Member Info for Auson

Multiplier7,

Yet still we have two 0.5% short, what are they thinking ?

Boark,

I disagree with the entire premise of selling a nations gold reserves, regardless of the relative performance to bonds. I don't believe UK gold reserves at 600 tons were excessively high to begin with, so why meddle.

To put it into context, I think the sale would have netted just under £3.2b with which to invest in T bills or Bonds, in recent times I read that £895b has been invested in Govt bonds simply printed from QE. The more Gold reserves you have the more QE you could get away with.

Back to BP any thoughts on the EPL and how damaging it is to the country ?

Jakers,

Unless you believe the recent Brent price falls ( spurred mostly by OPEC ) are over done - hence BP share price fall is over done and should correct back to the 500p level. Also dividends to be reinvested 28th June.

Boark,

It was a very stupid, economically illiterate move, as a Nation you should never sell gold, he could have borrowed cash using the 600 tons as collateral. The reason you don't hear about how much was made on investing said gold sale money is because it was zero, they spaffed the lot, even sold off hospital buildings and car parks just to rent them back of the Landlords.

Longtermthinker,

I'm sure I don't need to point out the pitfalls of the ( practically bankrupt ) Pemex and the problems of dealing with the corrupt Mexican government. Isn't the acreage being disputed at Zama ?

Jcj07,

Its my understanding that Media Monks and SFOR don't make any money from media buying, as it is all external. So the reduction in Tech clients spend is not due to less media buying but the recent macro economy.

Spights,

The Gold sale was only equivalent to less than 1% of current UK GDP. I guess Labour will sell another hundred tons or so. But I agree it was a stupid move, never sell Shell ( or Gold in this case )

Do we think he actually holds or is on the payroll, he never seems to know the actual live share price only whats displayed on this site.

No numbers so as to not give the shorts a gift ?

One for you union basher

'‘Lazy’ broadband engineers blamed for exposing hospitals and banks to cyber attacks'

www telegraph co uk/business/2024/01/02/broadband-engineers-blamed-hospitals-banks-cyber-attacks/

Unionbasher,

Do you happen to know the current percentage stock on loan here ( euroclear )

Thanks in advance.

Jcj07.

I can't argue with that. I do think SMS hasn't done enough and needs to do more to bolster the shareprice. Obviously a dual NASDAQ listing would help due to the size of the market NYSE all time high and all those 401ks. I have emailed this to him/ them before.

I have a few mates in the ad industry and a couple in ad sales at Google. I will ask the same question to them out of interest, but I think Sorrell has a much better idea than most. He was the reason I invested here just after Derrison and he is the reason I will remain invested here until over £2. Operationally SFOR is a mess and this I hope transient situation I think is why the SP remains well under £1.

Jcj07,

Does he mean 'cut out the larger ad agencies' in regards to media buying ? Media buying has been historically very profitable for the larger ad agencies. I believe SFOR farm this out to an external media buyer.

What is your take on his statement ?

Unionbasher,

No we are definitely not the same person, hence why I asked the question to you, as I have a feeling you might know a bit more than you are letting on. The obvious reason for the large short position which hasn't reduced much is of course the court case, but a second reason is they might be acting in cahoots with a bidder. I am just trying to see the wood from the trees here I have no agenda/ aside from a profit of course !

Unionbasher,

Would you say the large short position here is just for the court case, or are they shorting the company/ sector ?

1msn,

I had always thought the algos smash this down in the morning to then buy it up all day at a lower price ?

Nige Co,

I think it adds weight to my theory, they are controlling the price and potentially also lending out their stock to be shorted ( possibly at a discounted rate )

1msn,

Interesting, Bloomberg shows they sold down to 5.42% on 17 April now holding 5.72%. Does anyone think Third Avenue and Franklin Resources could be acting on behalf of a bidder ?

Pokerchips,

If they had bought up stock to offset short position they need to notify net short % so they are due a fine. I doubt they have done this.

Does anyone think the US funds might have been acquiring on behalf of Stagwell or another interested party ? They would then be happy to lend the shares out for shorting.