[spokeshave]

Eat my shorts....

But seriously...every short position must eventually be liquidated, thus purhased so is essentially bullish.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

As I read the concept, these are futures contracts, not long puts, which cost to put on and become more valuable as the underlying (the house) declines in value. The "bet" would be initiated by selling the futures contract, generating cash upon sale. Covering the short would require cash. That moment in the game is, as you say, bullish, but it is bullish from the lower valuation. It is a bearish "bet" when the bet is initially put on.

[SAJ]

That's simply not so, in futures. One always has the choice, if one is selling short, to deliver the goods specified in the contract -- IF said mkts settle by delivery.

In these new markets under discussion, though, my understanding is that they're settled in cash, should one either hold a long or short position into expiration. Not surprising at all. Every index mkt, from S&P to Russells to DJ to Nikkei to weather to XAU, and not a few product futures mkts (lean hogs come to mind immediately), is settled in cash.

[fairtrader]

Unless it's a Naked Short.