This is with reference to threads http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?13,906675,906675#msg-906675 and http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?13,887322,887370 , which deal with the captioned topic. Schweser on Pg 108, SS 4, point b says , " The investors consist of many investor with large low basis position in same security… The investors partner with unrelated investor who *purchases* the same security" Then under benefits it says, " Since they *maintain original ownership*, the investors retain the upside potential of their original positions" Isn’t that exactly the opposite of what it sauys in para 1? Once you’ve sold something, how can you still be the owner?
IMO para 1 implies that the unrelated investors have ‘purchased’ the same security as well. In other words, if you were the investor who had ownership in a low basis position, these other investors also have a similar ownership and partner up with you. These investors do not ‘purchase’ your position. Hope that helps.
So why do they use the word purchase there? Ins’t sale and purchase always associated with relinquishing control over the asset?