Member Info for alfista

Don't think we can read anything much in to a modest crop of buys yesterday on no news.
Unless there's a lot more action, MM's remain in control, trying their mind games
IMHO of course.

I've thought that longer term packs would make sensible savings. However, the difference to the bottom line given current sales volumes would be very modest.

Bigger fish getting closer to the nets?

Looks like a trend to me, wouldn't you agree Naz?

I doubt that you are.

Ask 90

Nobody can be that dumb.
It ended yesterday Bid 70 and Ask
Still is.

Probably landed badly from a backflip, and damaged the one finger he types with.

Naz will be along soon, once he's stopped doing somersaults' and backflips in celebration

So, we have yet another health claim.
Can we hope for commercial success for such a health benefitting discovery?
Never mind that, here's another health benefit.
Yes, but, will it be a product which sees wide spread public awareness and market demand?
It's a very important health benefit.
Yes it is, so shall we wait and see then?
Yes.
Sigh, OK then.

Repeatedly, we see a crop of tiny trades posted, far too small to be trades as we normally think of them. Some kind of financial instrument like CFD's ? Who knows, but they are of no consequence to those holding IMHO. Only a dumbo or a fraud would respond with an expression of impending doom.

Doesn't matter how many times you say it, it was a miniscule trade, as are all the others today.
Strong feeling that you're a MM plant, and not a very good one.

Perhaps they needed the £3.25

Take car saying stuff like that. However, anyone thinking of having a go here would be well advised to read the Iceberg research report IMHO

Puzzler. Trade reported, then unreported, at the same time ???
Still, slightly more interesting than working out how long that piece of string is
:-)

So good to know my platelets aren't bound to the Von Willebrand Factor .
I'm sure that had been worrying Naz too.

Kind of sums up the inaccuracy of Bella's claim then?

Quite deliberate policy.
Has anyone ever done the equation and matched to the reported sales?
Because I don't think the order number volumes match the income reported.
Just saying

If you could point us towards the sells by any large holders, the point could be validated.
As I've posted many times, the structural changes inn DSM, and the relationship adjustment, may result in DSMV reducing, but the fact is that there's simply zero proof of that happening.

A lot of experienced folks on here, so I find it hard to understand the lack of appreciation of the fact that, knowing that a substantial holder is disposing, short traders have an easy target. Sell and hope to buy back cheaper, as they do, or add more on dips and avoid difficult tax calculations. Each to their own, but the strength of the resource surely argue for a long term large rise. IMHO

You have to stop this disinformation, it isn't true, and is unfair to shareholders.
This share price is neither up nor down, you know that fullwell but you feel you have to post lies for reasons only known to yourself, or those that instruct you.
Stop.
Now