Member Info for greygeorge

Oh, sorry, I forgot. This board suffers from 'literalism'. When I say 'I don't know, nor do I care' what

I mean is there's a college-course worth of citations examples and references attached to 'my article' as clued phrases it. Figure it out for yousrelves.

I don't know, nor do I really care Clued. Interpret it in any way you choose.

Here you go, tom111, some weekend reading for you. Also, the article follows on to give a quick explainer to those 'short positions' conspiracy theorists who are clueless as to how the financial and investment world works..

'...In practice, however, large differences from theoretical price parity can arise. For example, in the early 1980s Royal Dutch NV was trading at a discount of approximately 30% relative to Shell Transport and Trading PLC. In the academic finance literature, Rosenthal and Young (1990) and Froot and Dabora (1999) show that significant mispricing in three DLCs (Royal Dutch Shell, Unilever, and Smithkline Beecham) has existed over a long period of time.[7][8] Both studies conclude that fundamental factors (such as currency risk, governance structures, legal contracts, liquidity, and taxation) are not sufficient to explain the magnitude of the price deviations. Froot and Dabora (1999) show that the relative prices of the twin stocks are correlated with the stock indices of the markets on which each of the twins has its main listing.[8] For example, if the FTSE 100 rises relative to the AEX index (the Dutch stock market index) the stock price of Reed International PLC generally tends to rise relative to the stock price of Elsevier NV. De Jong, Rosenthal, and van Dijk (2008) report similar effects for nine other DLCs. A potential explanation is that local market sentiment affects the relative prices of the shares of the DLC parent companies.[9]

Because of the absence of "fundamental reasons" for the mispricing, DLCs have become known as a textbook example of arbitrage opportunities...'

'...Price differences between the two markets in which dual-listed companies are listed (also called mispricing) has led to a number of financial institutions trying to exploit the mispricing by setting up arbitrage positions in such circumstances. These arbitrage strategies involve a long position in the relatively underpriced part of the DLC and a short position in the relatively overpriced part. For example, in the early 1980s an arbitrageur might have built up a long position in Royal Dutch NV and a short position in Shell Transport and Trading plc. This position would have yielded profits when the relative prices of Royal Dutch and Shell converged to theoretical parity...'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-listed_company

It's just so pointless.

Tom111. Why are you wasting time and energy with your posts ?

Looks like redlse is fast becoming the object of notrex obsession. notrex is such a funny little fellow.

Redlse, it's not '...amazing that DEC can't escape from a descending wedge...' It's amazing that DEC manages every time questions are asked of it's accounting practices, reserves, claimed production, actual debt type and amount, to con its' gullible (myself included) shareholders with 'innovative' monetizataion of assets that result in nothing more than increased debt piles. the latest wheeze, the SPV, swaps debt in DEC for debt in the SPV, hiving off a large chunk of assets into a - a what - a subsidiary ? of DEC, and DEC owns what percentage of the SPV ? Yeah, good deal for someone, I'm sure. I'm just not sure who. But yeah, notrex is waiting his turn to flick bogies, so over to you, notrex.

Clued - 🤣

You know, for a board full of posters who are so averse to 'conspiracy theories' and who demand evidence of such claims and call heresy on anyone who posts things they don't like to read, there sure seem to be a lot of 'conspiracy theories' being posted here lately by those very souls who demand proof. 'It's the dems', 'it's the shorters', it's the 'market playing us', 'it's bloomberg', 'it's Greta'. Grow up.

'...GG is under the guidance of Greta Thunberg...'

Scratch49, in the world of dumb, you reign supreme. 👑

SPV. Look it up. They're ringfencing the 'good' assets that are left from the 'rubbish' DEC shareholders are going to be left with. Very clever.

Clued, you're such a pathetic little poster. Happy New Year.

Who - me, him, or both ? 😁

I think notrex has just discovered he's been been abandoned this Christmas. He's been unhinged for 24 hours now. Enjoy his ravings. 😊

'...Hello Arramni: Seem's you're so thick you can even differentiate between the letters DEC and ECR (this is the ECR BB for clarity). Maybe English is your second language?

Hello daramuda: No - he's just a random nobody - like you. LoL

Oh dear Jim - you do seem to change your mind to suit the reality.

TS: Just seen this - so who is this goldfinger - I'm assuming some random nobody on Twitter?

Hello Walter: Who are you today then - anybody interesting?

P.S. I post drivel - look up the word 'irony'! LoL

Oh dear - we do have some sensitive souls here - like to dish it out but can't take it eh? LoL..'

Thanks notrex, every time you comment on a post of mine, I get views that I wouldn't get if I were the last poster on that thread. Every time they see someone else has left a comment, they go to read it, and then carry on reading to see what you're referring to. So, carry on the good work. Much appreciated.

This is how these things always go. You start by having the utmost faith in the board of the company you're invested in. Everything is going swimmingly. The company (in this case DEC) has hit on the magic formula for buying (in this case) depleted gas wells, age uncertain, reserves assumed to be honestly reported by said company. Company gets bigger as the scheme carries on, then reaches a certain size, or engages in one shady transaction too many (Tanos II).

Shareholders refuse to admit the truth. They've been conned. Shout down dissenting voices, argue that anybody taking an opposing position is acting disingenuously, irresponsibly, or illegally. Start reporting anyone with a dissenting view as having 'inside information' as the scheme they've been unwitting victims of begins to unravel.

YOU ARE HERE.

As time goes by, and the share price continues to fall, and those investors left holding these shares who still haven't seen that they're the ones who've been conned all the while, you'll want to form some kind of 'shareholder's action group. Because whatever happened here, it was always someone else's fault.

You're welcome.

'...Several shareholders have contacted the FCA market abuse team and received similar responses...'

I have no doubt at all that the responses were 'similar'. I'd stick my neck and say they were 'identical'. 🤣

Deadly4U - '...Not really optimistic about the FCA but at least they promptly responded to my complaint :)...'

God, I hate doing this to you, it being Christmas and all, but that response is just an autom...yeah, you're right Deadly4U, they got back to you quickly there. Must mean something, right ? Merry Christmas, Deadly4U !

Deadly4U, you've got my undying admiration on this one. Single-handedly you've busted a $5 billion dollar + asset management company. Kudos to you, my man !

I think the last high profile insider dealing case in the US was Martha Stewart. She spent a few months in an open prison.

Thing is, Deadly4u thinks he's discovered something that those big asset managers - often brought up here as stellar and solid reasons to invest in DEC - cos if there was anything iffy, they'd know about it and avoid it like the plague' - have missed ? Or maybe he thinks they're all in it together ?

It's just sad that people are reduced to grabbing onto any security blanket they can find to avoid dealing with the situation they find themselves in.