Member Info for Bella6532

....'The main purpose of dark pools is to

minimise market impact. By restricting access to undesirable market participants – for example,

high-frequency trading firms – and by not revealing prices, dark pools enable institutional investors

to minimise their information disclosure and realise more efficient executions.

More precisely, dark pools create the possibility of price improvement and lesser transaction costs

by crossing orders at the midpoint of the quoted NBBO prices, which saves on both the bid-offer

spread and on exchange fees.

Why are governments worldwide considering tighter regulation of dark pools?

Dark pools have been criticised for their lack of transparency, along with their potential to cause

fragmentation, which can lead to less efficient pricing. This has led to growing calls for greater

transparency of trading venues. It has also potentially opened up dark pool operators to wider legal

action from government agencies.

Last year, in the US, the Chief Executives of NYSE Euronext, Nasdaq OMX and BATS Global Markets

urged regulators to introduce rules permitting trades to only take place away from a public exchange

if a customer is getting an improved price. These exchanges referred to steps taken by Canadian and

Australian regulators to fight the rise of dark pools.

There may now be greater incentive to increase regulation of dark pools in the UK following legal

action taken against Goldman Sachs and Barclays in the US. Goldman Sachs was fined $800,000 by

FINRA for failing to ensure that trades executed in their dark pool were being made at the best price,

while New York State filed a lawsuit against Barclays relating to high-frequency trading in its dark

pool.

The fine and lawsuit follows the SEC’s announcement that it would review the transparency rules

regarding dark pools in a bid to make them more open. Due to increased criticism and legal activity,

some dark pools have in recent months voluntarily published information on how they

operate. We can expect further light to be shed on dark pools in the months and years

ahead.

Siobhain Egan is a Director at Lewis Nedas Law [lewisnedas.co.uk], a leading white

collar and corporate crime law firm based in London. She has more than 24 years’

experience as a solicitor, specializing in areas including financial crime, regulatory defence,

compliance, and business investigations.'

'Barclays and Goldman Sachs were sued recently over their use of ‘dark pools’, but what are dark

pools and why are regulators targeting them? Siobhain Egan, Director at Lewis Nedas Law, explains

all

What are dark pools?

Dark pools are electronic Alternative Trading Systems that are very similar to stock exchanges where

trades can be matched. The main difference is that in dark pools, the price at which shares are

offered for sale cannot be seen by anyone – even those participating in the exchange. The price at

which shares change hands is only disclosed after the trade is completed. This limits the amount of

interaction between participants as they do not know when to move their price up or down in

answer to the trade.

Although the term ‘dark pools’ is relatively new, the pools have been around since trading began

and were previously called 'upstairs trading'. They are not a ‘black market’ trading platform. The

prices and size of trades just are not displayed. A dark pool allows traders to buy or sell large

amounts or 'blocks' without other traders knowing that the sale is being made. This prevents other

traders from putting the price up or down and minimises the block trade's effect on the market.

Dark pools are not damaging to the stock market. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has

recognised the importance for institutions to be able to work orders without displaying the whole

order “to maintain long-term confidence” in the markets. Dark pools are highly regulated. All dark

pools are broker-dealers registered with the SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority

(FINRA) and subject to regular audits and examinations.

They are not environments where the participants 'go in blind’. Participants choose to place their

orders in a dark pool. The users are sophisticated traders who understand the advantages of not

displaying their orders at an exchange. Dark pool prices are not just made up, either. Trades are

bound by the National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO), and prices cannot be chosen arbitrarily.

Why have dark pools become increasingly popular with traders?

Dark pools have become more widely used due to technological advancements that have lowered

costs, allowing brokers and dealers to route more of the order flow they handle to their own private

pools first, before sending unwanted orders to the public markets.

The volume of trade in dark pools is increasing because the system really works for institutions. The

percentage of non-exchange trades has grown to roughly 33% of all trades, up from no more than

10% a decade ago. The likely reason for this growth is that users have had a better experience and

more success using dark pools than they have had using regular exchanges.

Dark pools are not all the same. They have varying features to appeal to different segments of the

market. Some only allow certain types of traders while others allow participants to rank trading

partners

When Heights received shares they had to sell them to get their money back.

With these placng shares they will go to the Investors who we are told will be holding on to them.

