MQG - Macquarie Group

[Cartman]

hi lads --- dont hold Mac's and dont follow them at all, but just a thought --- if u guys have been offered shares at a guaranteed 26 bucks --- why not take a short via CFD's at the current sp of approx 34 bucks --- that gives yr purchase a risk free 8 bucks per share does it not? --- only issue would be if yr purchase was not filled to the equivalent CFD short i guess -----

are the directors involved in the offer? ---- if so, i bet they are doing the above (indirectly of course ---- they would never do anything naughty would they !!

and i also bet their share subscriptions are fully allocated as well --- unlike the average punter who will have to "punt" on getting filled --- ya gotta luv the MacBank boys; all class !! ---- who says i'm cynical

 

[johannlo]

Its not risk free as the dilution could hammer the SP for the short termer.

For a long termer could be a good deal but then again if you're talking long term there are lots of other biggies out there still undervalued depending on what criteria/metric and your outlook on larger economy.

I wouldn't speak to soon mate, we're not going to recover over night at just because we've moved up ~800 points since March doesn't mean we can't wipe that off again.

<--- this

 

[Cartman]

Its not risk free as the dilution could hammer the SP for the short termer.

For a long termer could be a good deal but then again if you're talking long term there are lots of other biggies out there still undervalued depending on what criteria/metric and your outlook on larger economy.


<--- this

hey Johann ---- if u were guaranteed a fill of yr allotment, it would be risk free (if u shorted CFd's against it), but the guaranteed fill is the problem ----- if the sp gets diluted obviously punters current holdings could be negatively affected, but that is a separate situation to the offer ---- personally, id be taking a punt on getting the allotment, and shorting the equivalent (or at least 50%) CFD's and locking in the $8 buffer ---- be very surprised to see the sp rise significantly after the offer is subscribed (unless of course the Mac boys push it up so they can dump at a profit --- then it will tank after they unload anyway ---- do u get the impression i dont trust the MacBank boyz lol ( i hear a faint Bris Connections tune humming in my head !! )

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

The short sellers will be in to MQG., this week looking to make a quick buck.

This chart has a symmmetry to it, its a weekly over 2 yrs.

Sorry I can't post it, but heres the link.

I'm still looking at picking it up at $8.

http://markets.smh.com.au/apps/qt/q...on=charts&submit=Go&submit=#topOfChartsAnchor


gg

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

MQG seems to be holding well for the first 45 minutes of trade, just down about 50c and holding above $30. If it breaks below $30 it may be in strife today but it certainly looks to be holding above that.

There appear to be only just over twice as many sellers than buyers, but I never believe market depth.

It will be interesting to see how it goes when folk wake up in the US and UK tonight and this evening outr time.

gg

 

[johannlo]

That's true Cartman but I'm a naive newbie with no real knowledge of CFDs or shorting, sticking to the basics (buy low, sell high, short term rely on TA, long term look at fundamentals etc.). Thanks for your comments

 

[glads262]

MQG seems to be holding well for the first 45 minutes of trade, just down about 50c and holding above $30. If it breaks below $30 it may be in strife today but it certainly looks to be holding above that.

There appear to be only just over twice as many sellers than buyers, but I never believe market depth.

It will be interesting to see how it goes when folk wake up in the US and UK tonight and this evening outr time.

gg

Yup, especially when they wake up and figure out they can now short Aus financials.

Interesting to see what happens end of trade today - as some traders in the UK should have returned to work by then.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Yup, especially when they wake up and figure out they can now short Aus financials.

Interesting to see what happens end of trade today - as some traders in the UK should have returned to work by then.

Traditionally does shorting of financial stocks occur at the beginning of trade, as a slow dribble through the day or with a burst at the end of trade?

Does anyone know?

MQG looks ok today.

gg

 

[babka]

GG's quote: I am looking at picking it up at $8.
To say that you must have a reason, or some indications that MQG sp will go down to $8.00. If you do, it would be much appreciated to publish them and enlighten us, readers.

 

[oldblue]

On the subject of shorting financial stocks such as MQG - or any other stocks for that matter - can anyone enlighten me on the following:

- I assume that "naked" shorting is still not allowed? ie one must borrow the stock to be able to short it?

- If this is so, why on earth would anyone lend their stock when the intention is to lower the value of that (their) security? Is the price received so high that the offer just can't be refused?

- Or is it a case that the beneficial owner of the stock is not always aware that their stock is being lent? Or doesn't understand the implications? I've often wondered about the huge volumes of shares held in nominee accounts and whether the beneficial owners always know what's going on.

Any answers out there?

 

[Struzball]

why on earth would anyone lend their stock when the intention is to lower the value of that (their) security? Is the price received so high that the offer just can't be refused?
?

Somebody selling the shares wouldn't lower the value of it in my mind.

If I sold my house tomorrow would that suddenly make it worth less?

If I lent my house to somebody so they could sell it, then later buy it back at a lower price would my house be worth less because of the transaction? or just because it is then worth less.

