Member Info for knot

Absolutely, f... hillarious. I completely missed that.

Chid, stick with your rotting sprat. I'm quite happy with my macrel. Guessing no comment on the NGO operative. You sound like series two of the Traitors arguing over the table.

Crs Date Crossing date in the RNS notification

Hold Percentage holding on the crossing date

m shares Millions of shares held on the crossing date

m Chg Change in notified shares held

m Trad Million shares traded in the market the date of the crossing

Imbalance The difference between the RNS notification volume change and the traded volume

ex Avg The difference less an approximation of a typical 0.8m traded per day

Aprx Mkt The approximate holding equivalent the volume represents

It was as I said in an earlier post, the shorts pushed down in the morning as a very clear attempt and one cashed some out or were hit with a different chunky buyer. That may have made them pause for thought (rabbit in headlights moment) and a quick back pedalling then occurred.

What gave it away so clearly was the complete decorrelation away from the other banks after having looked at the short strategy for Qube and Caius. Both made an error around 13th Nov and just kept doubling down. The shorting of the SC appeal approval was to protect the book positions, so 260 down to 230 with more short position added, yet no exit strategy as the tracker exit boat hs passed.

Nothing to do with CBAM. Just the market doing what the market does....

Today was very interesting and will be even more interesting on Friday when after the market the short positions will be reported for todays changes. The change on MW is the continuation of the slow exit, which could be delta hedging of derivatives because it's not well correlated, regular and relatively small to be a planned mass exit.

My guess would be MW may have taken an opportunity to close out more at the 209 point or one of Caius or Qube bottled and closed some volumes out. Prisoners dilema never tends to work well in capitalist situation because one is always more greedy.....

Tommorrow we could see a new set of risk limits on one of the funds as they go for broke and test the market again in the morning, however this to me would then look even more desprate and more obvious. They may wait a day or two, however momentum could get away from them.

Beware they can still potentially drop the market, however they don't have much of an exit strategy that in my mind will work so view the drop in whatever way you want. The price will rebound because there are only two shorts actively pushing down.

One or both shorts could have potentially made a proffit from the intra day trading, however they have hit the book position hard as a result and doubt the intraday gains would compensate.... more interesting strategy meetings with possible more nervous comments going on.

The two chunky 1.2m and 1.3m trades are todays key..... short report or RNS of new long....

Note that the initial reporting of a long position is 5% so a new buyer could be in the market days before they breach 5%. By the time a new long reports the shorts will be looking at a significant loss on the books and no exit plan.

Might need some more popcorn...... just my thoughts on the day......

This is for educational purposes using actual BoA reported data for CBG. To help understand part of the market and what and how positions are and can be reported relative to what actually trades through the market. Note that some of the volume changes could be direct sale/buy to other participants off-market and would therefore not necessarily appear in the daily traded figures.

BoA Reported Holdings on Close Brothers (See links below for sources)

Crs Date Hold m shares m Chg m Trad Imbalance ex Avg Aprx Mkt

13/03/24 6.835 10.2525 10.2525 6.2 -4.0525 5.4 3.6

14/03/24 1.796 2.694 -7.5585 0.8 8.3585 0 0.0

15/03/24 6.856 10.284 7.59 2.2 -5.39 1.4 0.9

25/03/24 1.796 2.694 -7.59 0.5 8.09 -0.3 -0.2

26/03/24 7.864 11.796 9.102 1.4 -7.702 0.6 0.4

27/03/24 9.888 14.832 3.036 3.7 0.664 2.9 1.9

02/04/24 10.211 15.3165 0.4845 1.9 1.4155 1.1 0.7

09/04/24 7.919 11.8785 -3.438 4.3 0.862 3.5 2.3

11/04/24 8.112 12.168 0.2895 1.7 1.9895 0.9 0.6

12/04/24 8.165 12.2475 0.0795 1.2 1.2795 0.4 0.3

15/04/24 1.972 2.958 -9.2895 3.9 -5.3895 3.1 2.1

Imbalance is what the daily traded figure is missing relative to the reported position

ex Avg is the traded less 0.8m which I have taken as an average daily normal traded volume

Aprx Mkt is the rough company holding equivalent traded percentage

Notice two things. The initial increases and decreases in reported holdings on 14/3 and 25/3 compared to the traded volumes in the market. The increase up and down twice of over 7pct. Then compare the volumes as the positions were exited. This sort of gives an idea as to reported positions vs what actual reported trade numbers are in the market.

