Member Info for knot

Sorry, my mistake, was thinking AIM style non 250/350 index. Small cap type index.

Bad popcorn...munch..spit...munch...

I would presume the majority of the trade volume was index buy and sell between All Share sales and FTSE250/FTSE350 buys. Possible short covering adding to some buys (will see on Mondays close report). The reason why I think it could be some short covering is that picking up volume in the after hours auction does not move the price in the same way as trading out in the day. The Index volumes would also dilute any price movement in the averaging, hence the 3.4p premium the auction went through at. That 3.4p to me says net buys (if that makes any sense because there is always a buyer and seller) so more long additions as such. Buying pressure dominant.

When people rely on charts and trends for price levels they are looking retrospectively as to what has or is an ongoing activity. You never lead anything by looking at pricing this way and therefore only ever playing catch up. It's one thing to wait for a big trend to start and joining in (madness of crowds) compared to doing the much harder work of truly understanding the rationale that will set those trends in motion before they happen. Each to their own and as has been said, if the end result is a win (being long or short) then who's to say what was right and accurate vs luck vs a self fulfilling prophecy. The markets are inherently chaotic and stochastic in behaviour with a paradoxical feedback loop that means you can never know the whole, because like the uncertainty principle when you participate in the market you change the dynamics. You can be right in 5 years and completely wrong next week at the same time. Where the price goes in the short term is dislocated from different time horizons because for example derivatives contribute to part of that mechanism, asside from the madness of crowds.

I'll stick with my mad popcorn...munch...munch...

“Greater Fool Theory” I always tend to think of Ponzi or Tulip Bulbs rather than the extermities of a reasonably normal market cycle. I won't say where I think Crypto resides, although I wonder if there is a tulip bulb coin...

This dead cat levitated today.... 2.8% of the shares at the after market auction (3.9% including market maker and others), a market maker was the 114k share trade. Market makers seemed to be holding the price up a little at the start of the day and then possibly trying to hold the last hour flat for the auction, where the 114k possibly seems to be the reason..... that's looking at the market maker trades and trying to guage if they are on the bid or offer by the differential in the execution price before and after.

Interestingly only 10.6% of the shares traded on Friday actually traded during normal market hours 08:00-16:30. All the other volumes was after hours, so it's a fair guess that the majority was all share index sales and 250/350 index buys. One of the shorts may have closed some out in the auction, which would make sense if Walleye added around 330p and again between 300p and 320p. 283p would be a profit on those two increments, which might offset the other losses on the book.

Next week is the last week of the month and the last full week before the court hearing starts on Tuesday 1st. I can't see Monday being bearish... the cat might have a rocket up it's...... or chasing popcorn... munch...munch...

In addition to the brokers recent valuations and targets being way above todays share price.

Todays dislocation of CBG rising while the rest of the banking sector falls.

The Chairman of CBG makes a buy in at £2.88.

Asside from popcorn, what else is to love...munch...munch...

No change on reported short positions for the 19th.

Trade volume on the 20th was 1.9m with an initial chunky bounce off 276p at 13:10 150k and 13:12 196k trades (both off book), which reversed the direction briefly. Only 60k in trades later and the price was below those trade levels briefly before rattling around to the close and 251k going through in the after close auction at 274p.

97.2pct of the trades were for less than £10k and represented 40pct of the volume. 94.8pct (33.4pct volume) less than £5k. The top 10 trades accounted for 30pct of the days volume. The drift down seems more like small and automated hedging stretching some elastic. The days low touch to 270.6 was a stretch by a market maker with a 35 share trade of £94.71...... Will have a look at tomorrows trade data in more detail again, because it appears that market maker direction changed around 3:10pm with low or zero volume trades 1-2p off market seemigly trying to lead the market lower with ver low volume..... getting that stretchy feeling...

Popcorn tastic...munch...munch...

