Member Info for Cyberdoggy

As I said, in cahoots.....

"Take Caius Capital, the hedge fund led by a couple of ex-Goldman Sachs alumni, that specializes in the distressed debt of financial institutions. Caius bought Metro Bank senior bonds as they retreated below par in recent months, while at the same time betting against the shares of the bank, a typical hedge strategy for funds buying bonds of troubled companies. So when Metro’s biggest shareholder, Colombian billionaire Jaime Gilinski, said he was ready to inject more cash to cover the shortfall at the bank if creditors would shoulder some of the burden, Caius was happy to oblige. The fund led a group of hedge funds that offered to swap the old notes at par for new senior, longer-dated bonds with a 12% coupon, up from 9.5% on the old notes. Gilinski agreed to inject £102 million to take a 53% stake in the bank.

Here comes twogood, couldn't hit a barn door with a banjo, another fantasist.

Slow and controlled exit, Mark my words

Oh look, finished down on yesterday, not up

Because you're just spouting nonsense and I'm calling it out

So unknown trades are buys now?

But everyone knows the asset sale is coming, it's baked in to current share price, you can't seriously be saying this is going to ramp the share price up surely?

6.89% reported short over the minumum threshold on 5th October. Let's see

OK, let's see in the next week or so whether shorts close, and look at the price now v then. Let's deal with facts rather than fantasy.

Sharebels failing to mention the short have been involved in this entire process so will exit in a slow and controlled manner with little to no impact to share price. Been here before with the shorts when the short holding was higher, and there was no squeeze. I'm not making it up, look at the short holdings over time and correlate the share price to those reductions and you'll see this was the case previously. Go to short tracker for the reductions, and use historical share price charts. That way you see for yourself.

I really don't know

No point asking anyone for guidance on here. If you look closely at anyone who posts, it's either intentional nonsense or guess work

Sharebel, nonsense

The shorts were involved, let's get real here please

As I said, shorts not burning anywhere

Which Is likely part of the reason they kept the shawbrook bid quiet, knowing fine well the price could hit earlier levels when the carlyle bid talk was reported, even though that may well have been nothing. Its all a bit murky.

Sharebel must have hit the nail on the head about paying the highest price paid in the last 12 months per share. Must be looking to keep the price as low as possible for the next 12 months so he can assume full control at a lower price point.

I wonder why gilinski is seeking exemption from having to buy the full company, as per normal rules in the UK

I'm just not completely naive unlike many others on here

Shorts are irrelevant in terms of getting burned, they haven't been and won't be. Do you really think they didn't know what was going on here and what the resulting outcome would be?