Member Info for fleccy

"Off market trades will show on the London stock exchange site"

Many aren't reported until after the evening UT, even Off Book trades from much earlier in the day, and aren't price affecting. Mega trades may raise eyebrows, but most wouldn't fall into that category.

It's been a while since I checked my stocks for the ratio's of Off-Book to On-Book trades and BT and Lloyds are currently quiet in that respect, but Vodafone seems to be currently warming up. Yesterday Vodafone On Exchange volume was 79.94 Million shares traded, with total trading volume at 313.966 Million shares, so 234.026 Million Vodafone shares were traded Off-Book yesterday; If all 313.966 Million Vodafone shares were traded On Book yesterday, you can bet the price would have seen a far higher increase than it did. What I'm saying is that Off Book trading allows the market to move a price as little or as much as it wants during high volume trading, and they can do pretty much what they want on low volume days anyway.
In summary, yesterday Vodafone Off Book trades exceeded On Exchange trades by a ratio of nearly 3 to 1, so the majority of trades wouldn't have been used to determine a fair price for the stock. I've seen the same things happen with my other stocks during certain periods, sometimes with all three of my holdings simultaneously seeing trading skewed toward Off-Book rather than On Exchange trading.

"Yet on the back of a good trading statement from Barclays whose SP is currently up +4.5%, Lloyds is up a mere +0.27%"

LTI will disagree with me, but prices are driven by Algo's On-Exchange these days. My personal view is that all trades should be done On-Exchange, so all trades are price affecting. The only reason I can think of, why Off-Book trades are allowed, is so that big players can move prices in whichever direction they want. Even the brokers can slice and dice their trades between Off-Book and On-Exchange to move prices to their own advantage; They'd say they're doing it for the benefit of their customers, but they would say that.
LTI will come back and say I'm talking nonsense again, because the big players would want the price to rise, right? But the industry makes most of its money through trading and volatility, so they don't like Long Term Investors, especially investors sitting in dividend paying stocks.
If I'm correct in my opinion, the brokers and big market players will have various strategies and mechanisms, to achieve their goal to make money at the expense of retail investors, and a mix of Off-Book and On Exchange trading allows them to drive prices in whichever direction they want. Just to repeat, in my opinion all trades should be On-Exchange, with any Off-Exchange trades immediately reportable and price affecting; It'll never happen, but i can dream.

Is currently rolling down a steep hill.

Anyone else having a good laugh at the rhetoric coming out of the US? The CMA has blocked the Microsoft Activision deal and it's caused some upset across the pond. A presenter on CNBC suggested that maybe the US could block two big UK companies from merging, but went on to say that probably wouldn't be possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVG2YuK23uo

Makes a change for the regulators to nobble foreign companies, rather than nobbling UK companies for the benefit of foreign companies. The reason they can't knacker any UK companies is because they've already done it. The US and EU are super protectionist and for all their talk about free markets, years of events prove it to be subterfuge. The latest protectionist policy out of the US is Inflation Reduction Act, which promises massive subsidies to US companies at the expense of their "allies". The EU is just as bad as the US and doesn't even try to hide its protectionist policies. Even when UK companies follow the rules and are awarded EU contracts, it becomes a huge issue.

https://www.politico.eu/article/outrage-eu-deal-uk-bt-confidential-network/

Apparently the contract still hasn't gone through as it's in litigation.

"The Bank of England's top economist has said people in the UK need to accept that they are poorer otherwise prices will continue to rise."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65308769

What a f"£&ing idiot. I wonder what his agenda is, making such controversial statements. By making statements like this, he's stating the obvious to the informed, but also making it a mainstream topic.
Pensioners can't strike, so for anyone on a capped pension they'll be plunged into poverty during a wage/price spiral. Some things are better dealt with on the quiet.
Here is a chart I did, comparing a capped to 4.235% pension of £18,000, at the start of a 20 year time window, compared to an uncapped pension where the inflation rate remains around 10% over the 20 year period.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vR7BdUTF5R7o-pLglgSqc-Svezc1z6IL0fW6XeIU63DT6Rg03ov9cTp_8z4-Tu_F13Fk61yWdz5KxBn/pubchart?oid=593070434&format=interactive

It highlights how quickly many pensioners would be plunged into poverty.

"I suppose the price will depend on the 'manipulation' taking place."

Stock prices can easily be manipulated and retail can be targeted, people like Jim Cramer have talked about it many times. More often than not, manipulation like a shake out is used to achieve a short term goal, but who's to say that whole sectors can't be marked down over extended periods by the market behemoths, until retail capitulation reaches a critical mass. I also believe UK stocks are being targeted to allow Foreign entities/companies to take advantage, and its about time the UK Government started protecting UK companies from predatory attacks from these foreign entities. That's just my opinion for what it's worth, but going off what's been happening it's hardly a conspiracy theory because it's regularly highlighted in the press. If UK companies were truly their listed value, then Foreign private equity wouldn't be mopping them up .

