to forced buy-ins if the short seller cannot locate shares quickly.
Standard Recall: For less urgent reasons, the notice period is typically a few business days (e.g., 2-5 days). This allows the short seller some time to repurchase the shares in the market.
Longer Notice (Less Common): In certain circumstances, the notice period could be longer, but this is less typical for standard recalls.
Important Considerations for Short Sellers:
Recall Risk: Short sellers always face the risk that the borrowed shares will be recalled. This is an inherent risk of short selling and should be factored into their trading strategy
Again, GOOD LUCK to the Shorts on purchasing 20 MILLION Shares in the open market once the FORCED CALL BACK of the loaned shares by Institutions (Vanguard & Blackrock) occurs!!!
x993231
14 hours ago
Something I'm looking at on the fiber side 8x thing, this reduces the runs I think, but I haven't noticed it on the NVDA pics.
Fanout
MTP (Multi-Fiber Push-On) insertion loss, a measure of signal loss in a fiber optic connection, typically falls between 0.35dB and 0.75dB. Higher quality MTP connectors, often referred to as "Elite" or "low-insertion-loss" versions, can achieve losses as low as 0.35dB for both single-mode and multi-mode fibers.
Just tell me when, I'm always game to buy more. I prefer buying cheap though but if I spend a buck and it makes me 5 I'm game.
X. Going to be a crazy day and even crazier weekend.
x993231
14 hours ago
Something I'm looking at on the fiber side 8x thing, this reduces the runs I think, but I haven't noticed it on the NVDA pics.
MTP (Multi-Fiber Push-On) insertion loss, a measure of signal loss in a fiber optic connection, typically falls between 0.35dB and 0.75dB. Higher quality MTP connectors, often referred to as "Elite" or "low-insertion-loss" versions, can achieve losses as low as 0.35dB for both single-mode and multi-mode fibers.
Just tell me when, I'm always game to buy more. I prefer buying cheap though but if I spend a buck and it makes me 5 I'm game.
X. Going to be a crazy day and even crazier weekend.
prototype_101
16 hours ago
good thoughts Henk, let's get the message out to DFV over there on WSB's and activate the gorilla army to smash the criminal Shorts and MM's who have likely been circle jerking millions of illegal Naked Short shares in addition to the 21 million reported Short shares!!!
Here is an overview of the competition that LWLG's technology faces, it is EASILY SEEN that LWLG Polymers is the TONS THE BEST solution!!!!
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN) versus LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
Performance
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN)
- r33 intrinsically capped at ~ 31 pm/V at 1310 nm
- n = 2.2, er = 30 (high dispersion across frequencies)
LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
- No intrinsic cap on r33 (> 200 pm/V at 1310 nm easily achieved)
- n ˜ 1.9, er ˜ 3-6 (low dispersion across frequencies)
Integration
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN)
- Integration with Si/SiN very low yielding & basically still in R&D stage
- Limited wafer size (150 mm)
- Large device footprint (sub-cm scale)
- High material cost w/ only one supplier (NanoLN)
LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
- Fully Si compatible
- Easily scalable to 300 (+) mm wafer
- Very small device footprint (sub-mm scale)
- Low material cost
Processing
Thin-Film LiNbO3 (TFLN)
- Thin film uniformity becomes difficult as wafer size scales up
- Specialized processing/tools needed – leads to higher costs
associated with processing, QC, etc.
LWLG Electro-optic Polymers
- Spin-coating produces films with high uniformity
- No specialized processing/tools needed (completely compatible
with existing Si foundry processes/tools) – reduces costs
associated with processing, QC, etc
Slide 13 from 2025 LWLG ASM presentation found here,
https://irp.cdn-website.com/a5f8ef96/files/uploaded/2025_ASM_Presentation_-_FINAL-40e13d6a.pdf
Where are you Mark Lutkowitz? Here I even DETAILED the differences Yves pointed out on Slide 13 here for you!!!!
#deepfuckingvalue
#diamondhands
prototype_101
16 hours ago
Ruud, all of this AI analysis is overlooking the one greatest fundamental point to be considered, that being that the 20 MILLION Short shares are MOSTLY LOANED from the supertankers Vanguard/Blackrock, who as the Shorts will tell you 1000 times over have invested their holdings in passive Index funds to shadow the Russell, so if LWLG will be removed from the Russell then Vanguard/Black will NEED TO DO FORCED CALLBACKS of these 20 MILLION shares from the Shorts BEFORE they can sell them on the open market!!!!
