Member Info for Spikeyj

made sell recommendation on UTW yesterday: http://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/news/analyst-still-bearish-on-utilitywise#.VjxYf8tLHlI

nothing much in the way of late declared trades. down significantly, but actually on pretty low volume. ho hum.

catch, don't get me wrong, lol, i think it would be a bullish sign if RT fairly quickly bought back up to that 9.9% level again. .... if he sells shares down to 6.1% then only buys back one per cent say, that would not be impressive. small token buys + "intention" not the same as actually buying chunky. an important issue will also be whether or not the investment vendor holds onto their DAN shares or not. If they do, and RT buys back above 9%, then that's a chunk of shares out of free float. but if RT doesn't buy back a similar amount of DAN, or the vendor dumps their DAN onto the market, different story. RT says they will be a 'responsible' holder of Dan, which presumably is meant to imply they won't sell quick.

seems fairly low so far will be interesting to see if there's more to show up in delayed trades or not.

about time for a tick up. not been nice, hovering around £4 for so long.

memento mori: http://www.veoh.com/watch/v172497429BYa7aeQ

no, i'm not ignoring catch's post. at least catch makes some attempts, with fairly good manners, to post something actually about the company, which i do appreciate. .... so i do get, that catch is optimistic about the prospects because 1) this company has hired additional office space, 2) because RT's interest might "provide a catalyst" [presumably, especially if he gets permission to go over 10%?], and 3) because RT has said that he thinks Dan will return to profit. 4) catch also likes that epsilon added about about 3% to their holding at 3.35, although his post yesterday seemed to express some puzzlement about why they were willing to pay that. all clear enough, so far as it goes.

"and also report the post to admin so its removed in case theres any positive sentiment generated." ? what are you on about?

clock, if there is no sale, then DAN won't need to issue RNS to say RT has reduced his holding. so let's wait to see if they do.

that's fine catch, thanks. but i thought your question yesterday was about *why* epsilon bought at 3.35.

morning catch, look forward to it. i've previously agreed that if rt does indeed quickly buy back up to 9.9% that would be a pretty bullish sign. i thought your 12:51 question yesterday was a good one. i've offered the answer that i can think of, and i saw that jub gave a brief (somewhat jaded) response too. but i would be genuinely interested to hear some responses to your question from others on this bb who can think of positive and grounded answers. i'm not saying that there may not be bullish reasons, it's just that at present no-one seems to be coming up with them. it's an unusual bulletin board in that respect, normally holders in a share are very keen to swap positive info & analysis. gl.

i think there's been several issues combined affecting sp 1) specific to clinigen, those recent sales by BoD put a bit of a brake on 2) the short-selling kerfuffle in usa vs Valeant has affected sector sentiment 3) hillary clinton's tweets re drug pricing have had a significant short term effect on multiples, tho' i note woodford's blog on phara still fairly sanguine. 4) possibly, the disappointing hikma results also hit sentiment? - not sure. i got position stopped out a bit higher, but bought some back since. am not quite fully loaded at this stage, as am wondering whether there will more of an attempt on 6. meanwhile, so far as i can see, underlying strategic progress & implementation of company seems ok. [lol, famous last words]

a short remains frozen when share suspended, just as with long positions. if someone has a short open by borrowing shares, they would presumably remain liable to pay the borrowing cost until the position could be closed out. (if someone has a short open via spreadbet, it's a somewhat different situation -- most of my trading is with IG, where i have to pay them a daily funding charge for any long DFB s/bet positions that i hold, whereas they pay me every day if i have any DFB short positions open.) IG won't allow s/bets in Dan anyway, presumably as its mcap is too low. i imagine that there may be some other s/bet providers who might make a price, but probably only for very small size. (me, i haven't checked.) ... i assume that clock is referring to me, since he seems to have a bit of a bee on his bonnet about me posting on this bulletin board. -- for the avoidance of doubt, i have no position in Dan, neither long or short, (nor do i have any intention of taking any position here.)

are you guessing Mick, or you have some line to what SCSW will say?

and in relation to that, no reason whatsoever that Dan itself will have anything to say about warrants in an RNS -- simply a matter between RT & that unrelated third party. from Dan, we await (a) news on their fund raising, (b) if RT is telling the truth, at some point an RNS re RT's holding --> 6.1%

do you think it is good news for DAN that RT is planning to sell 1/3 of his stake?

dunno. ? simplest explanation perhaps just that they were trying to protect the value of their existing investment by offering at least token support for the subscription at 3.35, i.e. showing 'willing', -- which of course would help underpin sentiment and pricing for the large stake that they already held from a much lower price. (it wouldn't have looked great if they had declined to take any of the new shares...) epsilon already had **264,500,000** shares bought in at 0.4p. they then only took an additional 8,656,716 shares in the issue at 3.35p. so fairly small beer compared to the stake they already had. meant their average still stayed way low.

bear in mind, we don't know why Dan didn't proceed with this 'investment'. (RT has given his own spin on it, but that may or may not be truthful.)

it's all good healthy fun, but remember to wash your hands afterwards.

hi addicknt, doubt you are going to get very far with ash... from his posting history, apparently gbo's troubles were entirely to do with me and jolly sometimes posting comments on this bb which he said were evil shorting nonsense designed to undermine this fine, upstanding company. i don't think ash really understands yet that this has been a massive fraud, let alone finer details of what happens in administration. (i can't say i'm delighted by it myself, as lost a few K on this one, but c'est la vie, vive la diversification!) atb.