Trembling Hand
Can be found on the bid
- Joined
- 10 June 2007
- Posts
- 8,852
- Reactions
- 205
Oh you know. complete lack of understanding. There was 1.2 mill short as of yesterday. So that would make all of todays trades short sells.......
How did you estimate that?
Oh you know. complete lack of understanding. There was 1.2 mill short as of yesterday. So that would make all of todays trades short sells.......
Shorts were not easy to come by this morning... I don't think too many people would have shorted this on open given the $7 open price and the balance of probability.
Made decent money on a trade but still left quite a few $k on the table. Oh well...
Bought the low and sold the high.
(but missed about $1.50 in between :bad
At least its better than holders that left money and then some on the table
Bought the low and sold the high.
(but missed about $1.50 in between :bad
At least its better than holders that left money and then some on the table
Look a big short too a big punt at the open and every seller today has lost today...as there is no shares to buy back. I estimate the shorts are now caught short by 5m-7m shares and many to buy those back today and over the next few days....plus with other shareholders averaging down some and plus new entrants taking a punt on the election and a Liberal victory will push it back to $12 pretty easily.....especially if others buy in knowing that Rudd is unlikely to be elected. Right now the price is saying Rudd is elected and he will legislate...that is wrong.
Liberals are $1.20 v Labor $4.40....this has massive short covering bounce written all over it...
Approaching highs of the day...I think A $1-1.50 per day will come back into for it the next few days.
This is a buying opportunity
Liberals might only be in for 3 years. There will be a lot of people that don't want to risk signing up to a multi-year lease only to have the rules changed.
There is a short 1-2 month disruption of lease orders. That is it. NPAT is affected for 1-2 months.,,not permanently unless there is legislation. There is not. Actually there is
No Govt Policy
No Legislation
Off the Rudd/Bowen cuff comments only.
Full coalition support given in full.
Coalition miles ahead in polls and betting
No likely majority for Rudd
NO chance of legislation being enacted this term and tiny chance next term and no chance with Coalition.
Rudd would need 5+ seat majority....no chance of that at next election
This is actually a screaming buy. Stock is down $10 from $18 since last Tuesday for an "off the cuff Rudd/Bowen comment" only no legal reason for MMS to change anything actually.
Market has jumped at a shadow....that doesnt even exist !! I expect a $4-7 buying and short covering retracement within days. It was strong buying all day if anyone noticed.
Shorts that entered today simply do not understand this stock. It fell $7 in mins it can rise $7 in a couple of days easily.
There is 4-6m shares short after today. If the company announces the dividend will just be delayed if coalition wins this gaps up $3-4 easily. and then shorts have to cover...
This was near $20 before the Bowen comment last week. Ironically the business actually has more certainty now than ever given the coalition unequivocal full support. This was key.
The Market has got this wrong today and the shorts will pay a severe penalty IMHO, the shares to buy were evaporating all afternoon and will evaporate tomorrow as there was a lot of shorts trying to short more (were on both sides)...and now have to cover the margin call dump of shares after a week in trading halt was at the open leaving only blue sky ahead for the stock.
Dont be suprised to see this at $11-12 tomorrow. If it gaps up a > $1.50 watch out.
Its safer being on the long side.
Buying Volume was 2 times the selling volume on depth most of the day...indicating pent up buying
and Highlighting the lack of available stock to short cover with. This is usually an illiquid stock. Shorts are actually in a real bind tonight, betting against Coalition at $1.20...dumb dumb dumb. and aggressively shorting the open....dumb dumb dumb.
MMS could feasibly do the opposite tomorrow and i expect less shares around to buy and no selling as its done. MMS will fight back. They have a great balance sheet, plenty of debt headroom, 15 % earnings lift for FY13, Dividend will be ok and will be an increase is my feel in line with earnings +15%, competition is also falling away giving them near monopoly status. Smaller competitors panicked but MMS did not.
The market just overreacted to some media stories of the week not based on fact and forced the open down now all the bad news is out there but the sky is not falling its actually pretty blue. The stock rose nearly every minute of the day from 10.10am onwards. Look at the chart.
The aggressive short seller at $7 open and $8 (resistance) is now in very big trouble IMHO whoever you are. Good luck getting those few million shares back, The fundies were clearly buying today. Shorts dont want fundies buying and there were big buy orders after $7.50 especially
Smart money bought today.
I kind of agree on where you're coming from, except the short sell at open bit.