So let me get this straight, Short Interest rose about 2 million shares in the last 2 weeks from about 19.6 million to 21.2 million more shares Shorted, meanwhile in that same period of time the PPS rose from about 0.90 to 1.30, wow, the Shorts must be in trouble if that is the case!!
https://shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=lwlg&submit=Short+Quote%E2%84%A2
If there is any Institutional forced selling that is not negated by Institutions Short shares forced callbacks, those shares will be sopped up by MM's to Cover their Naked Shorting games of the past handful of years here, once MM's clear their books, they will guaranteed be sure to run this up to force the Shorts to Cover, which will be IMPOSSIBLE at any price under $20, Longs will NEVER give up 20 MILLION shares that Shorts NEED to Cover!!!
iBorrow available to Short has dropped, and the rate shot up to 13%, if Yves drops a Tier 1 deal it's GO TIME and Shorts will be TOAST!!
https://www.iborrowdesk.com/report/LWLG
Stay calm..... forced callbacks by the supertankers Vanguard and Blackrock who own combined close to 20 MILLION shares should be no problem for the Shorts, they will just need to PRY those shares out of the hands of the Longs who are NEVER going to give up the shares!!! watch and learn!!
did Institutions already begin to flip the manipulation script? did Shorts bite the hand that fed them? sure looks like it!! Vanguard and Blackrock DON'T LIKE TO LOSE!!! and each of them own close to 10 MILLION shares apiece and their average purchase price is around $8 slightly above the 5 year VWAP near $7, Will there be "forced callbacks" of 20 MILLION Shorted shares? It sure looks like Institutions are beginning to flip the script on the Shorts already!!
1) 21 MILLION SHARES SHORTED
2) ALMOST 20 MILLION SHARES HELD BY VANGUARD AND BLACKROCK COMBINED
Shorts best hope is SCENARIO #1 of these only two possible scenarios, in either case it would be in the best interest of the Shorts to Cover all the shares they can right now ahead of EITHER of these two scenarios playing out
Scenario #1 after Yves inks a Tier 1 deal or two in the next 2 months before final decisions, and the PPS moves up to the $3-$5 range before the final decisions day of adds/deletes that LWLG will not be deleted
Scenario #2 let's say LWLG would be a delete from the index, everybody here knows that it was the Institutions (read Vanguard & Blackrock who don't like to lose!!) that LOANED the shares to the Shorts!!! So do you really think the Institutions are going to be the ones to take the hit dumping their shares at rock bottom prices to aid the criminal Shorts? NO WAY!!! Here's what would happen, the Institutions would call back their loaned shares and watch as the Shorts try and find 20 million shares to Cover, good luck with that!!!! this is why it has held 100% true that the Shorts would never get a volume capitulation from the Longs!!! the criminal Shorts and MM's have been using low volume high frequency manipulation games here routinely for many months!!! So only after the Shorts be forced to Cover by the Institutions driving the share price higher, and then the Institutions would be able to sell their shares unharmed!! That's the way it would work, so Shorts better hope LWLG is NOT going to be a deletion!!!
How quickly would the Shorts be forced to Cover in the event of Scenario #2? from AI on the topic here
General Timeframes:
While there's no strict regulatory standard for recall notice periods, here are some general expectations:
Short Notice (Urgent Recall): In some situations, especially due to client sales, short sellers might only receive notice within the trading day or be required to return the shares by the next day. This can lead to forced buy-ins if the short seller cannot locate shares quickly.
Standard Recall: For less urgent reasons, the notice period is typically a few business days (e.g., 2-5 days). This allows the short seller some time to repurchase the shares in the market.
Longer Notice (Less Common): In certain circumstances, the notice period could be longer, but this is less typical for standard recalls.
Important Considerations for Short Sellers:
Recall Risk: Short sellers always face the risk that the borrowed shares will be recalled. This is an inherent risk of short selling and should be factored into their trading strategy
Again, GOOD LUCK to the Shorts on purchasing 20 MILLION Shares in the open market once the FORCED CALL BACK of the loaned shares by Institutions (Vanguard & Blackrock) occurs!!!
Henk van vleuten
16 hours ago
Let’s Squeeze the Shorts – Together We Make History
It’s time to ask the right questions and take bold action. Over the next two weeks, we have a unique opportunity. If we unite—young or old, rich or poor—and everyone buys shares on June 27 or 28, we could trigger something big.
