RRS 0.00% 0.1¢ range resources limited

food for short food for thought ya gotta larf

  1. 6,284 Posts.
    IF... UBS had implemented an across the board contingent sell down of any number of investments for the purpose of keeping the bailiffs and hounds away from their bottom line, in this debt-aphobic credit squeezed micro climate, it makes sense that they (ubs) will continue to blood let. Or...... be used as the mirror while the smoke comes from elsewhere.

    Why did they seem to take so long to anns initial sell down last Oct.....timing?

    Why is the ''account holder'' that's selling down within the UBS herd always xxxxx.

    If... the volume has yet again been further UBS blood letting, (which it aint), then the shorters of this business will indeed continue to prey on the negative sentiment that ''change in substantial holding'' notices imbue upon retail/outsider holders...even tho only one of the ''various account'' holders from within the UBS noms has sold.

    Add to this the recent attempt to remind us all that we had been brow beaten in late September by the '' I'll buy your stok for 20c'' Russian walking, talking, singing and dancing short bread Pongosniffavitch aka the stooge nee perfectstage,,, and you are all now primed to be scared of your own shadow and are looking at a stock from a trending to 20c perspective, more often than looking the other way.

    PUT THE UBS FUNDAMENTALS and your SENTIMENT into perpective !

    NOMS ACCOUNTS WHILST AGGRIGATED TO SHOW AS SUBSTANTIAL HOLDINGS, ARE NOTHING MORE THAN REGISTRY ORGANISATION.

    If for example the members of RUM or similar wished to organise, they may hold a united clout of similar status.

    (RUM noms...yes its a joke)

    Every time one of them wished to buy or sell, there would be a notice issued by form 604 to the asx, and the market would react accordingly...until it worked out that it was of little significance.

    Also realise that the stock can be shorted without showing on the ''list'' that really only ever held a handfull of possible shorts anyhow.

    Why has that ''list'' been looked upon as a positive sign as it change from 300,00 to 180,000 to fa. whilst the intra day shorting was/is having a ball.

    YES !! UBS hold noms (and also named accs) on the register, but they are not a single or chartered entity, say like TUDOR JONES, or RAB, FIREBIRD and the likes.

    They are a convoluted holding similar to ANZ noms, or citicorp, which for a long time ''incorporated'' the main consort acc.

    Ask yourself....from which are they selling off, why, and for whom?

    Ask yourself why one of the ''various holders'' of the securities held under the blanket acc of UBS AG London branch can remain xxxxxx anonymous, yet use the sentiment of inertia created by the WHOLE UBS substantial holder umbrella.

    Answer, because its legal common practice in corperate law ozzy style.

    Corperate lawyers earn the big bucks dont they ?


    Also understand that in this financial eye tickkkking environment, that contingent portfolio, ''across the board'' blood letting is ''horses for courses'' strategy, and therefore will create an easier environment to effectively short, whether or not UBS are feeling the pinch along with the rest of their competitors.

    Could the ''on the nose'' shorters be insiders selling down their noms holdings from within the UBS machine....smoke screening UBS and thus manipulating the retail sentiment regarding SUBSTANTIAL HOLDERS that in turn feeds their short position bottom line, making them bikkies when you sell at a cap loss?

    Yes I could have just said rrs is a manipulated stock.

    But that hackney phrase is not understood by the very holder that is targeted as cannon fodder.

    A CHANGE IN SUBSTANTIAL HOLDING notice should only be enterpereted as fundamentally genuine if you KNOW WHO THE HOLDER IS and have an understanding of sorts, why they may have sold.

    If.... pongo is indeed a bitter and twisted loaner loner, then these inside players are indeed ''stooging'' him, playing him for their profit....This is one of the reasons why I have referred to him as the stooge.

    But he is way too knowing, and savvy to be stooged....just ask him.

    The other reason that I refer to him as stooge, is because he stooges you, the quick buck trader, or you, the unresearched holder and folder.

    You see,,, if HE did not already exist for some personal bitter and twisted reason, HE would have had to be invented by the pump/dump/short mob any way.

    Either way, knowingly, or unwittingly, he does their boiling.

    I suggest that he has been too accurate with his pongnostics to be out of the loop, and that we operate in a country where our compliancy rules are virtually impossible to regulate given the wild west nature of the penny dreadful/junior explores' sector of the ASX.

    How can you make money out of rrs under these conditions?

    Do exactly as they do.

    Competitors create much more competitive margins than monopolies/duopolies etc.

    But if it becomes too commonplace, why damm it ! the only ways left, include pumpadumpa or dealgod forbid!!.... fundamental reality!

    The volume and churn on sentiment is where they are burning you at the moment.

    If there is no perceivable good news imminent, they will continue to make dollars by creating volume, bad news,, and short, interjected by sawtooth mini pumps to keep you on the boil.

    Nothing could do them a greater disfavour than sticking them in the bottom drawer till the oil flows....but this will never be the case....( the drawer that is....the oil is there alright )





 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.