RE: Tactical trading9 Feb 2022 18:57
From the company's web site we know that only three II's held more than 3% of Mthp stock as of August 21 (when mtph last updated the info on that page)
(From a Jan holding RNS here we also know that someone has built over 3% via Spreadex UK recently .. I'm guessing this is the same high net worth individual that has done similar previously and then sold into rallies.. so that's not directly related to todays RNS, I believe.. (its indirectly related to the extent of that buying being sourced from Cantor's selling, I guess ))
My GUESS is Cantor has either, as an agent to one of below, been dumping for them or perhaps more likely - as none of their names are given as the selling holders - took principal ownership of shares in an off market block transactions and then sold their position into any buying that occurred recently here eg that 3% buyer via Spreadex ..etc..
The top two II's listed below are 'concert parties' - ie interrelated co's - and so that add complication to any views I might look to take off the back of todays RNS.. so all i'll offer is my GUESS is this Cantor holding dump RNS today is to do with the selling of shares from one/both of the two Asia pharmas Investment Arms listed below.. ( from memory, I think they built their holdings here alongside agreeing license arrangements for certain of mtph products in Asia markets.. some long termer here can help me with here, as needs be)
Name Number of shares %
CMS Medical Venture Investment (HK) Limited* 5,194,805 5.3
A&B (HK) Company Limited* 5,194,805 5.3
Lombard Odier Asset Management (Europe) Limited 7,536,559 7.5
Please Chique don't ask me any questions off the back of this, because i'm not going to answer them .. as conclusions I might reach - and you too I expect - may well be incorrect/misleading, whatever..
And especially WTF don't ask me any questions off the back of this post either, because I think it would be a waste of both our time
If you want to post on conclusions you might reach off the back of this post then good for you.. I might comment on those, but only if I feel I can add value here in doing so.
Finally, apologies if I'm somewhat or a lot wrong here .. as I've seen such interpretation on such RNS's be wrong very often across many LSE BB's.. and very often including from those who have a fair clue on what they're talking about - which is generally very few on most BB's anyway imho - as these things can often be - very - complicated