Somebody always has to buy back the shares when they short it, and they would buy it back at whatever the market deems it is worth at that time. Regardless of who is buying it or selling it and for what reasons.

That's how I see short selling. Also on the plus side it would create more volume and give the market more direction.

 

[oldblue]

Somebody selling the shares wouldn't lower the value of it in my mind.

If I sold my house tomorrow would that suddenly make it worth less?

If I lent my house to somebody so they could sell it, then later buy it back at a lower price would my house be worth less because of the transaction? or just because it is then worth less.

Somebody always has to buy back the shares when they short it, and they would buy it back at whatever the market deems it is worth at that time. Regardless of who is buying it or selling it and for what reasons.

That's how I see short selling. Also on the plus side it would create more volume and give the market more direction.

Sorry, Struzball.
I meant "price", not "value". ( Bad slip! )
The whole point of short selling is to lower the price, so that the shares can be bought back cheaper. If that isn't directly against the interests of the beneficial owner, I don't know what is!

By the way, I don't think that the house analogy is valid. Houses are individual, not generic. Shares in XYZ Ltd are shares in XYZ Ltd!

 

[Struzball]

Sorry, Struzball.
I meant "price", not "value". ( Bad slip! )
The whole point of short selling is to lower the price, so that the shares can be bought back cheaper. If that isn't directly against the interests of the beneficial owner, I don't know what is!

By the way, I don't think that the house analogy is valid. Houses are individual, not generic. Shares in XYZ Ltd are shares in XYZ Ltd!

Well my point is, that if the price is lowered, it then has to be raised again because if price is less than value, price has to go back up to be equal to value (in theory).

And I think typically the people lending their shares to people are big institutions that are long term investors, and wouldn't be bothered by price fluctuations.

But anyway, there's a thread for this

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10075&page=8

 

[cutz]

The whole point of short selling is to lower the price, so that the shares can be bought back cheaper. If that isn't directly against the interests of the beneficial owner, I don't know what is!

G'Day oldblue,

Thought i'll check sentiment on my favourite stock and it's turned into a short selling discussion.

The whole point of short selling is not to lower the price but to sell in anticipation of a price drop, just like when going long you're not actually pushing up prices but buying in anticipation of a price rise.

If MQG is destined to get slammed in the next few weeks it will happen regardless of short selling.

 

[nick2fish]

GG's quote: I am looking at picking it up at $8.
To say that you must have a reason, or some indications that MQG sp will go down to $8.00. If you do, it would be much appreciated to publish them and enlighten us, readers.

Exactly, I incurred a infraction on this thread for an overly bullish ramp on this stock which included an equally bullish sp price target. Apparently though unsupported bearsih rants coupled with falling of a cliff sp price prediction seem to be OK

 

[Kez180]

On that note I am sure there are many cases of investors looking over funding agreements for market cap triggers and then shorting to hit them... Obviously this takes Uber money and a lack of conscience but it does happen...

 

[oldblue]

Well my point is, that if the price is lowered, it then has to be raised again because if price is less than value, price has to go back up to be equal to value (in theory).

And I think typically the people lending their shares to people are big institutions that are long term investors, and wouldn't be bothered by price fluctuations.

But anyway, there's a thread for this

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10075&page=8

Thanks, Struzball.

I didn't mean to hijack the MQG thread for a discussion on shorting so will sign off here.
Hard to believe though that that discussion tailed off on 23 June, 2008 as if nothing of any importance happened thereafter!

Cheers

 

[johannlo]

Exactly, I incurred a infraction on this thread for an overly bullish ramp on this stock which included an equally bullish sp price target. Apparently though unsupported bearsih rants coupled with falling of a cliff sp price prediction seem to be OK

Haven't you noticed mate, bearish rants are all the rage at the moment. You should hit up some US forums you'd think the sky was falling in.

Which in fairness from a US or Japanese or UK perspective, has a lot more factual support than our market (fortunately).

I've noticed with these former high profile corporate raider stocks like BBI, macquarie etc. that forum sentiment is running high and this is probably due to the fact that a lot of people have a lot of eggs in the basket

 

[cutz]

GG's quote: I am looking at picking it up at $8.
To say that you must have a reason, or some indications that MQG sp will go down to $8.00. If you do, it would be much appreciated to publish them and enlighten us, readers.

Hi Guys, fellow bulls and bears.

Just want to mention that G.G. already explained his reasons for his bearish sentiments on this stock, you may just have to refer to his previous posts on this matter, me personally also feel slightly bearish on MQG due to the reasons none other than what I highlighted on post #763, may not be a valid reason but one nevertheless.

BTW i would have thought a return to volatility would have been welcomed, as traders this is what we live for.

 

[hecko]

Not everyone on this forum is a trader though!

...yet anyway

Well I am still watching eagerly, very much in two minds whether to give them my cash or not for this capital raising. I've realised some sizeable losses recently so am not sure whether that is affecting my judgement or not