Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

LNC - Linc Energy

Jump to new
tech/a said:
Loss of faith comes from those who allow others to control their financial future and become exasperated when they find that their GURUS (Managed Funds etc) cant protect them from economic re balance.
Or Private Investors who simply buy a stock based upon "Their" valuation and anticipated future value only to see that fall terribly short.

As they cant possibly be wrong---it must be some other dastardly reason---beyond their control.
They simply sit --watch--and complain.
Click to expand...

Bingo


CanOz said:
+1. Great post Tech/A
Click to expand...

I'll second that :xyxthumbs
 
basilio said:
Clearly you see this from the a single perspective of a sophisticated investor/individual attempting to gain best advantage of trading. I'm saying that the rest of the investment community needs some protection othwerwise there will be a progressive loss of faith in the stock market with losses to everyone.
Click to expand...

It has always been thus surely?

Firstly, is LNC an "investment grade" company? Or more simply, does it make a profit? I would not think it is a suitable stock for an investor based on fundamentals. So if you own this stock who else is in the pool you are swimming in? If the company is not making a profit it can't pay a dividend. So how will you profit from owning it's shares? Capital gains. You aim to buy low and sell high. To do that you are going to have to grab shares off some sucker who doesn't realise that they are worth more. To realise a profit you have to sucker someone into paying what you consider to be too much for your shares which you now deem to be too expensive (better opportunity elsewhere). So every time you buy or sell a share you are, in your estimation, screwing over some other poor sod. Where's the morality in the market? Any market is going to be full of people who are going to try and manipulate it to their advantage. That's human nature. The aim is to not be the one on the wrong side of the trade.
 
Again a lot of interesting perspectives.

I said it a few times but it seems to be overlooked in the conversation. I am not trying to bang on about the short selling attacks on LNC in particular. The report I referenced attempted to show that the short selling in LNC shares was very neatly recovered by off market transactions which enabled the short sellers to repurchase shares at depressed prices without having to bid for them on the open market.

That was the part I thought warranted investigation.

My query is whether that type of collusive corporate action should be sanctioned. It seems that most forum members don't see anything wrong with it. If effect "buyer beware".

Just for fun I am going to open another thread on the main forum to start discussion on what types of market transactions/manipulations/whatever people believe should be sanctioned and why.

Cheers :)
 
basilio said:
Who is manipulating share prices on the stock market - in particular LINC ENERGY ?

I will also open this topic for discussion on the general investor forum.

Cheers

http://www.scribd.com/doc/139929124/7-2-Further-Research-Into-ASX-200-Companies-Linc-Energy-LNC
Click to expand...

I skimmed through it and came to a conclusion. When you need to write a paper to justify holding an 'undervalued' stock, then its really really time to get out.

Here is what the author had
33admat.png


And here is Guildford Coal, Whitehaven, and Linc on different axis. No prize for guessing which ones which.
25i81nk.png


Not included: CZA, CPL and others that look far far worse with better cases.
 
basilio said:
Again a lot of interesting perspectives.

I said it a few times but it seems to be overlooked in the conversation. I am not trying to bang on about the short selling attacks on LNC in particular. The report I referenced attempted to show that the short selling in LNC shares was very neatly recovered by off market transactions which enabled the short sellers to repurchase shares at depressed prices without having to bid for them on the open market.

That was the part I thought warranted investigation.

My query is whether that type of collusive corporate action should be sanctioned. It seems that most forum members don't see anything wrong with it. If effect "buyer beware".

Just for fun I am going to open another thread on the main forum to start discussion on what types of market transactions/manipulations/whatever people believe should be sanctioned and why.

Cheers :)
Click to expand...

Basilio why was it "collusive corporate action". Just because it was off market doesn't in anyway support your claims. The shares listed on the ASX/Chi-X do 20% of volume off market. No big deal dark pools have been around for some time.

