I know I've probably said this before - However I 'll say it again as I find it no less significant or interesting.
And that is the significance of the ' matching ' out of volumes. So lets take the most simplest example taking place with VIC.today. O.K so we know that volume is a bit of an illusion in the sense that there is an ' Equal and Opposite ' amount of shares being sold on the SELL side to that which is being bought on the BUY,
So in today's example that would mean that there 2,009,697 of Share wanting to be disposed of on the sell side which are being offset by the 2,009,697 ( and just now as I type 3,009,697 ) shares wanting or lets say ' HAVING to' be purchased on the buy side in accordance with ' defacto ' buyback or unmarketable parcels share purchase arrangements.
Ok so moving on from there , we also know that this volume has so far been represented by 6 trades - 2 of which have been ' crossed ' meaning bought and sold to clients or parties within the same ' Broker ' / ASX concern. And we also know that whoever is instructed to do the ' Buyback ' purchasing has obviously got the power as they have stated to ' Pool ' unmarketable parcels in order to sell into and buyback in the market.
O.k so then knowing all this , we can examine the 2 snapshots of the basic structure of the trades today which clearly demonstrate the near ' improbable ' and most unlikely chances of there being 2 buy's and two sell orders for the 491,303 balance as well as 2 buy's and 2 sells for the 8,697 and 9,697 orders.
So then what are the probabilities then that there are in fact THREE separate orders for the 491,303 parcels........ I mean set the ' Pooling ' issue to one side - who or what Investor(s) would actually Buy and / or Sell in the EXACT same rather unique and odd same parcels size in the first place.
One simple explanation would be that Brokers are obviously ' ping ponging ' back and forth the same quantities of stock to themselves and each other for some reason(s). Another reasons may be that they are having to almost in a sense ' short cover ' the SELL quantities which they match out by having to step into the market to cover these exact same amounts .......so in sense a ' shorting ' or accumulation strategy which requires them to step back into the market in purchasing and maintaining their same overall percentage holdings.
I can't think of anything else , but it certainly does look rather strange on the surface - particularly when you consider that the XT trades are with the same Broker entity , leaving the other two 491,303 parcels representing 2 additional and separate sellers balances.
The other curious thing is is that why was this 491,303 balance sitting at BEST offer of .001 cents for so long until it has now magically been joined by effectively 2 lots of 500,000 - which just went through. So now we have
4 x 491,303 separate Buy and Sell balances potentially being transacted. Something definitely suspect here folk's........
(20min delay)