When there is a shortage of shares a higher SP can be charged...with a glut of shares then the SP often has to be reduced to make the sales. It's a marketplace just like the guys selling apples and pears from a street stall.

Now...if a broker has a large order to fill at a certain price...he can buy above and below said price as long as the overall average gives the client the price he wanted. The larger the order then often the longer the timescale.

Agree but the markets only see debt without income.

Lets get Coris over the lines which will at lease put a few bob back into the pot and remove ghe overhead.

Next let's see a profuct deal...an MOU would be a good start.

A finance deal would be even better for say £50m up front to secure 2026 Funding/Cover Bond and allow Avacta to drag our product negotiations until more data secured thus improving desl terms.

Key to the whole lot...'subject to funding'...

'Medium-to-longer term financing options

Avacta’s stated ambition is to oversee widespread licencing, partnering and technological collaborations of its pre|CISION® and Affimer platform technologies plus related IP, along with selected in-house therapeutic developments, for the benefit of both global healthcare and its shareholders.

Following yesterday’s fundraising, the Group retains a cash runway out to Q1 2026. The £25.5m principal

outstanding on its convertible bond, which accrues interest at an annual rate of 6.5% payable quarterly in arrears, is due to mature in January 2028. Subject to funding, the Board has projected AVA6000 initiating a Phase 2/3 clinical trial for SGC (along with TNBC to expand the label) in tandem with the commencement of AVA6103’s own Phase 1 clinical trial during H1 2026.'

Only need £50m...seems a bit thin.

The finance detail still leaves a lot of questions...

'GSK has failed to win the backing of influential advisers to the US drugs regulator for a key blood cancer drug, putting its approval in doubt and sending shares in the pharmaceutical group 7 per cent lower on Friday morning.

The company said an advisory committee to the Food and Drug Administration found that the risks of its drug Blenrep, which GSK has forecast could be worth at least £3bn in its peak year, outweighed the benefits.'

Why buy shares when they're getting good share options...

Saintt68..you're right except there are sometimes exceptions when they can trade in a closed period.

Directors can buy at any time but they can't sell within closed periods. Basically they can't be seen to trade and make money on insider info until that info has been made public. So it's not so much about the buying it's more about when they sell.

Stinks...

Buy at 30 sell at 33 = quick 10%.

Mmmm!

Long term...a stretch...!!!

All those red trades and the SP remains flat...!!!

Barking!!!

'Long term high net worth'..to give confidence to the markets and particularly I would argue more importantly to HR fund investors in the US too...

'David Bryant will add considerable value on the commercial side'

What does he mean by commercial side...?

'Healthcare Royalty is a leading royalty acquisition company focused on commercial or near commercial stage biopharmaceuticsl products.'

So is Bryant going to help work on one or more deals which will lock in royalties of which Healthcare Royalty will get a future cut. If this is the case then it looks like Hughes will buy time with a couple of fund raisers to cover qrtly bond payments so Avacta can get one or more royalty deal(s) across the line and upfront funding secured from HR to then use to complete AVA6000 trials and finance next pipeline product move to clinic etc.

Yep...mates employing mates...happens all the time in this business...more importantly and pressing is finance...nothing else matters right now...the only thing the markets are looking at is the numbers not the science...money drives the markets and they have to find a way of getting out from under the weight of the current deal.

Should read 21st..Oops!!!

How about Coris news between now and 22st?

Not really big news but it would me they actually become fully fledged pure play which could then unlock a financial deal (specialist fund) and/or a licence/partnership deal. They'd also have the cash for the qrtly payment.

Ducks in a row...

Regulation A+ explained in this link..

https://www.dealmaker.tech/content/understanding-nasdaq-listing-requirements-for-successful-market-entry

Ah! Now what if they have chosen to go down the Regulation A+ route...could that accountvfor the "parking" comment...parked until they get the investors/investment onboard...then go for a listing.

Is this why we have the two new 'markets/finance' NED's on board. Kinda makes more sense...

If you had invested $1,000 in Verona Pharma Plc?

1 month ago $1,238.07 23.81%

3 months ago $1,807.97 80.80%

6 months ago $2,268.18 126.82%

1 year ago $6,182.30 518.23%

What a difference a year holding can make eh???