Member Info for gmed

Naked shorting is illegal and I doubt very much that any reputable broker would allow it. Market makers have an exemption from the rule, which allows them to maintain a liquid market. (That's their purpose in life, after all.) If mms weren't allowed to go naked short, there would be plenty of occasions when you wanted to buy, but the mm had no shares to sell you and the trade couldn't be completed. The only ways a mm can go naked short is by selling to another mm (so the net total mm position stays the same) or by you and me buying. Except by trading with another mm, there's no way he can initiate a naked short. He might intentionally build a naked short position by playing around with his prices, but unless he knew for certain that he could close the position out at a lower price (by doing a deal with a company about to do a low-priced placing, for example) he would be running the risk that he will be short in a rising market. Once again, most mms don't really care where the sp is - they make their money on the spread between their bid and their ask whether the sp is rising, falling or standing still. Although I'm told some mm firms have an active trading division that do take positions, a straight mm wants to keep his position, whether long or short, as low as possible most of the time. It's the trading volume that means profit, while sp movement can often mean loss.

I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of an update every now and again too. But even without exact information, I think I know enough to come up with a very simple approach to kzg: upside unknown but a very good chance of it being many, many p. Downside capped at 1.60p. Computer says buy.

Amen!

*list of trades

Yanis, how do you know they're short sales and not ordinary sells? They both show up the same in the List of trads, whether I sell or I lend the shares to you and you sell.

I'm trying to keep an open mind on this until the conference call. I expect detailed answers to a number of very puzzling questions and they'd better be good. I've given Lucan the benefit of the doubt until now, but this call will be decisive. George, if you're listening, this is the Last Chance Saloon.

In light of the current situation, why do you suppose he'd risk making a statement like that? It's the "high level of confidence" that I find especially intriguing.

It's probably just the sun and the bottle of pinot blanc, but my addled brain keeps returning to the last line of GL's statement in the rns. "the near term stable cash flow we anticipate, with a high level of confidence, from our onshore oil interests at Balcombe." What are we supposed to make of this? What's near term? Is it shorter than the 6-12 months we now expect to be the earliest we'll see a penny flow out of Balcombe. Where is this mysterious stable cash flow coming from? And most interestingly, why the high level of confidence? They haven't even tested the bloody well yet. All ideas welcome. Ah well, for now it's back to the pinot blanc.

The first part of the rns left me a bit shaken, so I didn't read the second part too carefully. But later when I reread it, the last line struck me. They anticipate with a high degree of confidence a near-term stable cash flow from balcombe? What does Lucan know that gives him this high degree of confidence? Seeing how cautious he was with Brockham, it's odd that he should be so positive at this point, isn't it? Probably nothing to it, but that sentence did stand out for me.

Weald - I didn't say he was ignorant; I said he was stupid. And stupidity sometimes knows no bounds.

I've always thought the same thing Charlie. A case more of stupidity than evil. At any event I think it's safe to say he's learnt his lesson.

Yanis thanks very much for posting this. Actually I was speaking of mms carrying out their normal activities within the rules (see the last paragraph of the article). I think the real problem is lack of enforcement of most rules on the AIM. The whole market is long overdue for a thorough rethink. That said, keep in mind that the strategy outlined in the article is not without risk for the mm. If the company in question isn't intereted in a deal, a good short squeeze or buying frenzy at the wrong time can cost him plenty. As they say in Wall Street about shorting: "he who sells what isn't hisn, buys it back or goes to prison".

As long as we're on the subject of shorts, another myth that ought to be laid to rest is mm shorting. If the sp goes down it's often those evil mms shorting, according to bb wisdom. But think about it - the only way a mm can short is if he sells to another mm (so net mm position is unchanged) or if you or I buy in the market. The rules allow a mm to go short so that he can fill our buy order and an orderly market can be maintained. But if the whole market and its uncle are buying, the poor mm has to keep selling and builds up a short position he doesn't want in a market with rising demand. So he raises his prices to attract sellers In order to level his book. But unfortunately for him, a rising price often attracts buyers as well and he has to keep selling. Don't think he'll be too thrilled about this - a mm's idea of heaven is a market where buys and sells are evenly matched and he takes his spread on every trade. Mms have plenty of tricks up their sleeves and use them, but don't think mm shorting is behind every drop in the sp. The real culprits are usually a lot of plain old sellers in the market, i.e., you and me.

The sp soars just because the company actually did exactly what it said it would do in an RNS several weeks ago. Just shows how little trust there is in the bod. But this is a good sign that things ARE getting better. Maybe next time the sp will rise when the Company says something and not need proof. You're on the right track, George, but remember that trust takes a long time to establish, but can be lost in an instant.

I wholly agree - AIM ought to be replaced by a market with an enforcable set of strict rules and the sooner the better. But until then, it is what it is. And as the saying goes, "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen".

I don't think Lucan wants to dampen expectations as much as he wants to avoid raising false expectations with a consequent sp spike and fall. We've been through that before and I don't think either Tidswell or Lucan want to repeat the experience. So no false hopes, only the facts when they become actual facts, and any surprises on the upside. I think that he believes that this is the path to long-term solid sp growth, even if it is a bit slow and boring. Tidswell may have gone silent because his twitter barage just didn't fit into this approach.

I've now got 10,000,000. Hey, I'm in the 8 digit bracket!

I hope we don't have too many screaming and cursing posters here if nothing at all happens on Monday. For heavens' sake, read the bleedin' RNS. The prep work, NOT the actual testing, begins the week of the 17th, NOT necessarily on the 17th. So if there's no RNS Monday, please hold all the wailing and other signs of desperation. (You paying attention in the back there, RA?)

It's not all that strange. MMs are long shares they would like to get rid of and they don't want any more inventory right now.

* just saw