The volumes of the holdings are split between swaps and direct holdings (voting and non voting).

Why this holding for just these dates ? That was around 100p gain in the share price in less than a month and was with zero notified short positions on CBG in the market. Just imagine the same positioning with a 5% short squeezed out on top.... Even if the shorts added 5% they would not push the price down anywhere near as far and still have to get out, so the risk for shorts is becoming quite interesting.

Basically, if you see BoA positioning like this again, jump on board.... a rocket ship is likely taking off.

Source : https://www.closebrothers.com/investor-relations/company-information/regulatory-news

Source : https://www.google.com/finance/quote/CBG:LON?comparison=&window=1

10:26 - 1.2m

10:27 - 1.3m

Popcorn munch, munch..... The shorts may be trapped in a prisoners dilema, they all can't get out separately. They would all need to short massively to try and flush a larger holder, however that game might become so obvious it could become a huge target for a long. BoA ramped 100p in less than a month in 2024.... with no shorts being flushed...

I'm watching with interest. This will probably snap back later this afternoon unless the shorts are going to add a chunk to their positions.

A test of tab formatting before another posting.... ignore this bit. experimenting... T1 T2 T3

T1 T2 T3

A very interesting morning with the shorts pushing down the price, completely decorrelated from the banking sector. Quite clear what is going on now. If they manage to hold the price down, expect a build in the net short positions reported on Monday for today. 2.5m just went through at 208.8 / 209.9 in two trades, so looks like a final play may be in motion and what could be another 14th Nov rally being set in motion. It would be hugely interesting if one short had just closed some out with the two trades and the other shorts are left holding the position. Popcorn time..... infighting between shorts time.....

My post 7 Jan 2025 14:13 - covers why there was no disclosure in Hopcraft, nor a requirement at the time.

The CoA even agreed that there are conflicts in Wood and Hurstanger and could not do what the SC will.

The CoA misapplied Wood and Barclays case proved the CoA rational wrong.

"hidden in plain sight" - was based on a perception a "consumer" did not have to conform to the same rules as a "commercial" deal. That breaks 1934 case law (see post 13 Jan 2025 20:14)

I could go on.... but the BoA positions dissapearing on the 15 April 2024 might be a lot more interesting.

They may be index swaps, long CBG and short FTSE250 (the index constituent at the time)

The strategy would be if you think CBG is going to out perform the index you would go long a swap on the equity and short on the index. If they still have the ability to go long CBG and short FTSE250 that would create a massive incentive for BoA to ramp up CBG back into the FTSE250.... especially as the weighting of CBG (influence on the index) would be zero until re-entry, so gives more upside, boosted by all the other trackers having to buy in on re-entry.

I would advise to read my prior posts on the case..... they will explain a lot (with links and facts.....)

Volume was 671k.

The 12th and 13th had Qube day trading (as per the very small notification changes, which were not required to be notified and wonder about the reasoning)

The prisoners dilema may soon become apparent because if Qube or Caius start to close out and cause a run up it will put the other shorts book position negative (in the case of Qube and Caius). This is separate to MW and the nominal Walleye. Marshal have been slowly closing out since the 2 Dec position high of -1.91% and Walleye seems to be a static 0.5% registered 23rd Dec (but not necessarily traded then).

Todays lift of the whole market will certainly be interesting as they may have paused today and considering if the last inflation report was a one off and how the oil price increase is going to factor into inflation in a few months time. How long can Reeves hold her breath.... Problem is they have the SC clock ticking, which I would figure is a far bigger risk for a large short position to have at that time.

