can't wait anymore sold, page-51

dolcevita,

A precis of our debate thus far is as follows:

A: "This stock is definitely being manipulated."
B: "Can you explain how so?
A: "Don't you know what manipulation is? you must either be naïve or have ulterior motives."
B: "I know what stock price manipulation is in a general sense, but I'd like to learn how it is specifically affecting MSB's share price."
A: "Why is the onus on me to tell you that?"

There is no onus on you whatsoever. If you choose not to substantiate your view, then that's perfectly fine, but anyone who makes a strong assertion on market manipulation like you have must reasonably expect it to be debated. It's pretty much the normal order of things: it is most common for those who proffer opinions and/or standpoints to receive enquiries from those seeking to understand.

One of your references to "manipulation", which exhorts people to look at the "course of sales" or way the order are stacked. Believe me, absolutely nothing can be gleaned from the way the "buy side" lines up against the "sell side". Trust me, what you are seeing there in term of the real intentions of both buyers or sellers of stock is absolutely meaningless. Not only are you only seeing one exchange (possibly the ASX, possibly Chi-X, depending on who your online broker uses, but you are also not seeing what's happening in the numerous dark pools. Finally, you also have no ideas what algorithms are running. And by the way, algorithms are not for the exclusive use of selling institutions: investment institutions BUYING stocks also do so by using algos.

So when you tell me to look at the "course of sales with trades of only a single share, to steer the share price down, there are also countering algos at play that would have the opposite effect.

Also, your reference to some broker that short sells the stock and then issues a negative report, surely you don't believe that? I suspect you are referring to the Macquarie Bank situation. You've heard of Chinese walls between investment management part of an investment bank, and the institutional broking part? Rest assured: there's no way Macquarie Bank will be explicitly involved in that sort of illegal activity. For starters, there systems wouldn't allow it to occur. Any insider knowledge would automatically put stocks on highly visible restricted trading list, until all share price-sensitive information is fully disseminated into the public. But even if corrupt individuals working across a numerous divisions (investment banking, institutional broking, equity capital markets, trade compliance, legal, trade systems) at Macquarie were attempted to do what you allege, it would take a substantial number of them working across many divisions in many departments across several office floors, probably in more than one building, too. You clearly do not understand the extent of the risk management practices at this sort of organisation.

And on the incredibly slim chance that some illicit trading activity was taking place against the bank's very strict insider trading policies, ASIC have highly sophisticated monitoring systems and exceptions reports that throw up all sorts of red flags.

No, Dolcevita, sorry. For all intents and purposes, Macquarie's investment management division, or its proprietary trading division, or any of its other businesses that deals in securities for it's own account, operate very much like any other one of Macquarie's clients, institutional or otherwise when it comes to accessing price-sensitive information contained within institutional broking and equity research.

I happen to believe that over time share prices move for reasons which are mostly fundamental in nature.

Which is why I am investing my time in trying to understand what those fundamental reason are, with a view to buying the stock.

But along my path of research I came across your frequent references to manipulation of the share price, and I thought - sceptically - that you might have some unique insights into this, which is why I dared ask you about it.

Your responsorial tirade is that including that anyone who can't see the manipulation is "naïve", "lacking in logic", or "deliberately failing to avert (sic) to the relevant facts".

You say with great conviction that the MSB stock price is being manipulated.
When someone - who doesn't have the same conviction either wway, i.e., he simply doesn't know - asks you to explain your conviction, you become all defensive, questioning why the onus is on you?
Where, then, should the onus lie? Does it become incumbent on me to explain why I don't know if the stock price is being manipulated? I don't know because I don't.


As for your response to pa31: "You mean, sell our holdings to you?"

I think you've been watching reading too many conspiracy tales. If you somehow think that anyone who posts on some internet blog is going to affect the market in a $1.50bn company, then I think you flatter all of us here far too much. No one here makes a different to share price values.

Finally, in terms of Teva's motivations in relation to MSB, it is observable to most novice MSB followers, like myself, that Teva acquired Cephalon, which happened to have acquired MSB. Now I'm not sure if Teva bought Cephalon for parts of Cepahon ex- MSB or the other way around. I have started reading Teva announcements and presentations gong back a few years but I have come across no meaningful reference to MSB. Whenever I have time I read more, so this is a work in progress, and I am happy to plod along at my own slow pace. But if anyone can point to any publications that can speed up my due diligence this would be greatly appreciated.