SIPP and S and S ISA are zero. Outside those it's CGT and you have the full option as to when you pay based on when you decide to sell. Day trade, it's classed as income and your forcing a tax liability at your marginal rate every time you trade for that tax year. Day trading spread bets are zero rated, but you pay in way bigger spreads on getting in and out of every trade. Being long in a zero dividend paying stock also avoids some of that return ending up classed as income by way of dividends, so I prefer zero paying stocks in a way.

Day trading you also end up potentially making mistakes by thinking you have to trade because you have cash sat doing nothing. With current interest rates you can plausibly make a years interest in a day or two, however you can't do that day in day out. If you are or can I'd very much doubt your on here posting messages.

Why am I on here ? Avoiding an echo chamber, reasoning arguments. Bit of fun. Opportunity to share some knowledge. Certainly not for any fan club as I probably have more people who hate me on here for various reasons, lol. Skip the next line...

Plus, being annoying with the popcorn...munch...munch...lol.

Here's one way to view the current price and noise around what is going on. With everything that is known and all plausible scenario's think of the worst case scenario (that does not involve lots of if's, tin foil hats and is based on reality) and then work out what the share price should be in 3 years time. Even with a £600m claim that would be covered with the current dividends, CBAM and two more years of a suspended dividend. That is asside from the NAV that's well over £1bn, which means the company could be wound up now, liquidated, everyone paid off, £600m handouts and still have enough left over to payout higher than todays share price. Push the claims up to £bn scale for CBG and your well into government intervention and plausibly the BoE intervening in the markets as well. Then work that price in 3 years time backwards with current interest rates and compare it to todays share price. I'd be hugely interested to hear any value that ends up with a figure less than today with factual reasoning and not smoke filled rooms that hand out tin foil hats at the door.

Depends on your perspective of time. You get rich slowly.

Popcorn annoying ? Is it the popcorn that's annoying or just the association to the posts that contain a disagreable opinion and belief ? The counter arguments explain which one. Focus on the popcorn as the argument, it's the rest of the post you disagree with or emotions taking over, so argue the post and not popcorn....

Keeping with it and the popcorn...munch...munch...

Re day trading - if you are classed as a day trader HMRC take another large chunk out of your proffits, so you have to factor that in. If your day trading via spread betting, your giving away a guge slice in spreads and may have leverage risk that forces your hand. Plus, you have to be sat daily watching, reading, etc. Lot's of time and stress for huge uncertainty and a bigger tax bill. One critical day out the market and miss a Rachel moment and you realise you were better off doing nothing and setting all the emotions asside. You either go fishing with time or dynamite and hope.

Mainly over 95pct purchase in the last year, all open market and can point to the individual trades, not an employee.

Yes, likely annoying with all the popcorn....munch...munch...

Well, yesterday turned out to be Walleye adding to thier short to 1.03% roughly adding 0.13% by the close of business, most likely closed out a bit within day from a larger position as well. Surprisingly they ramped up the short rather than using the moment to close out. Considering Walleye added a net short of only 0.13%, the two chunky trades of c300k were 0.2% each and over 6% traded in the day. My guess is that there are quite a few more smaller or offshore back to back book shorts in play, which may make for some nervous positions in the near term. Todays trading did not look like a bounce and looks more like more of yesterdays drop possibly being closed out. The elastic stretch returning...

Two interesting trading days ahead.... popcorn ready...munch...munch...

"Anybody posed or answered the question why reeves thought it pertinent to get involved?" - Go back to some of my earlier posts. It's all to do the Marvel movie scale stretch that the Court of Appeal did to get to a fiduciary duty. What I don't think the court thought through was the way the FCA rules applied on retrospective reach (unlimited) and that by stretching to bribery it's all well and good getting the banks to pay but the Serious Fraud Office also have to review if they should recover the few £bn in proceeds of crime. Plus, the trust to fiduciary route breaks other parts of the finance industry, overrules the House of Lords and sets the UK in a very lonely place. Reeves was likely prompted on some of this before the Mansion House speech prior to the intervention application.

