Posts: 840
Threads: 40
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
181
Another day where on balance volume (intra-day) measuring accumulation/distribution shows IOC price down -$2.27 and the obv for the day at 3:08 of net 1,571 shares accumulation. Yes accumulation......
A repeat look at how the big money pools are manipulating (controlling price action) for their benefit and our loss.
Incidentally, yesterday shows nasdaq reported short sales as a percent of reported total sales of 18%, very low and a sign of short covering. the net accumulation today as of 3:08 with the share price $2+ lower should also strongly hint, imo, of short covering down here.
Posts: 840
Threads: 40
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
181
fwiw, I recall the off exchange options can be traded in stocks, believe they used to call them flex options, but they were more or less a size player product and were invisible. Therefore, these off exchange bets could be much bigger than what we see traded. For instance , it seems like the Nov 30 55 strike is being played heavily here. Why would they do that for so little open interest on the regular exchanges? Maybe they have heavier bets on those off exchange options. It's similar to the dark pools and don't have to be revealed.......trans
Posts: 235
Threads: 10
Joined: May 2012
'trans' pid='13462' datel Wrote:Another day where on balance volume (intra-day) measuring accumulation/distribution shows IOC price down -$2.27 and the obv for the day at 3:08 of net 1,571 shares accumulation. Yes accumulation...... A repeat look at how the big money pools are manipulating (controlling price action) for their benefit and our loss. Incidentally, yesterday shows nasdaq reported short sales as a percent of reported total sales of 18%, very low and a sign of short covering. the net accumulation today as of 3:08 with the share price $2+ lower should also strongly hint, imo, of short covering down here.
I suspect that a huge amount of shorting and algo is in dark pools. I wonder how much if any stock we can put in nasdaq reported statistics, I suspect very little.
Posts: 2,904
Threads: 58
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
259
It is absolutely creepy how little we know about the financial markets. They aren't zoos, they are wild kingdoms.
Head down. Plod forward against the strong cold winds from...well who knows where they're from. I suppose that's the point.
Posts: 235
Threads: 10
Joined: May 2012
Its really outreageous what they let go on. So much for the good of the people. Its for the good good of those that can circumvent the law. You cant blame it on one doctrine politically or the other. Its all good as long as it can be rationalized away.
Posts: 1,112
Threads: 88
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
109
Bert, I sent you a private message.
Posts: 32
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
6
11-30-2012, 10:43 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-30-2012, 10:53 AM by HhoseBoy.)
The title should have read "Brilliant Manipulation" damn we are getting hammered.
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
Some argue that institutions will take profit after the deal, but why would they? It's more likely that with uncertainty largely removed and wheels of monetization and accelerated exploration set in motion, more funds will buy in, especially after FID and more broker coverage.
All this will significantly shift the risk-reward of shorting, depending on the terms of the deal even dramatically so.
There isn't much, if any reason for them to stick around for the shorts. Big funds will buy-in more and more, the closer we come to first cash-flow and the more success we have on the exploration front and/or closing other deals like the one with PRE.
The terms of the deal itself could awaken a lot of people to the blatant undervaluation and upward potential, both on the monetization and exploration side.
Even a $1/mcf deal with some upfront capital removes most risk and set this in motion, and is twice the present market valuation at least.
Shorting is not exactly risk or cost free, and both the cost and the risk will move up significantly after a deal. Let's keep it real here.
Let's also not forget that naked shorting is illegal, and if it were that easy, why did they borrow 10M+ shares in the first place.
Let's not fall for this crap that we could never win from these motherfuckers, this is something Tonka would argue and I've long suspected it would be the last short "argument" standing.
In the end, the shorts want to make money, that will become that much harder and more risky after a deal, almost any deal, as it sets the wheels in motion towards monetization and accelerated exploration and removes most uncertainty and the room for them to come up with BS stories.
Posts: 840
Threads: 40
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
181
Amin Admin, but you didn't mention that the price that institutions that have weathered the storm, will not take profits, except at way higher prices than we are now, right Tonka? lol on you at the end....
