And sorry but just to address this "if your only contribution is...

And sorry but just to address this "if your only contribution is having a go at others posts' part.

Yes bigb888 I do often challenge posts though this is not just to be adversarial or obstructive. The forum is full of different levels of knowledge and experience and some people post stuff, as if they know, and if I disagree or can see it is straight out wrong, I often refute it. And I try to do it with some kind of reference point so others can see it too and I do it without fear or favour, even if I really respect or like the person. No doubt I have upset a number of people in disagreeing with what they say but I am not trying to be popular, nor am I trying to 'scare people away', I am trying to get as much out of the forum as I can, and improve the discourse if I can.

A case in point is your post that started this back and forth.

I only focused on the last sentence because I agree with the possibility of your first. We have one day that the buyback has not operated (possibly yesterday as well but we don't know yet) and you claim from one day's evidence that it is "pretty clear where the share price goes when there is no buying back". From one days evidence. In the absence of any other data or possibilities, market, sector, sentiment or otherwise. And yet you claimed it was pretty clear. It was also a popular post. So I felt I should highlight some data points that show that this day can't be taken in isolation and that there is a lot of price data refuting your inference and we actually have no idea about where the share price would go in the absence of the buyback. That's it. If you dispute what I posted please highlight where I was wrong or provide further evidence, I am really happy to have a discussion. You seem to infer that you'd rather peoples commentary is never challenged, I personally think the forum would be much poorer for that.