Vodafone Share Chat (VOD)

Dan,

I agree. Like I imagine many others here (hopefully), I'm profitable with real shares since starting 02/2009. Whilst shares limit PIs to buying or selling their stake, but not shorting to catch downside, they afford greater margin of error for reasons you cite. Get a buy in shares mistimed &, as long as one bought below L/T resistance levels, one can hold for ages at no added cost, picking up yield, until recovery or much nearer to it.

Though SBs also pay divis for long positions, there are holding costs. Those can accrue over time, even though low rates means charges aren't too punitive. If I'd never touched SBs (I began 02/2011), I'd have been better off due to being over-leveraged. I agree it's a form of gambling, though so are stock markets in general. No sure thing. But the criteria behind buying shares or taking a long SB position in the same stock is little different. It comes down to personal judgement & accountability.

To be clear: I don't disagree with Fleccy on some points. More so on the degree of it across the FTSE as opposed to AIM.

Markets have always been stacked against smaller participants. Unlike us, large funds have vast resources, hedgies go long or short, they access up-to-date info (resources like Bloomberg terminal at $25K a year subscription), employ HFTs, dark pools, etc. But I don't accept MMs meaningfully manipulate large volume FTSE SPs for reasons stated.

Whenever we see protracted downtrends in premium FTSE stocks, it's usually fuelled by disappointing data & negative sentiment. Also, whenever sentiment predominates, be it bearish or bullish, stocks tend to get badly oversold or overbought. I agree that's exacerbated by algos & HFTs. But corrections are usually only a matter of time. That's verifiable from past observation when we've seen continuing falls or rises on relatively little fresh news.

IMO, it's not about who's better. I'm glad for Fleccy to see his approach as better. That won't affect my approach. Ego is of no value in this game. To a degree, it's subjective. For eg. I tend to feel that if I thought manipulation across the FTSE was rife & it frequently affected my financial health, why would I continue to partake in such a scam? So whenever I call it wrong, as here, I see only my own culpability in misreading markets.

But to each their own. What's more sure is that most of us can improve & try to continue learning in this game.

Re technicals: some of it holds less value than other aspects. But there's much to be said for identifying support or resistance levels, & checking if it's backed by larger volume. Also keeping an eye on moving averages for changes in trend.

As Henry Kaufman said: "There are 2 kinds of people who lose money: those who know nothing & those who know EVERYTHING". - GL.

Now you are really worrying me! Surely if you are all playing with this algo, chartist mumbo jumbo, you are just playing against each other? I.E. Is fleccy better than Jack or vise versa? Of course I am asking this question to be advised, but from my angle it makes no sense. Sorry, but I really do want to learn? For every winner there has to be a loser, & there are always more losers than winners if you are betting on the the stock market (bookmakers are not charities) (spread bet, C.F.Ds etc) If you buy shares & hold however, in the long run most make a profit. I know this is hard to understand for some, but although I am down on vod & no expert on the stock market, I am however an expert on bookmakers, which is who you are up against if you spread bet or do C.F.D. If you buy& sell short term, then stamp duty & commission will kill any profits in the long run unless you are much better than average, which by definition means most of you will lose money. But good luck, & thanks again for any advice you can throw my way.

I'm not blaming anyone, but myself, for my current paper losses, but i'll always believe that the big players will try and shakeout the weak. I read posts, from other investors, agonising over a price fall as if it's a real loss. There's a reason I pick stocks with a very high critical mass, over smaller "more risky" stocks. I wouldn't have bought CLLN and I wont buy Talk, as they are too small for my strategy. I'd look at the HSBC's, Santanders, National Grid type stocks, although i'd be a bit concerned about National Grid, as they currently seem to be ascending and i'm a bit dubious about the effect, on profits, of the OFGEM price caps, time will tell.

"I actually think it's easier to force a stock up or down now, you only need to trigger the algo's, looking at momentum trade opportunities and they'll do lots of the leg work. The best time for a company like Vod, would be post ex dividend, with a good dose of negative press releases. I'm not currently bothered if the price rises in the short term, I obviously missed an opportunity to buy lower, but overall i'm happy with my buy prices. Glass half full."
======================================
Fleccy,

I agree algo's make markets more volatile. That doesn't make it easier to manipulate SPs for advantage as nearly every professional trade on LSE is algo-driven.

