Member Info for Daisan

Pablo2,

I post as jc2706 on ADVFN.

Or, as they say, welcome!

Well, he wasn't giving advice, just suggesting that it wasn't illegal and I suspect that he is correct. It is, however, interesting to say the least. Endion also makes a good point about the 38p trade. The shenanigans actually seem to have stopped an even lower UT. Make of that what you will. It will be interesting to see how his plays out on Monday although volumes are likely to be low which may exacerbate the issue.

HaleSpur,

That was my hope as well - that this was some kind of final flag to notify completion. There was definitely something different about the close today and it may well be that this marked an end. I suspect that the 38p offer in the auction may well have been an indicator that somebody wanted to complete the trade today and this brought out some off market activity as well.

We can but hope but if that does mark the end then we should see an uptick, although trading over the Christmas period tends to be relatively light so it is often difficult to tell how it is going to react.

Gkb47,

I got them from here:

https://uk.advfn.com/Help/trade-types-1549.html

Is actually very interesting. It may be for 6 shares but the trade type is intriguing, it being: 'NonProtected Portfolio, Single Protected Transaction'.

Now, I confess that this is unknown to me but the definition says:

"A non-protected portfolio transaction or a fully disclosed portfolio transaction. Normally a transaction of a number of stocks dealt with by one market maker at an agreed discount to the market price."

"A protected transaction occurs when a large order is going through the market. The buyer (or seller) may wish to keep the order anonymous from the rest of the market as the size of the order could greatly alter the price of the stock. With a protected transaction, the dealer will put the trade through in small quantities rather than knock the whole order out in one hit. The entire transaction is reported once the deal is completed. The LSE is notified at the start and at the end of the transaction. However, the market as a whole isn't told until the end, thus the order is protected."

What should we take from this? That there is a very large order going through at an agreed price? If so, is that price 44p?

Or is this the final marker? Based on the definition (i.e. that the market isn't told until the end) perhaps this is a flag to signal that end?

Any brokers care to comment.

Yes, I too am on ADVFN.

I suspect that there is indeed an element of that and I tend to agree that we will renew the leg up once the selling is cleared as there is also obvious evidence of committed buying which I suspect, based on previous occasions when we have experienced this, is unlikely to disappear altogether.

I suspect not based on algorithms but rather on the continuation of an underlying sell programme(s) that has been going on for some time (on and off).

The issue, of course, is one of obfuscation. At the time these things take place we do not have the full information as this is deliberately withheld. Not something I agree with but not illegal.

There is ample evidence that there is a committed seller here. The way in which the market makers bring that selling to the market is a matter for debate and it could be argued that it is a little grubby. But the selling is clear.

I see that it wasn't just a UT either. Nearly 4m shares dumped at 42p!

I tend to agree Endion, hence the reason I suggested that we could be approaching the end. Interesting that BMN when it attracts sellers they tend to be big ones! Perhaps we need to choose our institutions a little more wisely.

Interesting. Perhaps that is indicative of approaching the end. This may well also indicate that there is more than one seller which has been my suspicion for some time.

I take it the UT went through at 42p given the jump down.

Chartist2, I think that I have said this several times before. You cannot rely on the buy and sell volumes on the LSE site. They are wildly wrong. In fact, you will notice that if you add the two together, it is nowhere near the stated number traded.

I think that it is more likely PIs who don't really understand (or care?) about the dynamics at play here.

Personally I don't see why the dividend policy should be dependent on a JSX listing or on the current production. It is, after all, a policy and these things tend to be a percent of free cash flow, for example. Of course, caution would be a good thing so that they don't have to immediately cut it and baking in something around the Vanadium price (which continues to be volatile and is likely to be so in the medium term at least) may well be prudent but this doesn't prevent the presentation of a policy.

As for developing one but not telling the market, that would be consistent with BMN practices over the years but, given the material nature of the news, that would be a considerable error on the part of management.

All that said, I think that the share price is likely to exceed 50p with or without the dividend news. Dividend news, however, has the potential to move it past SP Angel's target.

When was this pushed back unofficially? Do you have a link to the unofficial statement? (Is such a thing possible!?)

Leaving things to the last moment is one of those things that I find rather irritating. It is not just BMN - it is endemic amongst companies. And my children!