"I think that you might be misreading the announcement." <--...

"I think that you might be misreading the announcement." <-- possible but let me provide my reason

The form being lodged is a form 603 Notice of Initial substantial holder, meaning this is the first time they have become a substantial share holder

If they were already a substantial hold they would have lodged a form 604 Notice of Change of interests of substantial holder

The form further states that this change occurred on 03/02/21, the day we had the massive spike in volume 40mil +



Annexure A then goes on to list the funds that State Street Corp borrowed the shares off, and when you count all of the shares they equal to exactly to the 38 Mil as listed here (yes i counted Annex A manually)






Annex B displays the transactions (minimal) that almost all occurred before the 03/02/21


Further the agreement is one of Lending as displayed in Annex D. And you only lend securities for the purpose of shorting, not the agreement also says the voting rights do not pass during the term of the " Loan". Annex D also says that the loan agreement is between State Street Corp and all the various listed institutions.



Also the 38 mil shares fits in perfectly with Volume spike on the 03/02/21

**** Perhaps Van Ek purchasing NST shares in the last 2 weeks was in fact its ' Rebalancing' ?? Maybe, maybe not. it would make sense if it was, its the opposite that would not make sense.

@Downanout, am i still way off you think? or nah? like i sincerely looking for folks to peer review my theory.