For eg. whenever I buy or sell, I check London Stock Exchange to compare other brokers execution prices. I spot my trade even before I see if the amount of shares tallies. Because nearly every other trade anywhere near mine is an algo. Now what stops algos competing against each other? Nothing. Large funds work for themselves & their lucrative clients, not for other large funds. If they perform poorly, they lose clients.

For me what's driven VOD's SP down is a number of unsettling fundamental negatives & uncertainties, some global, coming together & affecting sentiment. My paper loss is down to me for not being more circumspect about VOD's debt & poor growth prospects. Hence not meeting forecasts.

As we know, even if a premium stock like AAPL fails to meet market expectations, it ill-matters how much profit they make below those expectations. SP will still tank. Reason for JD's paper losses in VOD are 100% down to JD. Nothing else.

For those who believe otherwise, you are of course perfectly free to blame other factors, like manipulation or MMs. But that's one issue we'll have to agree to disagree on. - GL.

"A lot of attempted manipulation ends up unsuccessful for a few reasons"

I actually think it's easier to force a stock up or down now, you only need to trigger the algo's, looking at momentum trade opportunities and they'll do lots of the leg work. The best time for a company like Vod, would be post ex dividend, with a good dose of negative press releases. I'm not currently bothered if the price rises in the short term, I obviously missed an opportunity to buy lower, but overall i'm happy with my buy prices. Glass half full.

On Monday, me and my missus had nearly three and a half grand, sitting in our ISA's/share dealing accounts, from our BT and Vodafone interims. The ISA dividends were reinvested back into Vodafone and the rest was moved out of the share dealing account, to be reinvested in the ISA's after April. That was just our BT and VOD interims, come summer we've got our final divi's for BT, Lloyds and VOD. All our future investments are going into the ISA's now, for tax reasons, but it just shows the power of dividends. We're currently well down, with BT average buy price around 294p and Lloyds just over 59p, but will pull in close to 15 grand a year in dividends. Vodafone is split with 40 grands worth across two ISA's at 153p and another 30 grands worth at just over 170p. Our capital losses are being eroded at a rate of knots. I just see these low stock prices as an opportunity and we'll continue holding through Brexit and adding another 40 grand to the ISA's after April. Maybe some are worried about Brexit, but I just see it all as overblown nonsense and creating even more opportunity to buy at low valuations.

"I agree, corrupt is too strong a word, manipulated isn't too strong a word in my opinion. There are many ways that the big players can collude, without tipping their hand to the regulators. Individual Stocks and sectors, imo, are targeted by the big players, for big falls, or large increases. I've lost count of the times I've heard, you cant move this stock, or that stock, or that sector, it's just to big, etc, etc. There are loads of examples of manipulation, where the perpetrators have been prosecuted."
===============================================
Hi Fleccy,

Indeed. I've already referred to large hedgies being one example of forces powerful enough to affect some SPs via HFTs or even dark pool trading. In latter, reporting of large sell orders is delayed to avoid tanking SPs & allowing exit at best prices. I agree about the best way to beat the market's vagaries, but I disagree as regards how easy you make manipulation seem or its prevalence today.

A lot of attempted manipulation ends up unsuccessful for a few reasons. Hedgies also compete against each other. Read up about the horrendous losses some powerful hedge funds have made when they called it wrong. More than a few were wiped out, literally. If manipulation was as easy peasy as some think, no hedgie would see such outcomes.

Mind also that whilst a large hedge fund may be using any trick to try to bring down a SP, OTOH, large pension & long-only investment funds can buy big at anytime. That can counter a large short move. Hence why it's easier to manipulate small-cap AIM than large cap/volume FTSE stocks as favoured by large investors.

To my understanding, MMs will struggle to move any large volume, liquid FTSE SP meaningfully. Not least as their input has decreased. Buy & sell orders are now matched up electronically. To quote from recent link. GL.

