Thanks ezirida. I always like reading your posts but on this one I'm firmly in the more disclosure would be better camp.
I realise that most people won't feel like reading something as long as my earlier Post #: 66019512 but it's a record FWIW.
I don't see any upsides in increased opacity. To me, opacity tends to help the wrong people e.g. those who hammer stocks with bot trading for their own advantage. I see it as a negative for market integrity and perceptions of fairness, both of which I know you'll agree are important (despite current lax enforcement).
If the identity of the broker which placed each order was able to be seen - as used to be the case - traders/investors could see which house was placing successive bot orders etc. Insofar as such behaviour might be market manipulation, it would be a step in the right direction to expose that sort of thing to more scrutiny. Even if it wasn't market manipulation, it would be good to know who was doing it.
Having knowledge of who is involved etc. reminds me of the collective groans from many shareholders when they see substantial shareholder notices from certain (in)famous names that often are associated with short-selling stocks. The disclosure helps people to possibly understand what's happening and for how long it might last etc., or even if they want to stay in a particular story knowing it will be pushed around a lot.
Loss of transparency has had negative effects, IMO. On a broader level, it's been an increasing feature of Government, regulators and many companies generally for some years now - despite regular ESG boasts from all and sundry nowadays. I don't like that trend - especially as individuals are being forced to disclose increasing levels of details about their lives in order to do or participate in a range of things. IMO if we had more meaningful disclosure about which brokers placed orders, there would likely be some improvement in behaviours.
An vague example from different markets... You'll recall Bernie Madoff's massive Ponzi scheme - which caused terrible heartache in the USA and much of Europe - was able to continue for years despite there being no actual trading. The apparent trades, from which the false earnings were purportedly derived, were just made up BS! Had there been suitable transparency in the markets in which Madoff pretended he was trading billions of US dollars, people could have realised much earlier that his firm was not involved in trading there at all.
I do know that bot trading drives a lot of key people mad in some of our companies. You're well connected - ask a few MDs whether it takes up their time with shareholders queries complaints etc. I know it does, and I hate seeing our key people distracted by that instead of working out better exploration plans or business development ideas.
Finishing on a high, I love this story. As you know, we've got very high potential acreage and I hope we can unlock a big step-up in value beforee too long.
(20min delay)