"Madamswer, I haven't sifted through the data but if they do have a sell rating and are buyers they could definitely be doing things to push the price down and buying at the lows."
jwil3236,
If the data showed that Macbank were net sellers, then the howls of indignation and fury would surely have been, "See? Told you. They are shorting. The Bastards!"
But when the data shows Macbank has been a net buyer, then the conclusion is, "There's the proof that they are manipulating the stock by having a sell rating, and yet buying the same time. The Bastards!"
As I expected, Life-of-Brian-esque logic prevails.
"It is neutral for the argument as to what they are doing but could most definitely have impact."
The contradiction in terms of "could most definitely" [*] is a most apposite proxy for the sort of unsubstantiated banality that is the Great Macbank Conspiracy Conjecture.
So, which is it then?
Macbank is definitely having an impact.
or
Macbank could be having an impact.
For - unless you want to change the mechanics of English grammar - it clearly can't be both.
MSB Price at posting:
$3.20 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)