Ann: Becoming a substantial holder from MQG, page-7

"Whoever believed tobyjack saying the shares are lent to shorters"

Hopefully no one, @equityma

I don't believe anyone should believe anything/any one on stock forums. I would hope everyone does their own DD/research. We've seen many on the SYR thread claim someone is buying/accumulating in the past when it's ended up quite the opposite - same applies, DYOR.

I'm not here to convince you JCP's "transfer" was a loan to shorters - I merely had the intestinal fortitude to voice an opinion that it could be. I could be completely wrong, but then so could you, and others who believe I am wrong.

I'm guessing you don't know the history of Macquarie's past efforts? Let me enlighten you, since I've probably seen more of the comings and goings from various instos such as Macquarie than perhaps you have.

21/12/15 Macquarie became a substantial holder - purchased/sold/then a large number of shares borrowed that took their holding above the 5% mark
24/12/15 Macquarie ceased being a substantial holder - returned

1/6/16 Macquarie became a substantial holder - as per above
2/6/16 Macquarie ceased being a substantial holder - as per above

3/3/17 Macquarie became a substantial holder - "received collateral" 5 million

What does "received collateral" mean? Will we see another "change of substantial holding" to either say they returned, or borrowed more in the next couple of days, as per past experience?

JCP "transferred" 7.5 mil shares, so if they leant these shares to someone, as is my view, then there's 2.5 mil shares still out there.

Macquarie doesn't, like a few others, provide details in their anns who they borrowed/received collateral from. They also use different terminology, as do JCP. Macquarie also use a sp value that makes one think they bought, rather than borrowed. Others use N/A - that at least tells you they haven't paid for the shares and that they are borrowed Macquarie's reporting makes it hard to work out precisely what they are doing. I'm a firm believer that all companies should use the same terminology/same reporting style to make it easier for the market to understand. Others, like Regal Funds Management, don't even provide a running sheet on their transactions - what they bought/sold/borrowed/returned and when/at what price.

So - believe what you want.

All I can say is something does not smell right with what ever is going on here, and anyone trying to tell you this current sp action is a win win is crazy.