The "unarguable" (CoA opinion on SC appeal) is indeed being argued by the SC.

As a side note. Look back at BoA dated swap positions and the volumes for this year, which appeared to go off book / offshore on the 15th April 2024 or someone else took them up an did not report them or they just vanished into thin air.... BoA holdings in Centrica was in a similar manner when they just dissapeared...... wonder if they went offshore, ho, hum...

https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/uk/close_brothers/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=61&newsid=1809886

3.34% between 21 Feb 2025 and 1st April 2025. Wonder where that volume will come from.... and the impact on the share price....

Very interesting timing....... just my thoughts, check the links look for yourself, research, make your own mind up. Then ask youself the one glaring question. Where did the reportable position go on the 15th April ?

Yes, it's late again, yes I'm bored....

Today will see some interesting internal discussions on the short positions. If they go for broke and force the shares down in a strategy to try and force a larger holders liquidation I will be liquidating other holdings and buying in to CBG and sitting back with an even bigger bucket of popcorn. Remeber Buffet “to be fearful when others are greedy and to be greedy only when others are fearful.”

Chid - having looked at quite a lot of his posts, the language, syntax and timing I have come to a conclusion that he is operating as part of a foreign government sponsored NGO. Purely to instigate uncertainty and erode social cohesion within the UK. He contradicts his own points and standings. Unfortunately just one of many in operation today.

Queue Chid erratic outburst in 3...... 2....... 1.......

Qube closed out a little with a very minor change notification of 0.02%. They did not need to do this from a regulatory perspective as the notifiable changes are in 0.1% increments, so I would view the reduction with caution as it may be a baited notification they are starting to close. Lure in day trading longs, like today and drop in the afternoon to flush them out. What it possibly indicates is that they are likely continuing to day trade while liquidity is abnormally thin due to the regulatory uncertainty. A lot of shares in the market rattling around a lot more than CBG at the moment, so today looks quite calm for CBG.

Just my observation.

3.06 over subscribed vs 3.1 last year. Not good given the yields a lot higher and pound weaker..

chid, you certainly appear to be a troubled soul. in sugars response, i'm making money. note my all in post on the 13th nov.

i will now repost the short position posts with updates as a reminder, thanks.

as for the *** packet calculations in your words, i supply the facts and links so that people can work them out themselves. i backup my submissions with the facts and links. unfortunately you only seem to offer up hugely negative opinion, which based on the wording, you have a chip on your shoulder from something. you don't seem to have a positive word for any company, neither the country you supposedly live in. carefully worded so, with macrels and alike to pretend your well educated.

you seem to be under this very odd illusion that i am going to sell up on any short term news. you do appear to read what i have said, yet read nothing productive and offer just huge negativity all round. i feel sorry for you.

Forgot to add one that has since closed out

Basswood Capital Management LLC - FTSE 250 exit play - closed out

Separate note/change of view on Qube. They helped day trade the price down after the CoA ruling with a position between 0.5% and 0.8%, reducing to 0.58% on the 13th Nov. Riding the FTSE 250 tracker exit volume. They may have also fallen for the same assumption surrounding the bounce on the 13th expecting it to be a false bottom or a larger flush out of a market participant. The subsequent build of the short had then been steady upto the end of 2024 and then slowed in 2025. They also shorted into the SC appeal rally, trying to protect a position that then had a loss on the books.

The pause in 2025 is looking quite interesting and the build on the 8th may be more to do with a view to the UK market overall or a resumption of a short build.

If it was based on a confident perspective of the SC outcome they would have built a much larger short position with a different starting date for the builds.

Between Qube and Caius they are likely responsible for about 40-80p of the share price discount at the moment.

There may be trouble ahead....... or burning shorts.

That's my guess....

For the daily short positions of the whole market the data is here :

https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/data/short-positions-daily-update.xlsx

Qube have 31 notifiable open short positions - adding 1.81%

Probable short term hedge strategy against the UK market.

