Member Info for misty12

There is Jim. On LSExchange. But funny enough BC has gone, the demise of seaq perhaps?

Says "o" here. Doubt it would be BC tbh but who knows!

Suspiciously good price

Fair Jim, my BAD. I have no problem with Harald by the way, rather liked him in fact.
Some of your phrases reminded me of him thats all.
The saying "square" book for instance is an industry term not a BB one (at least I've never seen it used other than by myself and then Harold).
Anyway, it matters not and happy to take your word for it

"And then multiple ID"
oh the irony mate.

Harold. Got you. Still ramping fella, my god, really!

Hi Martyn. I was a little obtuse, my apologies and GL

Oh god your jtd arent you. No point what so ever, filtered

Yeah great advice reademnweep thanks. Tell me what do you reley on? One to one with a CEO, professional qualifications, independent verification from the FCA, 30 years industry know how, LSE degree in economics?
I have all of those by the way

Nonsense Martin I'm afraid, but there are so called experts on here that are very dangerous posters. FACT

Not quite Fry, I'm not losing money lol. I am going out for the day (I really am) take care my friend

I'd prefer yours right at the top etin so everyone can see what an end of a bell you are

tight tight book all day and the 8.06 explains everything. Interesting though, why the LRGS when it wasn't requested. Not really interesting I suppose,

Doesn't happen often down here (it did the other day though). All to do with risk management and reluctance to carry to much particularly into close. I suspect daily order book was adequate for day and some orders were either already filled or close to being filled. A cross over in the ax MM at an exact moment can also result in the distortion. The other reason can be confusion of course, when they riddle and squirm when something happens like a RNS log.
the 12.26 and 16.20 trades are the likely culprits here though.

Makes sense. I was a long time ago. Remember the rest you mention.

Yep. What was your name back then? I haven't even looked at these boards for a long time

Just goes to show. I spoke to cwind (remember them!) They were the expertes, the "boat" specialist. They said "not fit for purpose!" Peter- yeah its good to go! So forgive me and the market for not believing a word he says.
You forgot "we will never use Darwin Again"

Peter said the bloody boat was fit for purpose as well. Just saying

If they are that good, why do you need to put them in the public domain? Think I know the answer so a pointless question

Don't see that very often buy at 12.7 and sell at 12.71, twitched?