Member Info for StarBright

@Doublehun, here's my take on this...

From 1/10/20 to 31/03/21, GGP saw a proper spike. A 6-month round-trip from 19p to 38p and back. Average daily traded volume during those 6 months was close to 33m, and over 4bn shares (>100% of shares in issue!) were traded at a VWAP close to 27p. Despite the high turnover during this period, the holders data tells us that most (80%?) shares remain in the hands of PI’s.

While there are clearly a group of long-term holders who bought well before the spike and whose positions are still positive, the many positions bought during the spike period will be on average >40% down. And pre-spike holders who added during the spike period are likely to have undermined materially the paper profits they were sitting on. Buying pressure was punctured by the spike and sellers have held the upper hand since, with daily traded volume also down by 50%. Despite the brave commentary shared daily here on “diamond hands”, “top-ups” and “holding for the dividends for my grandchildren” etc, price action and volume data tells us that spiked PI’s are (quietly) selling to other PI’s with resulting lower entry prices. Over time this lowering of average entry price will create the pre-conditions necessary for a rise, but this process takes time…

I don’t think that far-fetched theories about “the shorter” timing trades to coincide with posts from our charismatic mega-rampers, and long-term price manipulation facilitated by LSE via organised gangs of paid bulletin-board trolls are required to explain the price action we see. Despite the noise here, there is no incentive for the market-makers to do anything other than collect risk-free the spread on two-way trade as they are today. And modern governance structures mean it is hugely unlikely that someone like NCM would risk being exposed for buying shares under cover etc. So I don’t buy the various conspiracy theories; Hanlon’s razor applies and there are simpler explanations for what we see.

I think this is nothing more than the painful period after a bubble when spiked PI’s are reluctant to add, and quick to sell when any strength is shown. It will pass when new news strong enough to attract new investors and their capital is released. Clearly the recent PFS wasn’t that - it was confirmatory in nature as many pointed out. As LookingatgoatS observes there are likely people trying to trade the short-term news cycle, so we do see mini-spikes around scheduled announcements etc. This is noise that LTH’s can (& should) look straight through. I’ve said consistently that GGP is a value buy below 18p for the speculative compartment of a portfolio, given the extraordinary find at Havieron. My view is that NCM will want 100% of Havieron at some point in the next 24m or so, and that this will offer most GGP holders an opportunity to exit at a premium. But everyone should DYOR etc...

Wash sales used to be useful for tax purposes, but this hasn't been the case for many years in the UK.

Matched orders - we (this side of the Atlantic) would call agency trades. These are pretty common. If a broker knows that XXX fund/family office/HNWI/whatever is a buyer in size at below (say) 16.5p then they will talk with known holders to see if any might be tempted to sell a few. This is what brokers do! Once they've found someone willing to sell then a deal will be executed.

This deal is - of course - a buy for one party and a sell for the other. It'll be reported once, with reporting possibly deferred under the LIS (large in scale) rules. The delay may be until after the next close. The following will then happen:

1. LSE/ADVFN etc will report the trade at the time the exchange is notified
2. Someone here will jump up and down about after-market dealing
3. LSE/ADVFN will match the trade against the mid-point of the last quoted spread and (falsely) identify it as a buy or sell
4. Someone here will jump up and down about there being a big buy or sell (remember, there have been both)
5. Someone else will then state unequivocally that it is the opposite (they'll say it's a buy if the first poster said it was a sell)
6. Someone will try to point out that we don't actually know
7. Someone else will say that it is manipulation, "the shorter" closing etc
8. Posters who enjoy conspiracy theories will pile on

And around we'll go again. All for one trade between two holders...

I don’t know why there is an outbreak of cancelled trades like this, but it’s not spoofing - because that requires orders to be visible in the book to impact price formation.

Trade reporting is imperfect, and there is significant complexity in transactions between primary dealers that doesn’t fit the very retail/simplistic way in which the topic is viewed and discussed here.

I’ve dug out the kevlar gloves of unstinting courage and added in the 12s this morning.

Here's hoping that OMI HQ can watch and wait without feeling the need to "discover" new things to do. I'm invested because of the potential of APTA, not for any other reason...

@shenners - it's normal to drive the price of something UP before you sell it, not down...!

Assays from five additional holes

· Most holes drilled for geological and stratigraphic reasons
· Thick anomalous zones of mineralisation intersected
· Operational handover of Anzá now largely complete


London, November 9th, 2021. Orosur Mining Inc. ("Orosur" or the "Company") (TSX-V/AIM:OMI), is pleased to announce an update on the Company's Anzá Project in Colombia.

Drilling Summary, Anzá

A major phase of drilling was undertaken at Anzá from October 2020 through to the end of June 2021, designed to confirm the potential of the core APTA deposit at Anzá and to provide sufficient information to allow the Company's JV partner Minera Monte Águila SAS ("Monte Águila")to move forward into the next annual period of the Exploration Agreement with Venture Option ("Exploration Agreement"). Once this was achieved, the number of drill rigs was reduced from five to one, with focus shifting to better understanding the regional picture and to mapping and sampling of the other licences and applications to identify targets for the next phase of work.

Reducing to one drill rig allowed geologists to be redeployed to mapping activities, with the remaining drill rig focussed near the margins of the APTA deposit, to address several regional stratigraphic questions and to provide greater guidance as to the controls on the previously identified high grade mineralisation at APTA.