"I have stated the facts - it it others like yourself who are constantly moaning about it - I thought that you had turned a corner at last but apparently not, you are still disgruntled ."

I didn't mention my opinion in the post, my point is that you've argued with everyone who complained about losing the pre-covid dividend and the subsequent debasement of the "progressive" dividend policy since Covid; Just because you don't care about losing out on a dividend payout doesn't mean others should feel the same, and instead of empathising you just argue it out as if you're somehow right and they are wrong, like I said Black and White and no in-between.

"you won't be able to - I deal in facts not imagination"

Your posts are shallow, opiniated and narcissistic. You give a running commentary on your fantasy portfolio and constantly bang on about your average being around 20p, it's like a textual equivalent of a stuck record. You seem incapable of seeing other people's point of view and show signs of someone who only sees things in black and white; You also seem incapable of understanding other peoples grievances if their opinion differs from yours, like the buybacks over increased dividends debate, which you argue relentlessly about as if your opinion is somehow superior to everyone else's, which it isn't, it's just different.

LTI, stop being a nob or I'll start pulling every single one of your posts apart. Unlike you I don't camp out on here , so I'll make it a leisure activity as and when I'm online.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7rJpRqK-8E

Hahahahahahahahahaha, Karl please stop, my sides are splitting.

Your post made me chuckle, ever thought about standup comedy Karl?

Lol LTI, admit it, you're The Sphinx off The Mystery Men aren't you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5I94bT23cQ&t=1s

"No one is in control of what an investor is prepared to purchase or sell Lloyds shares at."

That's incorrect, since the price of a stock is determined by pricing of On Exchange trades, with Off Exchange trades usually based on the On Exchange price and not themselves affecting the price. Since the larger entities have up to the second volume and order data, they can move On Exchange prices with multiple algorithmic trades when volumes are low. Basically an entity can move the price On Exchange and then move large quantities Off Book without affecting a stocks On Exchange price, if that isn't a licence for legal manipulation, i don't know what is.

"is anyone in a position to disprove such a fantasy."

I suppose the LIBOR manipulation was fantasy until it wasn't.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/libor-scandal.asp

Who would have thought Libor would be manipulated? No one could manipulate a market worth over $300 Trillion, right?

Your doing your usual of giving a generic answer with no substance. I explained how Big Players can use a combination of Off Book trades and On Exchange Algo's to manipulate stock prices, disprove what I'm saying, or putting it another way prove I'm talking nonsense.

"The BT share price is at whatever price investors are willing to exchange at"

All you've done there is given a generic answer, with no explanation of BT's price drops in the last 6 months of 2022, it doesn't disprove my belief that BT's share price was and has been manipulated.

"just common sense i am afraid"

Common sense doesn't explain some big price movements I've witnessed, in relatively safe Blue Chip stocks. If you want to look at a stock showing evidence of manipulation, look no further than BT. In July 2022 BT was just under £2 and bottomed around 112p in Dec 2022. A few highly speculative stories were released, that had no direct impact on BT, and a negative narrative was spun around the results. The initial press releases knocked 7% chunks off BT's share price and the various narratives were dragged out over the 6 month period. The TalkTalk VMO2 story was clearly a non starter and I called it out at the time, yet the market used it and a few other insignificant narratives to hammer BT's share price by around 42% over that 6 month period. Drahi previously managed to accumulate his first 12% holding in BT, without anyone apparently noticing, at no significant premium to the price and then added a further 6%. Explain to me how a strong Blue chip stock can see a 40% depreciation in the share price for no substantive reason and in the absence of any substantive news?

"I make posts trying to stick to the facts - unfortunately a number of posters talk nonsense through lack of understanding."

Prove that I talked nonsense, I've just given you an example of a stock I believe has been manipulated, disprove my opinion.

https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BT.A:LON?sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhseWDssT-AhVZV6QEHSqhBcwQ_AUoAXoECAIQAw&window=1Y

"complete nonsense - the price of Lloyds is whatever investors are prepared to exchange shares at."

It's my opinion LTI. You talk nonsense regularly, thinking your opinions are superior to others and you don't see me criticising you. Just wind your neck in and stop thinking you're always right, when more often than not you're wrong. You appear to have some sort of superiority complex, and in your mind you've Crowned yourself as the King of LSE Lloyds chat forum, when you often display the traits of a village idiot.

"without the purchase and cancellation of those 6 Billion shares the current share price based on the current market cap would be a lot lower."

I'm not so sure about that. I've believed for a long time, that the big players have a large toolbox to manipulate a stock to any price that suits. The big players have far more visibility than retail traders and can easily trade off book, as well as using Algo's to move the price On-Exchange and that's without considering any effects from derivative trading; The big players will say that competition between themselves will ensure manipulation wont take place, but who gets targeted when it comes to stocks popular with retail investors?
I think UK stocks, in general, have been under attack for a long time, but in the wake of ARM looking at a US listing and trends around UK listed startups leaving, the Government is starting to wake up and panic about the threat these things pose to UK PLC.