HSBC Nosedive

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    62

    How do you actually subscribe to the rights issue? I own a few shares and haven't received any communications on this.


  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gold Coast Marina
    Posts
    17,934
    Quote Originally Posted by bascom:
    How do you actually subscribe to the rights issue? I own a few shares and haven't received any communications on this.
    I'm in the same position so I started a separate thread a couple of days ago to ask - the consensus seemed to be "wait" as nobody had had anything yet.

    This was the debate http://www.geoexpat.com/forum/thread...tml#post332487
    Last edited by MovingIn07; 10-03-2009 at 07:26 AM.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    23,205

    Well it closed down "only" 3% in London so I guess we should see a big jump up at the opening, and somebody therefore making the big profit that they manipulated the market for yesterday afternoon.


  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968

    Must be nice to be able to screw with markets and people the way some of these guys do.....


  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    In a little burrow
    Posts
    943

    Don't some institutional investors have to sell when the stock reaches a certain level? Isn't it mandated?


  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    5,585

    The term manipulation sounds harsh..

    if one needs to dump million of shares to ensure that the price at auction goes down another 12%, then the cost associated with such dumping usually outweighs the benefit derivable from it.


    Is auction at close bad ?
    I don't think so.
    Without the auction, if a huge player wants to manipulate the closing price of a market, he only needs to come in at 3.59 and sells down the shares to a level he wants. Market has only the 20-30 seconds to react to his action.

    MOC (match on close) gives participants usually up to 5mins to sense 'events' or 'rebalance' or 'readjustment' in the market and if one sees a substantial selling order, the value players can come in to place bids at good prices and expect them to be filled.


    There are tonnes of conspiracy theory in the financial market. But other than those on penny stocks that are controlled by one of few operators, the general market is efficient and capitalistic. Despite all the claims of big boys moving markets, I have never really seen collusion on stock market before in my participation of the market. Individual syndicates can try to take advantage by targeting warrants or such.. but collusion in manhandling HSBC is a sucidal attempt by itself.

    Investors that are badly burnt in hsbc might want to disagree with me and start blaming the so called big-boys.. but like said, the earlier you discover the reality the easier it is for you to make back what you lose.

    Players play in fulfilling prophercy scenarios. Technical analysis might be bullocks to many, but it nevertheless is a fulfilling prophercy and learning to take advantage of how/what people read the market is a good start.


  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,968

    "but collusion in manhandling HSBC is a sucidal attempt by itself"

    What do you mean? Someone made the wrong decision?


  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,896

    well, since at LSE they seemed to ignore what happened here. Hence, that investor could have sold his stocks for a much better price if he had sold it in portions.

    Maybe someone was leveraged to the extend that his portfolio value became negative right at yesterday's 3:50 course, ran out of money and had to sell everything? Or something along these lines?


  9. #19

    [QUOTE=er2;333303]well, since at LSE they seemed to ignore what happened here. Hence, that investor could have sold his stocks for a much better price if he had sold it in portions.

    Maybe he is selling in portions.. I've seen much heavier selling and marking of closes than this. There could be more to come in smaller or larger blocks, no one knows.


  10. #20

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Hong Kong.
    Posts
    1,355
    Quote Originally Posted by freeier:
    The term manipulation sounds harsh..

    if one needs to dump million of shares to ensure that the price at auction goes down another 12%, then the cost associated with such dumping usually outweighs the benefit derivable from it.
    Generally agree with that, except for...

    Quote Originally Posted by freeier:
    Is auction at close bad ?
    I don't think so.
    Without the auction, if a huge player wants to manipulate the closing price of a market, he only needs to come in at 3.59 and sells down the shares to a level he wants. Market has only the 20-30 seconds to react to his action.

    MOC (match on close) gives participants usually up to 5mins to sense 'events' or 'rebalance' or 'readjustment' in the market and if one sees a substantial selling order, the value players can come in to place bids at good prices and expect them to be filled.
    ...the concept of closing auctions is perfectly fine, the problem is with its implementation in Hong Kong. Specifically the problem is caused by limits on price movements during the closing auction and the fact that the closing time is not random. As a result, there are indeed ways for some people to manipulate the market for gain - David Webb had a pretty good explanation here and here. However, not saying that this is what happened in the HSBC case - don't have enough information for that.