Member Info for Crocqman

Nothing to do with being governed by Europe.
Some regulatory matters are better left as is, especially with cross-border activities, and complex ones like finance and arrangements that cover aspects of money laundering, market abuse, etc. Some things are better with collaboration and shared actions.
To remain a financial force, as SB states, you need to compete as well, rejecting European regulation on matters financial could see an exodus of financial business to other competitor markets.
The LSE does not just cover UK markets, it has activities across Europe, Canada, Asia and the ROW, and is an attractive proposition as past mergers and previous attempted takeover/buy-outs have shown

I would say doubtful, just due to the function of the LSE (not this site) and its links with other exchanges (e.g. Milan) and its position as trading venue within the world markets.
I would guess they will adopt the same principles implemented under this EU Directive as much for ongoing transparency, as anything else.
If they were to introduce their own 'trading standard' it would certainly take several years to implement, and not sure if the FCA would even consider this as an option unless there is pressure from the market itself (or government).
I have not read anything about any proposed changes, although it is not something I have been looking out for either, so I could be totally wrong on this too, just my thoughts.

SF,
It is part of an EU directive (MiFID II) that states what is required to be reported at the point of execution, and whether it is a buy or sell is not required, so the exchange will not inform the market. It is just a 'trade'
Many think this is a simple fix, but it is not when you consider all the different trading platforms, exchanges, etc, the millions of trades executed daily, and the time frame that everyone is obliged to report a trade to the market (15 mins from execution in most cases, hence the delayed reporting on sites like this).
It is not a simple coding issue like many think.
Exchanges will only report the minimum requirement under the EU Directive, so it will not change any time soon. Full transaction details do need to be reported to the local regulator within T+1, however.
The 'buy' and 'sell' indicator is just that, a best efforts basis at the time the trade is notified to the market. Frustrating, of course to users on sites like this.
This EU Directive came into effect in Jan 2018 to bring all European markets under the same reporting requirements and took almost 2 years for financial firms to implement (there were many other regulatory requirements too, so not just this aspect).
Not very interesting, but there are no games being played, as is often suggested, just every European market and exchange following the required rules stipulated by an EU Directive, and sites interpreting the required data on a best efforts basis.

mapp,
Do you have any evidence that this is being shorted?
Nothing on the FCA register of Shorts, that requires notification of anything over 0.1% to be disclosed, and is updated daily.
Is there an available stock identifier that can be used to take out a short?

I suppose that it is one of those 'common' occurrences that no one can ever provide evidence of, but which is going on all the time on every AIM stock (supposedly).
The 'evidence' is usually some expose article from 5 years ago which seems to be the 'go to' proof that shorting is rife on AIM.

Unconnected, but has anyone else lost the yellow band at the top of the screen to advise of new posts and to 'click here'?
I am having to manually refresh each page to see if there are any new posts.
I also note that I can reply to posts and recommend posts, but not report posts (not that I do)

Good news today. Another step in the right direction.
With all major world markets down yesterday, poo falling and a bigger drop in the U.S. overnight, was not expecting much today, but UK markets certainly look more positive today.
Holding this current gain will be a good end to the week.
There will be plenty of swings over the coming months, but hoping the overall trend will be positive as news continues to arrive.
gla

I've been here for 3 years, and the continuing situation continues to grate.
SS really needs to pull a rabbit out of the hat at the AGM to get some momentum here again. We need an operational update at the minimum, so that all are in no doubt as to the plans for the next 6-12 months.

It's amazing how, in those 3 years, without exception, every single one of the most ardent rampers on here, who loudly proclaim their every BUY trade, who tell everyone when they're topping up, and that this is a bargain price, so 'fill your boots', and who shout down anyone with an opposing view as a troll, swampie, or trader looking for a cheap entry, ALL turn out to have been trading this share all the time.
Without exception. I can name at least a dozen of the most prominent ones in that time.
They NEVER announce a SELL while they talk the share up every day with multiple positive posts.
It's only when they get caught out trying to explain away their suspiciously low average SP that they admit it.
And when questioned, they ALL reply that it is what any sensible holder is doing.
And yet, according to them, anyone else who openly admits to trading the share is not a true believer and should not be trusted.
Staggeringly hypocritical

leer75,
The 'buy' or 'sell' indicators you will se are just that. Indicators.
They are not actual evidence of whether a trade is actually a 'buy' or 'sell', merely a 'trade'.
They are shown by sites like this on a best efforts basis, based on the information available at the time of the trade.
Notifying the market as to whether a trade is a 'buy' or a 'sell' at point of execution is not required under an EU Directive (MiIFD II), just certain key fields such as time of trade, size, price, ticker.
As a result, these boards often have confusion over buys vs sells from the 'estimated' direction assigned at the time of the trade.
Trade Reporting to the market is 'instantaneous'; and requires minimal detail to be advised to the market, Transaction Reporting requires a more detailed view and will be notified to the relevant exchange in a longer timeframe from the point of execution (T+1).
Often a cause for confusion/frustration amongst investors.
Some good papers online will outline the 2 topics (trade reporting vs transaction reporting), but accurately notifying the market of the true trade direction in the timeframe required is not the simple IT process that many seem to think, and as it is not mandatory, only the required data will be reported

I believe a non-UK holder has to notify a UK issuer within 4 days, and the issuer has to announce by close of the following day.
A UK holder has to notify UK issuer within 2 days, and the issuer has to announce by close of the following day.

3% notification and 1% increments for a UK issuer
5% notification and 5% increments relates to a non-UK issuer
It is the issuer domicile that denotes the threshold, not the holders domicile.