Apart from the directors/founders, NAB aggregate holds 7.4m, Asia Pac technology holds 4m, Fidelty holds 2.3m
The shares under fidelty are under many different funds so lending would be difficult. Asia pac have been selling down from 4.6m, so I doubt they'll lend out much to sell.
NAB is the only real lender here. Assuming they are allowed to lend out 1/2 by clients, thats 3.7m. 1.3m is currently shorted.
Leaving a total of 2.4m available for shorting, assuming 1 entity gets all of it.
Yes a whole heap got done in the morning today, and I could just as easily say most of the volume is long selling by holders who got scared.
Ok, well for the rest of us fools who decided to buy and hold instead of flipping on the day for a quick but small profit I provide the following commentary from RM at http://rogermontgomery.com/fbt-fairly-badly-trampled/...
"Prior to the market opening, and based on the information contained in the MMS announcement, we had calculated a revised estimate of MMS’s intrinsic value in the event that the proposed changes are implemented. Our assessment was that the likely impact would be devastating to MMS’s business, with most of its after tax profits destroyed.
Note, however, that this calculation assumed the changes were implemented. We separately estimated the probability that the changes would not be implemented, noting that the Coalition has said it does not support them, and that Labor may not have the numbers to implement the changes even if it did gain power. Our best guess at the probability of the changes being implemented was somewhere below 20 per cent. The framework we used for this is shown in the attached diagram. Using a <20 per cent probability of devastation and a >80 per cent probability that the business would suffer only relatively minor damage, we estimated a probability-weighted fair value for MMS shares.
Based on that estimate, we were at the head of the queue this morning to buy additional MMS shares at $7.00 and grateful for the ‘McMillan get smashed’ sentiment. Clearly there is some risk in doing this, and the fact that we are underwater on the initial investment makes us acutely aware of this risk. However, a critical part of our job is being able to put emotion to one side and take decisions based on a considered assessment of the facts, keeping in mind one does not pick up bargains when there is a cheery consensus.
In this case the assessment was clear. At $7.00 per share, the upside considerably outweighs the downside, and our investment team was unanimous in its recommendation: a meaningful increase in our holdings in MMS."
Time will tell who made the best decision on the day, the day traders or B&H investors. My goal is to make $8 a share instead of 80 cents and I think probabilities may be on my side.
Sorry man You underestimated. Many brokers "naked" short sell and there was tons of naked short selling at the open. Naked Short selling is when the shares were not owned or borrowed they were basically flash orders on screen, (daytrades and t+3 sell orders) (essentially no stock owned and no stock borrowed)...my estimate was 1-2 m real shorts plus 1-2m naked. Either way I am right...they forgot to look at the betting markets nor read the bit about MMS having full coalition support. Now they are on the wrong side.
Buying Volume was 2 times the selling volume on depth most of the day...indicating pent up buying
Bet on the election
Err, naked shorting is illegal. Nobody is gonna risk jail time for that sort of thing.
Oh and selling 50x avg daily vol? Who in their right minds would do that? Esp as 3 days later the world would know.
Robert Gottliebsen didn’t think we should have this fun today.
I’m happy for it to trade – opens up more options.
The market is as informed as it could be in the circumstances. It knows how material the group remuneration services revenue derived from salary-packaged novated leases is and it knows that if Labor wins the election and enacts its changes to the law McMillan Shakespeare will be materially and adversely affected. Today’s share price plunge provides an indication of the extent of the anticipated impact.
It is true that the market won’t know until after the election whether Labor will be in government and in a position to get the legislation passed in both houses. It does know that if the Coalition wins it has promised not to proceed with the changes so there is effectively a binary outcome for McMillan Shakespeare shareholders.
In other words, the big "unknowns" are, in fact known. If the Coalition wins, so does McMillan Shakespeare. If Labor wins, the company loses.
The fact that we don’t actually know the outcome of the election yet is not a reason for maintaining the suspension.
Read more: http://www.businessspectator.com.au...stries/all-mcmillan-shakespeare#ixzz2a3OTxTOQ
Naked short selling is sadly everywhere on big news day or what appeared a short (prima facie). ASIC simply does not police it properly.
Just my read based on facts. DYOR
If I am being intrusive or rude (not my intention) I apologise - but since you cannot arrive at a valuation, does your reason for holding have to do with your assessment of MMS' competitive position vs weakened competitors and the ability of the balance sheet to take a hit to earnings / revenue?
Would it be fair to say that those still holding may agree with those who are buying (excluding the traders)?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?