In terms of tomorrow. My gut feel would be that the plateau around 270-271p is a good guide.... if there was momentum (panic/forced) to the downside it would have continued. The last 3hrs of the day being relatively flat and no change from first touching 270p at 10:05. It would need the shorts to keep stretching the elastic to pull it down further. When you push the price down and you realise your making up a large part of the selling you have to think ahead as to who is going to be selling to you later. Mind the gap is an imprint from the many tube trips in London.... touching 250p would likely create a massive short squeeze as the elastic snaps back if you think trading to close a gap is rational. Only a few days ago a large fund topped up their holding by adding 0.46%, which seems to an interesting omission as to how that fits Tuesdays logic. Even our radiactive popup commented on Lloyds not falling either. Tuesdays trading was likely far more emotional and opportunistic than logical or analytical. The likes of the Times article quoting a narrowing NIM ignores the rationale to CBG turning down higher risk business with higher margin, so a shallow type reporting just sees the NIM decrease, all emotional headline adding to the pool and indicative.

Time will tell indeed... and so will late popcorn...munch...munch...

1,605k shares traded at 271p. 497k at 270p. 3,524k were between 269p and 272p. Around 38% in a 3p range on a 74p move on the day. This is only working with data between 09:23:57 because LSE download is limited to 5k trades, so excludes the initial drop. This is also just my opinion/belief as to what has gone on and not any sort of suggestion as to what to do or how to trade. No Mexican's here amigo, no idea....

When looking at a market you can't just use the typical bid or offer price trade point as an indication as to the direction because as a market participant who can place those bids and offers vs Mr retail and others that can only hit bids or lift offers they offer two completely different sides, motivations and indications. If you want to move a car you can either push it or pull it. Makes no difference as long as the car moves if you have no real visibility as to who is pushing and who is pulling. What becomes more interesting is when price points stick, because that can be more an indication as to a larger position being entered / exited that is not panic or flush buy/sell type activity.

Panic or forced exits have volume and momentum because they can't dictate the price and they are price takers. Buyers or sellers can be sticky (270/271) because they can just sit and wait for the volume to be provided (in a bear fall) or sold out (in a bull rally), they don't have a take it or leave it pressure. They have time.

It can starts to look more like someone pushing and someone pulling, which can also end up being a game of chicken or who thinks they have the deepest pockets. Markets are full of ego's.

At 10:21 there was a 308k and 320k trade that went through at 271p and that was the cause of the first bounce. The rally faded as larger individual volumes did not follow through, so the price was pushed down again and the game of chicken continued, testing the waters and seeing what falls out. Below 269p the average trade size decreases, which is then looking more like automated hedging and small pockets with no panic flushes. The automated hedging also works both ways and is elastic, i.e. you can't flush out delta hedging to exit a position that will not be unwound in the opposite direction when you close out. At 262p volumes started to pickup, although this may have look more like new buyers rather than positions being flushed and the second floor, so back to rattle around 270-271p.

When you see a market in real time and can see both bid and offer stacks it shows more of picture and you can then see the momentum and rationale a lot more clearly compared to downloading a set of data after the close. Take from this whatever you want, take it or leave it. I'm not recommending to buy or sell and I don't have any bridges to sell either.

Back to the popcorn...munch...munch...

The one thing to remember is that when you have very big pockets you can move the market wherever you want and on paper your proffit and loss position looks great. The real key and problem is actually getting out of that position while you still retain some of those paper proffits. Today with CBG I have seen maybe 20p worth of short term traders flushed out that either emotionally bottled or were leveraged spread betting style or derivative related. The remaining 50p is maybe just elastic stretch and a new prisoners dilema, who we will see at tomorrows close short report. Neither of the existing two shorts added on Monday, so todays drop was not planned as such because they would have sold into yesterdays rally after the RNS or added to the short earlier. This is what says opportunistic stretch and the madness of crowds or others, which is timely for this post.