FCA Handbook rules DTR 5.1 refers.
This is my understanding of the rules anyway. Rules contain plenty of caveats and are not always easy to interpret.
I have seen plenty of discussion on different boards where posters are adamant that their conflicting view of the rule is correct

'The next RNS may well be a damp squid we will never know'
Surely we will know when we see it?

gkb,
Apologies for misquoting you. I misread what you were saying about your opinion on SF.
Balcombe is of less interest for me, just not sure I want to stick around long enough to see what happens there. I believe SF will happen before Balcombe. Potential for delays in time line for both, but SF seems more 'straightforward'.
gla

MG,
You will find a lot of people on a lot of boards referring to whichever particular stock as a 'lifestyle' company. It goes with the territory with being on AIM.
I certainly do not ignore the negatives. I have been here since before the rise up to 16p and seen the highs on here from the expectation, and the lows from the realisation re: Brockham.
Having a paper loss that was not worth cashing in (imo), I chose to sit and wait to see what future plans entailed in the hope of clawing some money back.
Unlike gkb, I see some value in SF, maybe smaller than the board and many here are perhaps looking at.
I have held and stayed as I see it as an interesting proposition and hope to recover up to half my losses there, maybe more. Success with any other project will be a bonus, but if SF comes good, I won't be here to see what happens elsewhere.
I take full responsibilities for my investment decisions and plan to sit and wait. If it does not come good as I hope, then I will reconsider then.
I am looking no further than Q4 for my investment here, depending on SF timelines.
gla

I do agree with his pinned tweet about I.O.W.
This will be a very long process.
Focus should be on HH whilst trying to progress anything else in the background, it's the best (only?) chance to generate cash to help fund future projects (imo)
gla

Yes, any TR1 will be based on the holding at any time the position changes, whether through trading, or new shares admission, so the change as of the admission date will be the point to declare.
I believe the timescales allow for a 2-trading day notification window by the holder to the UK issuer, and then the issuer has to notify the market via RNS by the end of the following business day they receive this notification, so the TR1 may not be immediate.
Notification requirements come under DTR 5 of the FCA handbook

Morning all,
New thread, as the existing 2 are disruptive titles.

Michael,
I suggest you value the company on whatever metric you feel is appropriate and works for you when evaluating this company and prospects.
Others will always disagree and use different methods for valuation. Company figures are there as a guide (imo) and can be used to form a basis of opinion taking other factors into consideration.
Yes, figures may show what the true value now should be, but with AIM you need to factor in other intangibles, and I suspect here, the current SP (despite a decent rise in the last few months) means the company is presently being undervalued in the market based largely on past achievements and scepticism regarding the different projects.

I would also ignore those spouting 2p and 3p 'next week'. It is just baseless ramping from people hoping for a quick return - what evidence is provided to support these figures other than 'news soon'? Possible, in time, given success, but not imminently
I still feel this could reach the 1.20 level by month end with a couple of news updates and general market uplift, but can equally see the SP around current levels at month end.
For me, planning approval for SF may be what makes the real difference and that will be around end August.
Any other news may result in small spikes.
Steady progress being made. Optimistic, but still cautious. Delivery, not talk needed.
gla

Morning all.
Seems like Cannacord is now being seen as some kind of white knight that everyone is hanging their hat on here as proof that ukog is going places.
Just as there has been zero evidence to date that they are selling out 'asap' as one poster has been claiming virtually every day for a month now, there is also zero evidence to date that they are accumulating more, and 'going big' here.
We would have seen a TR1 by now if they were reducing, for sure, seeing as plenty of shares were traded in the last month.
One poster seems to think they are accumulating to a 10% or even 20% plus level. Seriously?
With around 2 billion shares trade last week alone, and the new placing shares to be issued next week, we will see soon enough.
My bet is still on them maintaining their current weighting following the addition of new shares expected next week. TR1 within the next 7 or so working days to confirm.
And, as posted by a couple of posters last night, I agree with the 1% reporting thresholds here (from 3% and above) with ukog being a UK issuer. Have tried twice before to explain this, as have at least 2 others, but some still disagree.
gla

Thanks.
A good article.
You don't always raise funds when you need it.
Good business to raise funds when demand is there and the over-subscription plus the SP reaction seems to suggest the market likes this move at this time.
gla

Looks like its time to give this board a wide berth for a while given the posting of late, especially seeing as one smart cookie has decided to ramp this over on the ukog board at a time when precisely ZERO is actually happening.
Real smart move.
Will await news and give the BS merchants free reign in the interim.
Good luck to the realistic posters.

Let's maintain some perspective here.
Deliberately inflammatory thread titles that result in slanging matches between 2 extremes are not needed.
Things are progressing. Plenty of potential pitfalls on the way, but also plenty of news to come and delivery on their various projects (or not) is what will ultimately drive SP.
Can live with some slippage in timelines, but company need to get things right and show that they can deliver to restore shareholder trust.
Improving sentiment can only push this so far.
Important few months ahead.
gla

Good post BUTP.
Ignorance and bravado sums up the 'shorts closing' and the 'watch those shorts' burn mob pretty well.
When posters talk of 'shorts' they actually DO mean it in the true sense of the word via their implied suggestion it is happening on a large scale.
It's pointless trying to counter their claims with 'proof' as they usually respond with some expose article from around 5 years ago on another AIM share as 'evidence' that it goes on all the time on AIM, we just don't know about it.
They generally have no interest in understanding the mechanics, they prefer to perpetuate the myth to sow seeds of doubt for their own particular agenda