<--- thisI 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.
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
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.
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.
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!
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!
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.
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
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
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.
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?