A coordinated move, a powerful message.
Every contribution counts, whether it’s one share or a hundred. This isn’t just about numbers—it’s about showing the power of collective action. Think GME, but this time, even more focused, even more prepared.
If someone can start building momentum, sharing this idea on forums, socials, and communities, we can ignite the movement.
14 days. One goal. One shot to make it count.
We stand stronger together.
Let’s make history.
RuudSaltis
19 hours ago
Additional info based on data:
Here’s a clearer, data-backed breakdown:
?
📅 Official Delisting Date
Lightwave Logic (ticker LWLG) will be removed from the Russell?3000 after the market close on Friday, June 27, 2025—this is when index-tracking funds will be compelled to sell off ?.
?
📊 Short Interest & Borrowing Data
Based on the latest data (as of mid-June 2025):
• Total short interest: ~21.2 million shares
• Days to cover: ~18.6 days
• Short interest as % of float: ~17.1% ?
These figures tell us:
• Heavy short positioning: It would take ~19 trading days for all shorts to cover—an elevated risk if the stock rallies.
• High utilization/borrow fees: With ~17% of the available float borrowed and likely near 100% utilization, borrow costs are already very steep—typical of low-float, high-short stocks.
?
🔄 Market Mechanisms & Available Float
• Low float: A limited number of shares available for lending make it much easier for shorts to exhaust supply.
• High borrow fees scare off shorts: Steep fees eat into profits (or cause losses), deterring retail/weak hands, and often triggering forced buy-ins or margin calls if prices rise.
?
🧩 Will Shorts Use This to Maximize Post-Delisting Gains?
Strategy Outline:
1. As the delisting date approaches (June?27), institutional index funds must sell after the close.
2. Shorts may enter before this, betting on a post-delisting drop.
3. But if the stock rises beforehand:
• Shorts get squeezed (margin calls, forced cover).
• This makes their final entry riskier and more expensive.
4. If they wait too long, after forced selling begins, they might miss the best entry point.
Bottom line: Yes, traders could be trying to force institutions into bigger losses by inflating the stock ahead of June?27. But with such heavy short demand and tight supply, the risk of a squeeze remains high.
RuudSaltis
19 hours ago
ChatGPT:
You’re asking a great pair of questions about short selling dynamics and market behavior around a Russell 3000 delisting. Let’s unpack each part.
?
1. Why would Lightwave’s share price go up after being delisted from the Russell 3000?
At first glance, this seems counterintuitive. A Russell 3000 removal typically triggers passive index fund selling, which can put downward pressure on a stock. However, if the stock rises after the announcement, here are a few likely reasons:
a) Short Squeeze Setup
• If many market participants anticipate the stock will fall (especially shorts betting on the Russell-related drop), then any unexpected buying (from insiders, speculators, or contrarian traders) can force short sellers to cover quickly, pushing the price higher—a classic short squeeze.
b) “Sell the rumor, buy the news”
• Sometimes stocks are sold off in advance of expected bad news (e.g., index removal), and once the event becomes official, there’s no more “fear” to price in. If most institutional selling already happened, the price might actually stabilize or bounce.
c) Low float, retail speculation
• Stocks with low floats or strong retail followings (like some small-caps or microcaps) can behave erratically. A removal from the Russell might attract retail contrarians trying to bet against the institutions.
?
2. Is the price rise a setup to attract more shorts for a later drop?
It’s possible. Here’s the logic:
• Once Lightwave is officially removed from the index (on the rebalance date, usually late June), index-tracking funds are forced to sell.
• This creates a known, time-sensitive supply event.
• If the price rises in advance, it could:
• Encourage more shorts to enter at high levels.
• Make the eventual drop more severe when institutions do sell.
So yes, it’s plausible that short sellers are positioning for a bigger gain after the rebalance. But the problem is timing: if too many shorts enter early, and demand stays strong, a squeeze can still ruin the trade.
?
3. Why is the share borrow interest rate (utilization/fees) skyrocketing? Is it to scare retail shorts?
This is usually a supply-and-demand issue:
a) High short interest
• If many traders are trying to short the stock, the supply of borrowable shares becomes scarce, pushing the interest rate (a.k.a. “stock borrow fee” or “cost to borrow”) way up—often into triple digits.
b) Low float / low institutional ownership
• If Lightwave doesn’t have a large number of shares held in brokerages that lend, the borrow pool can dry up fast, even with modest short interest.
c) Is it meant to scare retail shorts?