“The LSE’s main electronic order book, SETS, is designed to pool liquidity for all investors. This is technologically a far cry from the brokers and jobbers (the colloquial term for trading floor market makers) in the old days, and facilitates rapid order-driven trading. The LSE does, however, also offer some facilities for larger investors seeking to take positions in illiquid stock.”

https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/shares/2018/11/09/the-truth-about-market-makers/

Fleccy, I think we all have to accept that in a capitalist system nothing is completely fair. But if we accept that said fact, the stock market is no worse, My beef of course(like many long term holders of shares) is the big shorts that undermine a share price, but that I guess is the modern way. I am holding(I would buy more at this low price) if I had the extra funds & i.s.a allowance.

"But whilst, IMO, markets aren't corrupt,"

I agree, corrupt is too strong a word, manipulated isn't too strong a word in my opinion. There are many ways that the big players can collude, without tipping their hand to the regulators. Individual Stocks and sectors, imo, are targeted by the big players, for big falls, or large increases. I've lost count of the times I've heard, you cant move this stock, or that stock, or that sector, it's just to big, etc, etc. There are loads of examples of manipulation, where the perpetrators have been prosecuted. Navinder Sarao is an example, although I have my doubts he caused a Flash Crash on his own and he apparently did that from his parents house in London. The market makers and mega players can move any stock they want, with trillions to play with. Algo's could be programmed to place small trades repeatedly to move a stock either way and if the other players sit back, there would be nothing to limit the moves. Collusion doesn't require communication or participation, just passive recognition which wouldn't be illegal/provable. My point is, the retail investor is the target of all the big players and as the MM's have virtually unlimited financial resource and the ability to trade off market, such as in dark pools, etc. Who's to say that passive collusion hasn't contributed to much of the decline in certain blue chip dividend paying stocks, popular with retail investors?
The easiest way to beat the big players, is to hold as long as you deem necessary, which is where the dividends pay you to hold.

I am thinking of giving up Indian curry in protest (moan, moan) Oh, then again, nothing like a good curry to cheer me up after a bad day on the stock market, good day today though. If we are up tomorrow, I think vod will be hot! Nice to see no moaners today, boring, but nice. Just wait for the fall (hopefully never) for the standard moaning hour!!?? Usual suspects!!

Thanks & you're welcome. I try to be objective &, aside from idle banter on days when we're all a bit brassed off, I'm always glad to help as I can, just as others have helped me.

IMO, a lot of posts on BBs, no slight intended on anyone, boil down to letting off steam. Understandable. That's not helped by occasional wind-up merchants who gloat & try to stir things up. When people are well down financially, no wonder hackles are easily raised. I've been drawn in myself.

I agree with you about self-accountability in markets. Frankly, I've never seen it any other way. I'm well down here for lacking patience when buying back & assuming that past trends would hold firm as they'd done for years before. Acknowledging errors helps us continue learning.

As you indicate, it's not uncommon when investments go wrong or are mistimed for PIs to seek scapegoats. They blame MMs, shorters, the CEO, the US, etc. It occurs on most BBs. Anyone bar themselves. In fact, FTSE trades are traded via London Stock Exchange's SETS, a carefully regulated electronic system that matches up buy & sell orders.

It's in no-one interests to have bent markets. Pension funds & other large investors would soon exit their money & park it elsewhere.

But whilst, IMO, markets aren't corrupt, neither are they that efficient for a few reasons. Otherwise SPs would be less volatile, be broadly in keeping with fair value, instead of frequently being oversold or overbought on sentiment.

Computer algo-driven HFTs tend to exacerbate volatility. Global stocks can be affected by any number of issues. No wonder even directors get badly caught out when buying & most analysts can't find even remote consensus on price targets, even though all have up-to-date info & huge research resources.

In VOD's case, negative sentiment has dominated recently for a few challenging reasons coming together. Some are specific to VOD, such as concerns over debt & poor growth prospects in short-term, Liberty Deal in the balance. But also uncontrollable macro-factors, for eg. forecasts of economic downturn across EU, uncertain Brexit ramifications, et al. - Cheers.

Thank's for your reply, although I have been a vod share holder for about 20 years, I am still learning, so I hope you don't mind me learning from you & others. Your much agree post to h-hi interests me, he has filtered me, so I can say what I like about him,(only joking). I just find him & some others have a very cynical attitude, suggesting the market is very bent, bent M M 's, U S markets are crooked etc. etc. Am I being naive, or perhaps it's the expletive,constant moronic moaning of him & some others on here that annoys me. I.E. vod is a crock of **** This is taking the piss. here we go again **** the U.S is screwing us. etc. etc.etc At least last call was funny. Mad, but funny. I just think that if you buy shares, you should except the risk, & if things go wrong, don't complain. I am losing money on vod. My fault, nobody else.