And no one give up their shares to short sellers to cover off market and hand them a profit out of their own performance. You have to be stark raving mad to think 1 fund manager just willing hands over his stock.
 
basilio said:
Who is manipulating share prices on the stock market - in particular LINC ENERGY ?

It has been a very crazy, frustrating ride with LNC over the past few years hasn't it ?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/139929124/7-2-Further-Research-Into-ASX-200-Companies-Linc-Energy-LNC
Click to expand...

It is really quite difficult to manipulate share price. Anytime you want to manipulate a share price, you need to first do the opposite of what you actually want. In this case, you need to sell / short it before you buy it. You need to make sure you can buy at a lower price yet a higher quantity than it just cost you to sell / short it. You really hope that no other institution sees value, and that they are easily spooked to sell along with you, AND that they have a larger holding than you so you can accumulate when they sell.

But you (and even with a few more colluding firms) are not the only institutions in town, and other instos are not completely stupid. If value is so obvious and factual, other institutions will step up to buy and send a thank you note to whoever that is "pushing" the price down by selling it to them.

The other thing to remember is that traders at instos are probably short term focused. A ploy that pushes down the share price of your own holding for 24 months is probably not great when it comes to quarterly performance bonuses!

To me LNC is a perfect stock to experience large gyrations. Back in 2010, it was asset rich (when it sold the coal tenaments) had a few more on the boil and every listed coal stock was taken over. Then the coal sector really came off, LNC spent all that cash and went into heavy debt to acquire unproven assets, and all other asset sale talks were just that, talks. It turned its risk profile 180 degrees in the space of 12-18 months and the share price responded. The sector itself is a major factor - Rio spent $4b taking over the old Riversdale in June 2011, only to announce a $3b impairment in Jan 2013, 18 months later. It's a RIO asset so definitely no manipulation there...

Is it the same author who wrote about BBG shares being manipulated as well? What was his reasoning there? It's pretty clear now that the fundamentals of BBG warranted a falling price...
 
skc said:
It is really quite difficult to manipulate share price. Anytime you want to manipulate a share price, you need to first do the opposite of what you actually want. In this case, you need to sell / short it before you buy it. You need to make sure you can buy at a lower price yet a higher quantity than it just cost you to sell / short it. You really hope that no other institution sees value, and that they are easily spooked to sell along with you, AND that they have a larger holding than you so you can accumulate when they sell.

But you (and even with a few more colluding firms) are not the only institutions in town, and other instos are not completely stupid. If value is so obvious and factual, other institutions will step up to buy and send a thank you note to whoever that is "pushing" the price down by selling it to them.

The other thing to remember is that traders at instos are probably short term focused. A ploy that pushes down the share price of your own holding for 24 months is probably not great when it comes to quarterly performance bonuses!

To me LNC is a perfect stock to experience large gyrations. Back in 2010, it was asset rich (when it sold the coal tenaments) had a few more on the boil and every listed coal stock was taken over. Then the coal sector really came off, LNC spent all that cash and went into heavy debt to acquire unproven assets, and all other asset sale talks were just that, talks. It turned its risk profile 180 degrees in the space of 12-18 months and the share price responded. The sector itself is a major factor - Rio spent $4b taking over the old Riversdale in June 2011, only to announce a $3b impairment in Jan 2013, 18 months later. It's a RIO asset so definitely no manipulation there...

Is it the same author who wrote about BBG shares being manipulated as well? What was his reasoning there? It's pretty clear now that the fundamentals of BBG warranted a falling price...
Click to expand...

This detailed study on the outright manipulation of LNC shares might be interesting to you which I got from HC. If its already been on this site pls ignore.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/139929124/7-2-Further-Research-Into-ASX-200-Companies-Linc-Energy-LNC
 
basilio said:
Actually mate I introduced the story a few days ago. Few other posters on this forum however give it much credence . (I still think its worth investigating more closely.)
Click to expand...