• Not directly. This isn’t coordinated. But the effect is real:
• High borrow fees eat into profits or even create losses for shorts holding over time.
• Retail traders may get margin calls, forced buy-ins, or just abandon the short due to high fees.
?
Summary
• Yes, the price rising after a delisting can set a trap for late shorts expecting a big drop.
• Yes, increased borrow rates suggest heavy short demand and limited supply, which naturally drives up costs (not necessarily a scare tactic, but an economic signal).
• Timing is critical—the Russell rebalance could cause a drop, but in the meantime, a squeeze is still a major risk.
?
Let me know if you want a breakdown of Lightwave’s short interest data, float size, or Russell rebalancing dates—I can pull the latest info.
x993231
1 day ago
Often I think that many have never built anything. Had you, you wouldn't plan the roof before the driveway, foundation, framing, plumbing, electric etc. I guess I'm weird.
Think data centers, labor etc.
I should stop, enough with common sense. It costs billions to build a data center, reduce labor, reduce power consumption, build it faster kinda makes sense.
X
prototype_101
1 day ago
nsomniyak it is really the Shorts only hope of survival from the onslaught of the superrtankers Vanguard/Blackrock doing forced callbacks on almost 20 MILLION Short shares, there is NO WAY on God's green earth that Shorts will be able to PRY those 20 MILLION shares out of the Longs hands!!
So let me get this straight, Short Interest rose about 2 million shares in the last 2 weeks from about 19.6 million to 21.2 million more shares Shorted, meanwhile in that same period of time the PPS rose from about 0.90 to 1.30, wow, the Shorts must be in trouble if that is the case!!
https://shortsqueeze.com/?symbol=lwlg&submit=Short+Quote%E2%84%A2
If there is any Institutional forced selling that is not negated by Institutions Short shares forced callbacks, those shares will be sopped up by MM's to Cover their Naked Shorting games of the past handful of years here, once MM's clear their books, they will guaranteed be sure to run this up to force the Shorts to Cover, which will be IMPOSSIBLE at any price under $20, Longs will NEVER give up 20 MILLION shares that Shorts NEED to Cover!!!
iBorrow available to Short has dropped, and the rate shot up to 5%, if Yves drops a Tier 1 deal it's GO TIME and Shorts will be TOAST!!
https://www.iborrowdesk.com/report/LWLG
Stay calm..... forced callbacks by the supertankers Vanguard and Blackrock who own combined close to 20 MILLION shares should be no problem for the Shorts, they will just need to PRY those shares out of the hands of the Longs who are NEVER going to give up the shares!!! watch and learn!!
did Institutions already begin to flip the manipulation script? did Shorts bite the hand that fed them? sure looks like it!! Vanguard and Blackrock DON'T LIKE TO LOSE!!! and each of them own close to 10 MILLION shares apiece and their average purchase price is around $8 slightly above the 5 year VWAP near $7, Will there be "forced callbacks" of 20 MILLION Shorted shares? It sure looks like Institutions are beginning to flip the script on the Shorts already!!
1) 20 MILLION SHARES SHORTED
2) ALMOST 20 MILLION SHARES HELD BY VANGUARD AND BLACKROCK COMBINED
Shorts best hope is SCENARIO #1 of these only two possible scenarios, in either case it would be in the best interest of the Shorts to Cover all the shares they can right now ahead of EITHER of these two scenarios playing out
Scenario #1 after Yves inks a Tier 1 deal or two in the next 2 months before final decisions, and the PPS moves up to the $3-$5 range before the final decisions day of adds/deletes that LWLG will not be deleted
Scenario #2 let's say LWLG would be a delete from the index, everybody here knows that it was the Institutions (read Vanguard & Blackrock who don't like to lose!!) that LOANED the shares to the Shorts!!! So do you really think the Institutions are going to be the ones to take the hit dumping their shares at rock bottom prices to aid the criminal Shorts? NO WAY!!! Here's what would happen, the Institutions would call back their loaned shares and watch as the Shorts try and find 20 million shares to Cover, good luck with that!!!! this is why it has held 100% true that the Shorts would never get a volume capitulation from the Longs!!! the criminal Shorts and MM's have been using low volume high frequency manipulation games here routinely for many months!!! So only after the Shorts be forced to Cover by the Institutions driving the share price higher, and then the Institutions would be able to sell their shares unharmed!! That's the way it would work, so Shorts better hope LWLG is NOT going to be a deletion!!!