Drilling Results, Anzá

Assay results for five additional diamond drillholes have been received from the ALS laboratory in Lima, Peru, MAP-092 to MAP-096.



Highlighted results from these holes include:



MAP-093 14.85m @ 1.60g/t Au, 1.08g/t Ag, 0.79% Zn

MAP-094 8.55m @ 0.96g/t Au, 5.88g/t Ag, 0.34%Zn

5.35m @ 1.17g/t Au, 2.18g/t Ay, 0.79% Zn

10.70m @ 1.08g/t Au, 0.24g/t Ag, 0.03% Zn

MAP-096 2.70m @ 2.84g/t Au, 1.12g/t Ag, 0.07%Zn

51.55m @ 1.32g/t Au, 1.34g/t Ag, 0.35%Zn

http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/7221R_1-2021-11-8.pdf

What will it cost GGP (in USD per oz) to extract the gold from its present location and physical state?

100% agreed @Groover. Predictable outcomes for both on the “shopping cart test”: https://twitter.com/jothornely/status/1259721946830274560?s=21

NDRBA (or whatever their marketing want to call them this week…) have to keep doing acquisitions to distract everyone from how poor their core investment performance is. Also because it makes their Q/Q & Y/Y comparisons hard for the market to understand. They didn’t know what to do with SL, or with Parmenion (an excellent business, one of my favourite former clients) and they’ll have less than no clue what do with II.

@Floater & others….

- SINT is nothing to do with shorting; I have no idea what gave you that idea? It stands for Systematic INTernaliser - in layman’s terms a firm (like Blackrock) that may operate many accounts and look to offset transactions internally rather than to take each deal to market. They still have to report these.

- The ECHO/ECEU markers relate to transactions executed in EU “venues” the LSE had to create in order to permit some EU based market participants to transact. Trades executed/reported via this route don’t necessarily indicate that the underlying buyers are European - it’s not that simple.

- XOFF trades are typically agency trades executed by brokers between their own clients. Sometimes these are nothing more than holdings being moved between accounts within a family office, for example. These trades are often reported twice, once for the buy and once for the sell. These trades are very common, and always seem to be the subject of misunderstanding and conspiracy theory speculation here…

- The reporting deferral possibilities for large trades are driven size, with a tiered structure under which larger trades can be delayed for longer. You’ll see these flagged as LRGS (large in scale deferral).

If anyone has any specific questions on this topic, please fire away…

Is that unexpected?

It's a pandemic, with a known disproportionate impact on those who are elderly with underlying health conditions. The vaccinations are about 95% effective against hospitalisation. For over 80s effectiveness falls to 75%.

We are going to have to get used to living (and dying) with it.

I think the final 5% at FMV is a good piece of negotiation by GGP, and not a problem in any way. GGP will realise far more value through it than would ever have been possible had the JV partners interest all been wrapped up in “in the ground” payments from the outset as is often the case. Whilst the price for the last 5% will be doubtless be below the expectations of our resident charismatic megarampers, I fully expect it to be very meaningful to the ambitions and funding of GGP going forward.

As the value will (almost inevitably!) be determined independently, the bigger question is whether NCM will be looking to move immediately on December 12th 2021…

It’s the best SP model out there if you want to believe that all the gold will be mined on day one, that no taxes will be payable and that there are no financing costs…

Hannam Partners have a model that incorporates all of these missing big ticket items. Their latest update shows a price target of 24.9p for Dec-21. That’s a 42% increase from today’s SP, with meaningful scope for upward revision as resources are better defined over time. What’s not to like about that?

Here’s a link. A log-in might be required.

https://www.hannam.partners/insights/research/research-articles/best-ever-intercept-reported-at-havieron-drilling-campaign/

He’s put on a bravura performance there, just as he did here. I just feel sorry for those taken in by him. Unfortunately “Charismatic rampers” have enjoyed a favourable environment since the pandemic created an influx of newbie PI’s. They all come unstuck eventually. LSE should do more to stop individuals from dominating discourse on these boards, perhaps a limit on the number of posts per day would do it? I could give you a list of shares where the relevant LSE board has a de facto self-appointed moderator aggressively curating discussion. Some of these chancers make dozens of ill-informed but positive ramping posts daily, whilst attacking anyone who questions their narrative. I have come to understand/accept that the antics of these guys can affect SP’s, and in turn affect the lives of inexperienced investors if/when they are sucked in. It’s actually quite sad to watch.

@archways - please do. The critical question is whether any such exception from notification is driven by the specific characteristics of the issuer, or of the holder.

Sorry - hit "Post Message" too soon.

The important point is that the reporting exception was driven by the domicile/circumstance of the issuing company, not by the status of the investor. Something similar may have applied with Arix.

@archways - Investment managers don't qualify for any special exemptions in the way your post proposes, whether EU/UK or wherever.

Was Arix a non-UK issuer with a London listing at the time of the events in question? I've seen something similar with Orosur Mining recently where Canadian disclosure regs were deemed to apply.

@archways - whoever told you that? It's nonsense.

Interesting I typed "Bloomberg's HDS function" with some less than / greater than symbols around HDS, and LSE somehow edits them out. Let me try another few options and see what does and doesn't show:

HDS
[HDS]
(HDS)