Marshal Wallace have 27 notifiable open short positions - exiting 1.39%

Helped run the price down with a FTSE 250 exit angle.

Caius Capital LLP only have 1 short which is Close Brothers - hold 1.54%

https://caiuscapital.com/

Looking at the dates their positions changed they shorted the spike after the SC appeal was granted (protecting an existing short and in effect doubling down), having added a position in the two days around the low on the 13th Nov. Given the trading halts on the 14th rally they may have been caught out in a short squeeze based on a false assumption about what happened on the 13th. They could loose out big time and are the most likely in my mind to try and force another flush with an even larger short position, however they could get seriouslty burnt in the process because I think they read the market completely wrong for the 13th as bore out on the 14th rally and sustained higher price. Current short of about 2.3m shares at vwap of around 225p. They may be wondering if they can get out or hoping for a Truss 2 to exit as they have done nothing in 2025 that is reportable yet.

Walleye Capital LLC only have 1 short which is Close Brothers 0.5%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walleye_Capital

Reading the summary (and web site) I would doubt they would take a position based on the standing of the legal case. The reporting standards changed at the end of 2024 and their update was for 23rd, the last effective trading day of sorts. I would put that position update as a reporting requirement rather than they added a 0.5% short on the 23rd. Especially given the price rose on the day.... That changes the perspective a little, especially as they have not changed the overall position since then even with the Reeves Starmer pound wobbles.

Bear in mind that the notification rule is based on reaching 0.5% of market cap and not a consistent value between all shares. Also updated only every 0.1% change, so minor day trading is not detectable.

Use the link above and look at the details and work out the position values.

After looking at the shorts in a lot more detail, I'm more confident.

Stumpy, for a definative perspective on position reporting this is the official EU regulation extract :

Source : Questions and Answers : Implementation of the Regulation on short selling

and certain aspects of credit default swaps (2nd UPDATE)

Question 3l: Could the meaning of the following statements included in point 2 of Part I of Annex II of the DR be clarified:

a. "a nominal cash short position may not be offset by an equivalent nominal long position taken in derivatives”?

b. “Delta-adjusted long positions in derivatives may not compensate identical nominal short positions taken in other financial instruments due to the delta adjustment”?

Answer 3l: In ESMA’s view, the two mentioned statements are ways to illustrate that persons taking positions through derivatives need to adjust the nominal/notional value of these positions by the relevant delta in order to calculate net short positions in the underlying.

For example, if you hold a long position in an option and you have carried out a short sale in the underlying share, you do need to take into account the delta of your long position in the calculation of your net short position. Moreover, delta adjusted long positions in derivatives can compensate short positions taken in other financial instruments on the same underlying. For example, a delta adjusted long position in an option can compensate a delta adjusted short position in a future (ESMA assumes that futures have generally a delta equal to 1).

What they mean by delta is with the option it would be assumed you would fractionally delta hedge the underlying instrument position, i.e. incrementally buy or sell the instrument as you get closer to expiry or volatility increases or decreases. You don't wait until the last minute to suddenly try and buy or sell the volume at expiry.

I'm a holder, 106p vwap, so cast me into the tribal bin that declaration puts me in.

The question I have in relation to BT is more around the pension liabilities and how they have been structured, which may be part of the reason that the share price is falling faster than the rest of the market. It may well be driven more and correlated towards the changing perspective on inflation and therefore interest rates, asside from the slow motion train crash. I'm starting to wonder if the BoE is going to start hinting significantly at raising rates, in part to try and talk the pound back up.

BT may well be on track to cut costs and increase the free cashflow massively, but the outlier of caution for me is the pension. Has anyone done any specific research covering the pension and it's sensitivities to interest rates and inflation ?

At the moment in time the budget and finances are being squeezed Starmer the charmer decides to add to the deficit by declaring a massive AI spend.... to become a "world leader" with a scale of equipment Tesla installed in one go last year. By the time we install the servers the world will have moved on 5 years.