The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
@Alfacomp - just when we were getting confident of a prediction this 140k'er confounds us even more!
I like how you've captured my best side on the photo on TBP :-)
It gave me an idea - could there be other TNCPs wandering around in the woods for other shares? Indeed there are and lots of them!!
For the bigger traded AIM stocks there is an emerging pattern: Just before 16:30 there are lots of Automatic Trades, then comes the Uncrossed Trade at 16:35, followed by NPFTs and TNCPs. Look at:
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/exchange-insight/trade-data.html?page=0&pageOffBook=0&fourWayKey=GB00B67KBV28GBGBXAMSM&formName=frmRow&upToRow=-1
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/exchange-insight/trade-data.html?page=0&pageOffBook=0&fourWayKey=GB00BRJ9BJ26GBGBXAMSM&formName=frmRow&upToRow=-1
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/exchange-insight/trade-data.html?page=0&pageOffBook=0&fourWayKey=JE00BG6L7297JEGBXAMSM&formName=frmRow&upToRow=-1
Quite a lot of stocks don't have any NPFTs or TNCPs - one that I looked at out of curiosity was CAKE which has a surprising recent trade history:
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/summary/company-summary/GB00BM4NV504GBGBXAMSM.html
Finally I looked at a couple of the larger main market shares and whole herds of TNCPs!:
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/exchange-insight/trade-data.html?page=0&pageOffBook=0&fourWayKey=GB0007188757GBGBXSET1&formName=frmRow&upToRow=-1
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/prices-and-markets/stocks/exchange-insight/trade-data.html?page=0&pageOffBook=0&fourWayKey=GB0005603997GBGBXSET1&formName=frmRow&upToRow=-1
So no answers but plenty to chew over :-)
The Moose
Interesting that the TNCP trades are in such a narrow range. Your idea about spread betting got me thinking - not so much about spread betting per se but whether this could be an indicator of shorting activity! One purpose of TNCP trades is where Securities Financing is taking place - the EU Articles require that where repos, sec lending etc is taking place then any related trades are flagged as TNCP. That could explain why we're not seeing large inflows and outflows of stock because sec lending, repos and all the other similar instruments are closed out - but if the margin is paid in stock then that has to be shown under MiFiD and if it is a daily margin call then we might see a recurring daily amount. I think the clue to this is the regularity of the share quantity - it would be a huge coincidence that every day all the firm's clients net out to approx the same quantity! But it's entirely consistent with margin payments. This of course is entirely speculative but nevertheless plausible. The logical follow on question to ask is, assuming it is margin related, do these daily TNCP trades give us any clue as to what quantity of shares are being repo'ed, lent? This I really just don't know - have you noticed any correlation between daily price movements in BMN and the TNCP trade quantity and direction? Are you able to tell if they are buys or sells?
Thanks Alfa.
1onic - good find re SINT. I think things may now be falling into place and my early thoughts went in the wrong direction. SINT stands for System Internaliser and allows an investment firm to match their client buys/sells with their own book. This is useful for firms that both trade on their own account and also have clients that have orders placed for them. The Mifid connection here I think surrounds some concern that these trades circumvent the transparency spirit of Mifid. The reason being is that I think these trades e.g. 10879 at 17:06:14 represent a net trade rather than the invest firm having sent all their own and client trades to the market (i.e. AIMX). This could be a plausible reason for these trades always turning up at approximately the same time of day - i.e. once the firm has closed its own book for the day. Essentially they are running a mini-exchange hence the Mifid attention.
Alfa - I think these are the "give up" parts of a trade where one broker has acted on behalf of another. I tried looking for a matching 10879 from early this morning but couldn't see anything. Perhaps it's a number of smaller trades that add up to 10879 at an average price of 40.72.
Now is a good time to introduce myself seeing that I've said something here! :-)
I originally discovered BMN while searching for stocks in upcoming technologies back in Sep this year and steadily amassed 200,000 (my current holding) in my SIPP which is held through Interactive Investor. Needless to say it's my best performing investment! Afterwards I first started reading ADVFN having initially overlooked LSE as I thought it was an exchange related site. Now I'm an avid reader and can't remember life without this place and the amazing analysis and insight.
In answer to another question (can't quite remember from whom - perhaps Endion?) where the poster speculated on Institutions having a limit as to how much they can invest in a share. I used to work for a Global Custodian in settlements, corporate actions and then for many years in IT. We had many fund managers as clients and got to know quite well how they went about their business. From a diversification point of view the fund prospectus will set rules as to how much can be invested in a particular security but a small percentage of a large fund could still be a very large holding! Things may have changed now but what I used to see happening was that fund managers would select asset classes for their portfolios and then invest in particular stocks that had been approved. A bit like DJs on the radio being instructed to play certain records (oops showing my age!) at some point during their 2 hour slot. The important thing was that the asset mix was controlled and stock selection was the final step in the investment process which was the domain of a chosen few.
So Blake - in saying "I bet there is a whole litany of rampers on here" indicates that you've only just come to the conclusion that there are rampers on here! To me that indicates that you bought into Angus at the time the price was above 14p and are now very bitter either sitting on a paper loss or have had to crystallise a loss. That's the problem with not doing your own research and depending on a BB for your investing decisions! Don't blame the people here - just learn from it! Now, you're either still invested and potentially about to reverse your losses or you did indeed sell out at a loss and are contemplating a re-entry. If it's the former then chill and be patient like the rest of us. If the latter then focus your energies in deciding whether to re-invest. If it's neither then kindly foxtrot oscar!
IMHO DYOR GLA etc :-)
CIBC Mellon and State Street Trust are Asset Servicing companies for institutional investors. CIBC and SS won't be holding OMI in their own right. Similar to when you see a holding for Hargreaves Lansdown which is a registration on behalf of multiple PI holders.
Max - re gold formation and quartz. Gold and quartz (as well as other silica minerals) come out of solution at roughly the same temperature. Therefore, if both are present in the initial solution that has flowed through rock fractures, then where the quartz vein has formed should be roughly where the gold should also have been deposited.
Re CIBC Mellon and State Street holdings. These appear to be Asset Servicing companies providing custody and trustee services to institutional investors (ie the beneficial owners) where the assets being serviced are registered in separate legal entities to keep them separate from the day to day operational running of these businesses. I used to work at a large UK Custodian/Trustee in London and all our customers' shares would be registered into the name of a trust account - makes it easier than the holdings being in their Own Name. To help keep holdings segregated, the share registrars allow holdings to be designated. These are often cryptic to keep the beneficial owner secret and also because the registrars only allow a few letter and numbers to be used. Under the Companies Act though, a share issuer can demand that the asset servicer reveal the beneficial ownership. In my day these were called Section 212 notices under the 1985 Companies Act. More recently there have also been EU Directives on beneficial ownership disclosure and I worked for a while on an IT project that would attempt to calculate the % ownership and report threshold changes - not an easy task as there were many changing variables to take into account! Hopefully someone can relate this to the AIM rules for issuing TR-1 notices. A plausible explanation is that the beneficial institutional holdings are under the TR-1 trigger %.