There is so many errors and BS assumptions in it that every time i read a page I would have to spend a few hours pointing each out.

Here is one. The off market transfers on page 23-24 would be from option expiry which HAVE TO HAPPEN on that day, It dosn't need the shares to be open for trading. The author keeps banging this. :banghead:

Pointing out UBS trading flows like its a conspiracy. They are brokers... LOL dudes.
 
basilio said:
Actually mate I introduced the story a few days ago. Few other posters on this forum however give it much credence . (I still think its worth investigating more closely.)
Click to expand...

Hi Basilio. I think its an eye opening read and good find that confirms the over aggressive shorting and previous tight ranges the stock traded in.

See you on HC.

Cheers and thks info.
 
Trembling Hand said:
There is so many errors and BS assumptions in it that every time i read a page I would have to spend a few hours pointing each out.

Here is one. The off market transfers on page 23-24 would be from option expiry which HAVE TO HAPPEN on that day, It dosn't need the shares to be open for trading. The author keeps banging this. :banghead:

Pointing out UBS trading flows like its a conspiracy. They are brokers... LOL dudes.
Click to expand...


T/H I don't know why you bother.
 
Still no joy with LNC :(.

However there was a big jump (33%) in the SP of AFC fuel cells in London. Could be something coming up with contracts for fuel cell sales. Might be some sort of catalyst for lNC there.
 
Think I found the reason for the sudden jump in AFC SP on Monday. Apparently there was pretty little story in The Daily Mail highlighting the value the billionaire Roman Abramovich investment strategy in AFC.

I imagine there would have been strong interest as a result.

Buy like a billionaire: Share tips from Roman Abramovich

Joanne Hart
Daily Mail
June 10, 2013 8:33AM


Roman Abramovich is best known as the autocratic Russian billionaire owner of Chelsea Football Club. But it is by no means his only business interest.

He and his best friend and business partner, Eugene Shvidler, have their fingers in many pies, including a small AIM firm, AFC Energy, that plans to transform the way large industrial companies use electricity.
Click to expand...

http://www.couriermail.com.au/busin...roman-abramovich/story-fnic6on7-1226661135394

And meanwhile, back at the ranch, LNC sinks slowly into the sunset.. :cry:
 
The fact that MR Abramovich via Ervington investments, continues to take an interest in Linc's technology, one would have to remain positive for the future of Linc, despite the demise of the sp in recent times.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2013/06/20/abramovichs-investment-vehicle-scores-clean-energy-deal/

More worrying is the current global macro economic conditions.

(LNC holder)
 
Well another good story from LNC with the announcement of the joint Russian project. Interestingly enough the interview on BRR suggested that this could take off very quickly - perhaps only a couple of months.

I am now certain that LNC will explode (and largely because I have exited to cover another opportunity. In my experience that always works...)

http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/app...theage.com.au/apps/qt/quote.ac?code=lnc&f=pdf
 
A Bloomberg article dated 20 June states in part-

"Separately, Linc has been in discussions to find a partner to develop shale oil prospects in central Australia. The company, which announced earlier this year that it hired Barclays Plc to help with the process, expects to narrow the talks to one group in a “few weeks,” Bond said. Linc is talking with at least four parties from outside Australia interested in the shale oil project in the Arckaringa Basin, he said."

I don't know why LNC didn't include this in their announcement.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...-partnership-with-billionaire-abramovich.html

The comment is vague in that it suggests that ALL the parties in discussions are from overseas. However, it doesn't specifically rule out an Aussie Coy (eg BHP).

L/T Holder
 
Another shocking day for LNC. Currently 81.5 :eek::eek: And I thought at $1.50 it was waaaay under value.
Just. Doesn't. Make. Sense.

Any thoughts ?

(Former LNC holder.)
 

Similar threads

R
The Financial Endgame
Replies
18
Views
9K
qldfrog
qldfrog
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
sptrawler
Top