I hope we’ve said goodbye to 130s, I don’t mind crawling up to 185p and above but we must not plunge below key levels once cleared.

I’m running out of cheap baked beans and candles in my cave...........oh my neighbour wants to start charging me for internet access too! Might sell the laptop soon but hmmmm, how do I cash out?

H-hi,

Much agree. It seems unlikely that there are or were no significant shorts on any stock in a months-long downtrend. More so that they were undeclared for either of said reasons.

IMHO, this is a flaw with markets. Not only should ALL major shorts be declared. But that info should be available to all investors. This game can be hard enough as it is for the average PI or trader. - GL. .

Hi,

Re your query at 13.56. To clarify: very few PIs have enough leverage to take out very significant short or long positions (SBs or CFDs). Certainly as far as affecting SPs of large volume FTSE stocks goes. Even collectively, should any still be short on VOD at near 10-year lows, which would be surprising. It takes considerable financial resources to affect FTSE SPs.

Powerful hedge funds with at least hundreds of millions at their disposal are quite different.

It may well be that some hedgies held undeclared shorts on VOD until recently. Undeclared as either below 0.5%, or simply that they chose not to publish it on public financial websites. No surprise if some closed their shorts near recent 10-year lows, which would increase buying momentum & lift SP as we've seen to a small degree. That might also explain some of the higher volumes seen last week. - GL.

On the accuracy of short data, I've got doubts about Shortracker: the values are far below those reported in the FT who quote from IHS/Markit for a given equity.

Anyone have any ideas?

Hello jack, I am interested in your post at 8.53. Are you saying that if private investors take out huge shorts, this doesn't effect the vod sp? By shorts, do you mean C.F.Ds & spread bets? I too welcome the reason rises,due to paper losses. I am glad I was away last week, as I think I would have been very worried with the low sp.

H-Hi

I reckon they think Huawei stole tech secrets at some point in time and they are using the spying angle to push them out as a consequence...

They fear higher prices if the German-French merge r goes ahead...but ..if it doesnt...then if the Chinese steal orders due to less competitive position with Siemens and Alstom then that could create job losses....

The EU Competition Group needs to wake up ....

JackD,

0.49% in VOD is 130 million shares, so many hedgefunds could be shorting this without raising any flags. £110 million / 85p profit (after the div) from high of last year......not bad.

Poker,

I think Huawei is not playing ball, the guys running the company must offer huge stake to big U.S funds to quiet the paranoid U.S government attacks. The U.S.A are the spymasters, huawei is a small fry.

She is one crazy lady, keeps blocking mergers and suffocating big businesses. The Siemens/ Alstom merger was blocked despite support from Germany and France. Liberty deal could be blocked if this woman is not gone by then.

LC was trying to keep posters from buying in on the lows....scaring them off ...he probably has a holding by now..
He was giving a 76p prediction which is his funny way of contracticting those that go for 230p+ I guess

I was away last week so missed the return of L.C. Sounds like he upset a lot of people on here as usual. What crazy nonsense was he banging on about this time. I have to confess, although he is very annoying, I find him very funny at times, but I think it's fair to say, lately, he seems to have lost all credibility. I gather from some of your posts, he's made some wild predictions on other share chats?

I am suprised this has gained traction given the poor news from Germany re: factory orders....and on top the suspension of the use of Huawei equipment which will, I would have thought, be more costly if they end up changing supplier

I think there must be an anticipation that China will return after their New Year closedown with some sort of Goverment stimulus or trade talks update

I can only welcome the rise due to holding huge paper losses here, but let’s be clear about this: major fund shorts are only disclosed if over 0.5%. However, they have no obligation to disclose short positions to sites like this even if over 0.5%.

This doesn't mean that short position are only day traders. There is nothing stopping me or anyone else from taking out huge shorts on VOD & holding them for months, as long as we have the leverage. However, it won't affect SPs of large volume FTSE stocks. - GL.

https://www.shorttracker.co.uk/company/GB00BH4HKS39/