Member Info for DanTheMan105

One nasty conspiracy theory could be to reduce the share price, or at least stop it appearing to rise: as I see it, each trade sets the SP, at least for the period of time until the next trade. So if an entity were to offer to sell many small packets of shares, the SP, as determined by the last trade, would remain at roughly the bid price. And if this entity offered to sell many small packets of shares at below the bid, the SP would appear to fall. Which might be for all sorts of reasons. And of course the reverse would apply if someone offered to buy small quantities above the offer price, the SP would be displayed as rising, at least temporarily.
Someone please let me know if this is tosh, but it seems logical........

I'm wondering whether the people/ institutions who have subscribed for millions of placing shares at 15p have strategems available to them to get the price up so as to be able to realise a decent profit at the time of issue. But generally the rise has to be good news.

I agree, I was prepared to see the SP anchored to about 16.5 in anticipation of some of the massive number of 15p shares hitting the market for about a 10% profit. But (and there's many a slip....) it may be that the market has an appetite for these shares, over and above the placing, and accepts that the 15p bus has left. Which would be nice. But i'm still prepared for a proportion of the placing shares to reappear after the 23rd, which might constitute a drag on any upward movement.

I can confirm that Interactive Investor are expecting to publish their version of the Open Offer today, when they receive 'Subscription Shares' from the Company. These 'Subscription Shares' seem to be some sort of voucher issued by SXX indicating the number of shares able to be bought under the scheme. Sadly, as with St1, they describe the shares as 'non-transferable', meaning that, apparently unlike HL, shares in an ISA cannot be bought outside of it. I think this reflects the limitations of their platform, rather than any real form of regulation.

"Hope is a cheap thing" (David Bowie, Diamond Dogs)

There's a timetable of events in the main St2 RNS, at https://beta.lse.co.uk/rns/SXX/sirius-minerals-plc-launch-of-stage-2-financing-9ao3oim66a59lsw.html item 7.1

If you thought that you had managed to ridicule, hector and bullyrag one optimistic shareholder into selling up and going away disappointed and disillusioned, would that make you happy?
For what it's worth, the SP seems to be holding its own today, notwithstanding the many large tranches of shares passing across the table. I like to think of you, wherever you are, sitting at your computer and perhaps also holding your own, if you know what I mean.

Yes, thanks GFA98. It all adds to the sum of human knowledge, and while there are many things in this business that we cannot know in advance, the more we all know about the processes involved the better to understand and dismiss the weasly words of the little bunko men who appear at times of stress in a company's progress.

PAAA, thanks. Your analysis in your 1323 referring to 'O' trades seems to be that they are individual transactions between two parties, rather than dumping shares on the open market. I think this is what I was describing in my 1303. I hope we are agreeing on this! Dan.

Well now I am struggling to understand the difference. I looked at the official document 'Rules of the London Stock Exchange effective 5 May 2015', and whereas 'Ordinary' trades may be the 'O' in the abbreviation, the only reference to 'ordinary' trades in the document is in the the section 'Off Order Book Trading Rules', beginning at rule 3000. So they are both 'Ordinary' and 'Off Order Book'. Since SXX uses the SETS trading service, why would these trades, which although large, are only up to 5x the Exchange Market Size (100,000), not be conducted through the order book, unless maybe they were separately agreed?
I am genuinely keen to be enlightened, if anyone could explain in simple terms. I attach a link to the Rules document in case it helps.
https://www.lseg.com/sites/default/files/content/documents/rules-lse.pdf

Unfortunately, we can't know who the parties involved are. But, as somebody suggested yesterday, Capital Asset Mgt held a lot of shares bought at lower prices over the years, which they could now sell, at a profit, and de-risk their portfolio to a level they are happy with. The buyers, clearly, are also entities with considerable resources, but may be investing with a more adventurous risk profile. And success to their enterprise, I say.

Sincere apologies if I was the only person in the world not to know this, but I have educated myself by looking up the definition of 'O' trades on the LSE. It seems that 'O' trades are conducted as single transactions between two parties, at an agreed price, 'Off the book', and then subsequently reported to the market for the sake of transparency. And almost all the big 'sells' today and in the recent past are 'O' trades.
So whoever is unloading large wedges of shares, for whatever reason, is finding another party happy to buy them, at prices which don't wildly disturb the prevailing market price. And perhaps there will soon be a TR-1 declaration to tell us who the new owner(s) are.
In case I have not explained fully/ correctly, this is where I found the info
https://www.ig.com/uk/glossary-trading-terms/off-book-definition#information-banner-dismiss

Er, no (I don't think so, anyway). JPM may have sponsored and/or facilitated our admission to the main market, but at that time we were in the AIM, so had a Nomad. Now we don't, although we may have maintained a close relationship since admission. Perhaps you might have said "the co HAD been with them as the Nomad for many a year now".
Mr K's 1210 seeks to urbanely dismiss what looks like a valid criticism.

If you'll excuse a bit of freestyle spelling, I should dismiss from my mind as an aerosol anyone using the expression 'sweet cheeks'. By coincidence, I notice that Rooster2011 has used it twice in 7 posts.

"The Company is working towards obtaining firm commitments for the Alternative Proposal and its additional financing requirements before the end of April 2019. The Alternative Proposal is subject to the finalisation of the Financial Institution's due diligence and internal approvals. "
It is nearly two weeks until the end of April.
Whereas I understand folks being impatient (I recall an anecdote about patience/ impatience in investing) and apprehensive about the big news to come, I think it is unreasonable to bellyache about targets missed etc. as if it was the company's duty to indulge those feelings. Please try to mortify desires for instant gratification.

I think £20k trades are more likely Bed 'n' ISAs.

A couple of thoughts about the impending financing, and what GK says in his earlier post. I should declare that I have some SXX shares, about 15% of my total portfolio, so I'm hopeful, but not desperate, and if it doesn't work out It'll be disappointing, but not devastating. Which I think is how it should be.
1. We are looking for a lot of money, relative to the current market cap. I'm thinking that it may be unrealistic to expect financial institutions to loan us that money at about 5%, while the SP rockets and we all make multiples of our investments; the people putting in the big money may well expect a similar share of the pie, in equity.
But this is not disastrous; they will expect their investments to do well, and the project will increase in value to nearer the NPV with time and derisking, just that the SP may not increase by quite the multiples which some expect. So I doubt whether Mr Kidney is telling barefaced whoppers about buying at the current price; it is still a good investment, and I have high hopes of it.
2. One thing I have been wondering about: does Chris Fraser's umpteen millions of shares suggest an acceptance that there will be a degree of dilution, but that he will still end up with a decent slice of the company when the arithmetic unwinds?

Are you suggesting that the gnomes and creatures of the market are transferring large numbers of shares around, amongst themselves, at pre-arranged prices, so as to manipulate the share price?

Apelki: Greek. The misleaders or turners aside.

Interesting, if this is shorts closing then it shows how much the SP may have been depressed by shorting. I note that the buy trades are mostly for fairly small amounts; perhaps shorts have to be trickled carefully back into the market to avoid price going up too fast.