If ASIC waste oodles of taxpayers money on this zero sum game (don't forget retailers also picked up scraps on the rebound), then perhaps there really will be something to complain about.
What will be the response of LYC shareholders if ASIC investigate and say it was retailers on margin with compulsory stops and retailers panicking that were the majority sellers during the cascade?
I'm not arguing for a second that there is no manipulation in the market. But just think about it - if this was some grand orchestrated conspiracy to get cheap shares why would the perpetrator leave the buy stack unloaded rather than let it free fall, as it did, and have other retailers and trigger traders pick up the scraps? If there was a smoking gun it would be in the bid placements and course of sales - not in imaginations, and personally I can't see anything there to indicate such.
And by the way, the e-mini stops were at 85 and 81 if I recall correctly, and I alerted LYC holders they had been hit at the time, but I did not mean to imply some half-baked conspiracy. It was just a point of interest.
If there is genuinely some evidence for malconduct why not analyse it and compile it here, gain concensus, then submit a singular case, rather than send a zillion vague "poor weak victim" conspiracy theory letters to ASIC and waste other taxpayers' money having them read and respond to them all. Wouldn't that be the logical role of a shareholder association? - to provide singular representation?
LYC Price at posting:
86.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)