There are various market examples of people having wonderful short term paper proffits (Copper, Coco, Tulip bulbs, etc.), while the news of their position sizes leaks out and they are then flushed out as a large enough number of other traders push the position towards it's limits. Seen that from both sides. That limit push is what flushes everyone out with over sized leveraged play and is likely what caused some of the shorts in CBG to get flushed on the earlier run up. Not much changes in life, just rinse repreat.

The real question that should be on peoples minds is why was 270 held and who was picking up around 3m shares as the trading revolved around that level.

Annoying unburnt popcorn time again...munch...munch...

Would agree with stockpickfree. If you want to really learn the markets, you have to be in them day after day for a good few months (without gaps) and then you start to get the feel as to the way they are flowing. Lots of people write books about the mechanics and basics, however you can't write the market sentiment into a book. At one job I was spending around 14 hours a day reading the news and watching the markets and after around six months certain things start to stand out. Granted it's not something you can sustain for long because it's an overload that takes over your life.

Chart trading is effectively just a very pictoral way of seeing larger derivative trades and other position trades going on in the market, they are not a pattern that represents a driver they are just the reflection into the past as to what has happened. Fibinachi is closer to behavioural patterns, like a flock of birds and waves. These have relevance but a lot of them have become self fulfiling prophecies because a disproportionate volume jumps on the same bandwagon.

Irrationality in the markets is a given just as it is a reflection of human irrational behaviour (emotion takes over logic) so those over and under fair market values are the real key to look for rather than trying to follow a retrospective pattern that you have no ideas if it is going to continue the next day. You either day trade and give away huge sums in margin spreads to your dealer or the boaring route of infrequently buying and selling and sitting back and watching.... with popcorn of course (to also emotionally rattle some apparently)...munch...munch...

Doesn't this just scream "future rights issue"? - When you have TNAV of 830p, unsecured lending lines of £1.2bn and a book that can liquidate over £100m per month, why would a rights issue make any sense at all ? They have securitisation options lined up for the book and a contingent convertible bond that serves as a separate backstop.

Presuming that tomorrows close short report will indicate who has added to their position today, although with the reinclusion into the indexes at the end of the month I'm not quite sure what the strategy would be asside from second guessing the Supreme Court is going to run against the House of Lords (prior ruling), Treasury and the FCA. Like November I see a massive squeeze event on the horizon.

If your getting all emotional while trading, your position is wrong or you are not confident in what your doing. Am I upset that at the moment I'm 10p out of the money on my earlier trades ? Not at all, because I have a longer term view, I'm not day trading and using zero leverage so I can just sit and wait.

Yes, and why not even more popcorn.....munch...munch...

The churn rate has slowed, so looks like the current drop to try and go under 270 again is likely to fail to hold given the volume that was at that level. Over 100k volumes again at 270. Getting to the point where the intraday shorts are going to have to figure out if they close out now, wait until later in the day or risk going into tomorrow (if the day trading limits allow). Given the size of the drop, yesterdays RNS (larger fund buying in), I will stick with my gut feel that 270-271 is the floor on this move. Just my opinion, which seemed to have evoked an emotional response from someone who's post was unfortunately deleted.

Thing to remember is look at the other major banks involved in the car cases and what did they do today.... up.... So that to me say's CBG is just todays football and being kicked around. TNAV in the results was 840p, unsecured available credit lines, £1.2bn. Nothing significant has changed in the update that was not already announced. That's why I topped up with what I had around.

Will now go out for some more popcorn... munch...munch...

There was around 800k shares that went through in the 270-271 range, which to me looked like the floor.

Running out of popcorn, the show rolls on...munch...munch...

This is the market, so added 50,961 shares between 274-279. That sums up my opinion. All that happened is the provision was included into the accounts.

