Member Info for chasf

People keep assuming they're not out, but I think most of theirs went in that big multimillion burst in August. Why wouldn't they sell into that rise?

Odd. Damille isn't listed in the annual report as a large shareholder at 31 May 2016, unless they are Redmayne (but with a different amount) and the online one on Ovoca's website is last October.

Hmm. Thinking about that, looks like someone who trades through Euroclear has been building a big holding here.

It looks like Damille is long gone, so it won't be them The table in the 2015 annual report (as at 31 May 2016) doesn't include them, but Euroclear's holdings is about 3 times higher. Euroclear Nominees Limited 14,698,561 16.62% BBHISL Nominees (HSBC) 7,633,143 9.36% Citibank Nominees (Ireland) 4,919,592 5.56% Redmayne (Nominees) Limited 4,891,804 5.53% Davy Crest Nominees 4,298,704 4.86% Chase Nominees Limited 3,231,200 3.65%

The disparity between the cash value and share price is fairly bonkers, though.

I suspect the main problem with the SP is that there's a big background seller. You can see big 100k-ish chunks appear periodically. Several weeks ago, someone mentioned a trust that was selling out of all its investments. I expected that they might have got rid of most of it during the high-volume spike (which might, ahem, have been encouraged to do it), but perhaps there's still more left. There could easily be another such seller. It looked moderately regular on the graph. I think there's been selling into every slight rise as well. A further problem is that the actual spread is extortionate. Also, the share is quoted on three exchanges: AIM(LSE), Eire, and ISDX. Anything else?

There is no buy/sell market in the data stream. Sites like this add it based on the mid price. Above is marked buy, below as sell. Since the actual spread is often less, it is inaccurate in many shares.

I'd be surprised if originally it was a 50% discount. I thought it was intended to be 20-25% at most, but there was a big rise meanwhile. It is not entirely unheard of for a rise to be somehow magically there before a placing is announced. Strange that. Could it be ... ? Surely not.

The discount varies and usually depends on the VWAP round the time they start the process. 15-30% is not unusual. The most disgraceful case was CEB/ADL where it was 70% or more(?) because someone pulled out (is the rumour) and there wasn't time to re-do it before suspension had to end. Too big a discount obviously drastically increases dilution, so PIs lose longer term. Rarely the placing is done at a premium (and then the fine print can turn an apparent premium into an actual discount). From time to time, there's revenge. Recently it was rumoured that a placing (not in WSBN) was pulled recently because in the end the company thought the discount thus dilution terms were poor and they could do without, but this was after some placees had forward sold so they were properly short (whoops, ... gotcha!). Why the discount? To get the money, the placees need to be certain they'll see a quick and certain return. That's also why they are all or partially forward sold, to guarantee that. There's little or no risk. Put another way, the discount is their risk premium, and the level of discount reflects the risk in a given case. With WSBN, as I thought the RNS said, the placing was mainly for the exploration side, because the trading side isn't cross-subsidising the exploration. If that's right, it seems a reasonable discipline to help insulate the (probably) loss-making side from the (hopefully) highly profitable trading side. Obviously the intention is that exploration will find something really incredibly valuable to make that worthwhile and recoup the cost, but ... well ... they all say that. That's as I say I was here for the gold trading not the wretched drilling of holes. Again. And again.

Especially annoying are the times when they say "fully financed", "there is no need for a placing" or even "there isn't a placing [at this very instant but we're working on it]", so we all get a bit complacent.

It's clearly a procedure that disadvantages private investors. I think they might as well do away with the fiction of "admission date" if they aren't going to ban the practice. It's just laughable as it is. Just have them admitted when issued at least.

It's the same procedure as naked short selling, except that they know that they're going to be issued those shares unconditionally and won't have to buy them to settle. The price is fixed at a discount, they sell at the current price (well) before the shares are admitted to trading, the brokers/MMs feed them in but can't settle them until admission day (12th October). When the announcement is made the price usually heads towards the placing price. This time, most of them seemed initially to have been bought up, but the chart shows that was misleading, there's still a chunk to go. (It's a bit complicated because of the ISDX secondary market.) You'll note that they're not admitted to trading until the 12th. I'll bet we don't see a TR-1 the next day because the mysterious strategic investor has sold them all, but we'll see. I might just be too cynical having seen this far too many times. I hope the exploration is worth it. I'm only here for the gold trading. I've had my fill of miners, let alone explorers. If I'd wanted that, I'd have found plenty elsewhere!

It's to tell PIs they don't want shares thanks until the overhang is sold at the average agreed price, which seems to be about 1, or 25% premium to placing price, funny that, so they'll push the bid down to punish other sellers and discourage sell-and-buy-back.

You buy, and they finally admit they've been lying about the ask. For the last few weeks MM trading prices quoted have been well away from reality, not just here but I've noticed it in others. New trading software release? New strategy to stir up volume?

Yes, some matching trades at 15:23/15:24, perhaps a DIY ISA transfer.

Looks like there's going to be a bit of overhang. If it lasts long enough I'll pick up quite a bit more once another position is free.

Looks like there's going to be a bit of overhang. If it lasts long enough I'll pick up quite a bit more once another position is free.

L2 suggests they want those shares! > 3v1

I've just said on IOG that I've noticed in this and several other shares where there was a run up earlier in the week but shares are in short supply, that they're behaving badly today. I wonder whether MMs went short and need shares to settle. I realise there was some profit-taking earlier, but they did sell rather a lot in that big burst.

That's normal because of the use of price related mid-price to guess sell or buy. More curious is why they are walking it down as they are. Even after a buy or two, they continue to mark it down a step.