How quickly would the Shorts be forced to Cover in the event of Scenario #2? from AI on the topic here
General Timeframes:
While there's no strict regulatory standard for recall notice periods, here are some general expectations:
Short Notice (Urgent Recall): In some situations, especially due to client sales, short sellers might only receive notice within the trading day or be required to return the shares by the next day. This can lead to forced buy-ins if the short seller cannot locate shares quickly.
Standard Recall: For less urgent reasons, the notice period is typically a few business days (e.g., 2-5 days). This allows the short seller some time to repurchase the shares in the market.
Longer Notice (Less Common): In certain circumstances, the notice period could be longer, but this is less typical for standard recalls.
Important Considerations for Short Sellers:
Recall Risk: Short sellers always face the risk that the borrowed shares will be recalled. This is an inherent risk of short selling and should be factored into their trading strategy
Again, GOOD LUCK to the Shorts on purchasing 20 MILLION Shares in the open market once the FORCED CALL BACK of the loaned shares by Institutions (Vanguard & Blackrock) occurs!!!
spartex
1 day ago
fyi --
FTSE Russell, the global index provider, today confirms the schedule for the 37th annual Reconstitution of the Russell US Indexes, set to occur at the end of June 2025.
This rebalancing process is designed to capture market shifts from the previous year to ensure the Russell US Indexes continue to accurately reflect the US equity market.
The 2025 Russell Reconstitution schedule is as follows:
Wednesday 30th April – “Rank Day” – Index membership eligibility for 2025 Russell Reconstitution determined from constituent market capitalization at market close.
Friday 23rd May – Preliminary index additions & deletions membership lists posted to the website after 6 PM US eastern time.
Friday 30th May, 6th June, 13th June and 20th June – Preliminary membership lists (reflecting any updates) posted to the website after 6 PM US eastern time.
Monday 9th June – “Lock-down” period begins with the updates to reconstitution membership considered to be final.
Friday 27th June – Russell Reconstitution is final after the close of the US equity markets.
Monday 30th June – Equity markets open with the newly reconstituted Russell US Indexes.
Catherine Yoshimoto, Director, Product Management at FTSE Russell, said:
“Due to the ever-evolving nature of the US equity market, it’s crucial to fully recalibrate the suite of Russell US Indexes, ensuring the indexes maintain an accurate representation of the market, including changes in company size and style shifts since the last rebalancing. This process culminates in one of the highest trading volume days of the year, with investors benefiting from a seamless and reliable experience that’s facilitated by our transparent, rules-based methodology and timely communication of preliminary index membership changes.”
On 21st February 2025, FTSE Russell announced the 1Q2025 preliminary list of IPO additions, which will take effect at the market open of 24th March. As of 1Q2025, there is one preliminary addition to the Russell 1000 Index and seven additions to the small cap Russell 2000 Index. There will also be six IPOs added to the Russell Microcap Index.
The reconstitution and quarterly IPO additions provide an important foundation for FTSE Russell’s widely used Russell US Indexes. These governance processes are designed to ensure the indexes remain a current and relevant measure of US equity market performance.
Although currently rebalanced on an annual basis, FTSE Russell announced in January that the reconstitution of the Russell US Indexes will be held semi-annually in June and November beginning in 2026. This decision is based on data analysis and follows a market consultation undertaken in response to the recent evolution of market dynamics. More on the Russell US Indexes moving to a semi-annual reconstitution next year can be found on the FTSE Russell website here.
In addition, in response to market concentration and in consideration of US RIC diversification limits, beginning with the March 2025 quarterly index review, Russell US Style Indexes will apply a capping methodology on a quarterly basis. FTSE Russell will also continue to calculate the Russell US Style Benchmark indexes, which will continue to reflect uncapped weights.
Visit here for more information on the FTSE Russell global family of equity indexes. More information and background on the rebalancing process can be found on the Russell Reconstitution resource hub.
https://www.lseg.com/en/media-centre/press-releases/ftse-russell/2025/ftse-russell-announces-2025-us-indexes-reconstitution-schedule
Trade smarter, not harder: Unleash your inner pro with our toolkit and live discussions.
jeunke22
15 hours ago
Hot Features
Premium
