If you do the maths the amount of shares sold over the weeks by the top 20, are in percentage terms no more than the number of shares sold by the rest of us.
That's hardly something that could described as capitulation by the top 20.
Why they sell is anybody's guess but it equates to loose change for some of them. - I can't deny that I'd rather they hadn't sold any but then I sold a few myself once - so does that make me a bad person? I bought them back when I felt like it.
The top 20 is nice to see remaining stable and I agree shares have been sold by some for years. Others have bought.
more interesting for me is the top 40 and as an exercise to keep me amused I looked at data from the RI shareholder breakdown and created the following
View attachment 22048
I admit to a little rounding of figures but I converted all figures into percentage terms with data points from the RI shareholder report along with the top 20. Effectively 100$ of shares become owned by 100% of shareholders and although there are inherent statistical errors with limited data points the graph is exponential. If I remember my maths correctly 40% of the total shareholders hold 4 % of the shares. The top 4% ( approximates to a theoretical top 40) appears to hold 72% of all shares at that time.
For me the fact the top 20 hold or sell does not affect the CSD outcome / success and it means diddly squat one way or another as to if the T20 are privy to things we aren't. I'm not ging to make excuses for them. What it does mean is that If CSD comes to the party and performs then the T20 and T40 holding steady and holding so many clearly has a positive effect on share price if demand rockets
feel free to poke holes in my maths and it's a little something to while away the time and all imho
dyor