The show rolls on..... popcorn time... munch...munch...

What was quite interesting was the 331p support that was held as about 65k in volume was pushed before the price started to rise around 13:35, before the 15:30 RNS. That is when a series of 5k rounded trades started to flow through that may look like someone else is adding volume in the 350-500k range or short volume exiting.

The RNS related to the volumes being added on Thursday and looking at the trades and volume on that day some traders were on the wrong side. Walleye adding to the short on the 7th around 335p is now not looking like a smart move and they must be getting quite nervous. For the overall volume there were relatively few chunky trades, so possibly looking more like short closing.

I might be able to smell Chid's brain burning in utter confusion as he drams of nursery rhymes.

Popcorn time indeed...munch...munch...

Even with the higher commissions under Plevin it was still ruled under the CCA to which bribery was not applicable because in the CoA the commission was converted into a bribe by way of a legal breach of duty (the fiduciary). This is part of the problem the Court of Appeal tried to leap and stretch to the magnitude of a Marvel movie in order to get to bribery, although I'm not quite sure they wanted it to be recognised as a pure act of bribery. It's not half bribery, it either is or it is not. With bribery, once you go down that route the Serious Fraud Office have to get involved if the bribe is not recovered to evaluate if they should procees (proceeds of crime, where scale becomes relevant and a few £bn is hard to ignore) and even then if the SFO do not take action the civil route remains open (more ambulance chasers). Bribery is possibly the step above the 'unholy mess' that the chair did not quite get to. That might have been 'oh my lord' and a face plant (as the polite version) when pointed out. It was one of those rare moments in life when you see the train depart the tracks and the party continues on, completely unaware of the direction of the train and impending result. That was my perspective when the ruling came out and it's still not fully understood widely as to how wrong the Court of Appeals judgement is.

My thoughts at the moment are that AI will replace a lot of lawyers because law is a structured language like programming and either works or it does not. It can be stretched slightly each pass, not Marvel leaps and bounds. The flip side is that the legal system may be one of the early issues that AI creates because the system will be slow to adapt and at least one of the LLM's can process legal ruling complexity far better than a lot of lawyers. That is also even when they lack the full training data set of the complete ruling history. I'm still trying to figure out how this is going to pan out and there is one particular aspect which may force the situation. Think the courts have a backlog now, wait a few years. Justice delayed is not justice served, which was a comment I heard that may become a lot more relevant.

Makes for one hell of a show though..... especially with popcorn...munch...munch..

As per a quote from the internet :

A fiduciary duty is a higher standard of care where the fiduciary must act exclusively in the best interests of their client, putting the client's interests above their own. This encompasses obligations such as loyalty, good faith, and avoidance of conflicts of interest.

In contrast, a "disinterested duty" without fiduciary responsibility does not carry the same stringent obligations. While it still requires impartiality and fairness, it does not demand the level of loyalty or self-sacrifice inherent in fiduciary relationships. A disinterested duty generally focuses on performing an obligation neutrally and without bias, rather than prioritizing another party's interests above all else. For example, this might apply to arbitrators or mediators, who must act impartially but are not fiduciaries.

The key in part is what is determined as a definition of a bribe. A fiduciary requires that all commissions are disclosed and acknoledged. Disinterested requires that any such commission does not compromise the neutrality or fairness. In Hopcraft the commission was fair because I have not heard any legal opinion that indicates the small level relative to the loan was anything other than fair. Johnson and Wrench touch closer to Plevin and CCA fairness bites. I still think that Plevin would be wrong to apply because of the variable interest rate aspect to the calculation so I believe that there is a reasonable probability they will come up with a new ruling, however they have to stay within the bounds of the CCA. They can't make up a new law and this should be remembered. The courts can't make law, they can only stretch it. This is all just my opinion / belief and not any sort of advice, as a disclaimer.

Fiduciary only to popcorn...munch...munch...