Member Info for chasf

"Day light robber from MMs." It isn't the MMs doing it (it isn't an MM-managed share). Usually the MMs slide away from top of bid or ask if there's anyone else there, unless they need shares themselves. Otherwise they simply sell between the bid and ask set by others.

The MMs don't select buy/sell: there isn't a bit for that in the protocol. This site's software does that, based on whether it's above, below or on the then current mid price (so delayed reports are often misassigned). It's usually reasonable for O activity but misleading for A trades.

The A entries are strict trades on SETS, so essentially they were buying at 2.35 even though 2.44 was on the ask. Also, someone is trying very hard to keep the share in this tight range, presumably to put bounds on the prices in O trades (MMs will usually keep within the bid & ask). I wonder why? I confess I was hoping for a little more excitement showing in the book.

I suspect it's caused by the warrant shares, but whether that's because a forward sale was finished, or they took it up to sell them?

Placing suggestions weren't helpful but really someone was systematically (in the full sense) driving the price down on the ask, and knocking the weak orders off the bid. I assume at several points along the way it triggered stop-loss orders that added to the selling volume, making it worse.

It's nice being able to push a bot round for a change. It keeps jumping out of my way. Mwah ha ha.

book looks healthier compared to the last few days. a bot (or very fast person) on the bid is antsy and shifts up if anyone joins the same queue. perhaps spreadex is finished since there was a 6 day gap last two times.

Almost certainly the drop through 2 or close below it triggered stop-losses that dumped a load more in, hence the run down to 1.71. The bid was generally light with nothing below 1.55.

Thanks. I'd noticed that someone was playing with SETS in a way I've usually associated with shorters taking advantage of weakness in the book. They seemed to be doing a decade a day. Held back to see if volume arrived for the RNS, then whacked it down from there to where it was before, then on to today's decade!

"Spreadex was out in force today also selling us down but they are slowing up" Are they identified on your L2 display (as the MMs can be)? If so I might dig out my full trading platform.

Most of the volume was on the ask all week, and again today. Bid was weak especially today except for 1.1m at 2.30. For a time there was a 1m that suddenly appeared further up (2.35, 2.40? can't remember) but that vanished when I was doing something else, either removed or sold into, exposing next to nothing between there and 2.30. I popped a bid in at 2.31, which went, but they never went lower than that. They didn't for instance sell into the large order at 2.30, so I suspect it's still a large managed sell that's trying to keep an orderly market, avoiding the 2.30 as a potential stop-loss round number, or because there was enough MM activity between 2.31 and 2.45 for them to do ok. If it is a big managed sell and they find a range where they can keep dumping it, they'll stick with that. A shorter would just have dumped it to try to trigger the stops.

Even at <3% they still had a load of shares to sell. I had the impression from the book that someone's working a large order, and there have been several late reports of large orders (eg, 5m or so). Takes ages when demand drops off, and the bid has been weak. Most of it is going through the MMs not SETS. Not today that I've noticed but last few days periodically someone sets the price down by whacking a tiny number of shares onto the top of the bid.

It says 0.085 in one place, 0.85 in another. Suspect latter is a typing error.

I'd be surprised if they sold all 8m of the last batch, though, since 1.85p/share is near enough an mcap of cash value that it's hard to imagine a better entry point appearing now, and plenty of profit built-in if they simply hold, but they might sell a smaller chunk say 25% for a decent profit now.

The exchange allows trades with a given settlement date; only on that date will money and shares change hands. If I sell on a T+2, the shares need to be delivered to the buyer on the second day following the sale, and the buyer must pay for them on that day. Settlement periods are part of the bargain: you can do T+10, T+20 etc. although most retail now is T+2.

The warrants are convertible to shares. Assuming no conditions to conversion, they can be converted on demand, on payment of the fee per share (eg, 1.85p). The warrants are presented and the company responds by issuing new shares. That is exercising the warrants, so that's already happened. The issue is unconditional so the warrantholder can rely on getting them on admission date. All that's needed is to combine settlement periods and unconditional shares: a warrantholder can sell the shares in advance of getting them ("forward-selling") with a settlement period ending when the shares are admitted, at which point they're handed over to the buyer. In fact, they can be sold in advance of exercising the warrants, and hence a public announcement, with a long-enough settlement period.

Question is, is it OM and their short, or do they just take it up for each batch of warrants? Average price of 5.5p say for a cost of 1.85p isn't bad.

They'll typically have been forward-sold. They can't be used to settle until admitted, but forward-selling on a T+10 (say) would be fine. It's effectively the safest short: both the price and the shares are certain, and the cost of the shares is the cost of the warrants + tax.

With so many shares in issue the dilution is fractional, less than the OM short.

It was a little more aggressive than I expected. I suppose it triggered stops that dropped it further for a while.

There was plenty of cake since in that placing.