Post by rockstarrick on Feb 16, 2016 23:54:52 GMT -5
From peacash ymb
Goldman Sachs--form 13F They INCREASED their position 7m to 10m shares. They own 2.3% of the company. THEY ARE THE BIGGEST SNAKES EVER. I know the longs will win. Live Life Long.
Goldman Sachs--form 13F They INCREASED their position 7m to 10m shares. They own 2.3% of the company. THEY ARE THE BIGGEST SNAKES EVER. I know the longs will win. Live Life Long.
Whalewisdom.com
fyi
short covering
#Nasty Women. It's just such crazy business. They lie, we know they are lying, they know we know they are lying, and tomorrow is another day - of lies. person, woman, man, camera, TV. Twice impeached. Indicted 4 times.
I have to admit even though this has been explained to me 20 times the increase in their position this filing period messed with my head. Especially now that I am 100% on the sidelines. As I have said a bunch of times my cousin owns an index fund and has helped me a lot of with my MNKD investment. In the past when we have discussed the manipulation (which he agrees with) the Goldman conspiracy is just not there. We went over it again this morning. I have repeated what other longs (who I thought knew what they were talking about) saying institutions are adding and viewed it as a positive catalyst and over and over again he explain to me why I cant look at it like that.
It can be trackers, or forced through an index but do not forget that GSCO also has private wealth management. There could be a high roller that has their money managed by GSCO and he believes in MNKD and it reflects in their ownership. Lets use some common sense here. Of course Goldman knew SNY was dropping MNKD why not buy after January 4th. Why buy before? You cannot look at any of the major broker, institutions (barclays, morgan, gsco, vanguard, blackrock) movements and think you are understanding what they are doing. If you are going to look at anything look at the hedge funds and their moves and most closed out their position
My cousin did think Jason Karp's long position was interesting but he still is short on much bigger positions. His 600k could be the same as one of us putting $100 into a penny stock.
***EDIT
If you dont believe me (which I am sure a lot of you wont) walk into your broker with the insitutional ownership break down and ask them if this means what you all think it means......
It can be trackers, or forced through an index but do not forget that GSCO also has private wealth management.
One of the best posts on this topic I have seen. All the big financial services companies have index funds, proprietary funds, and also manage private accounts. The private accounts can be anything from very wealthy individuals to self-directed IRA or 401(k) plans. No matter, when quarterly reporting time comes all those funds get reported as a group. Most investors see an institution and assume there is some smart financial analyst looking at the fundamentals of a company and making informed decisions. While that is SOMETIMES true, more often it is not true; witness all the index funds in Israel that had to buy into the MNKD listing on TASE whether they liked the stock or not simply because the fund tracked the index and HAD to own the stock.
The bottom line is that the presence of SOME institutional investors is a positive sign if those funds are 100% fundamental smart money investors. There are a handful of funds specialized in healthcare that have teams of PhD and MD qualified analysts to scrub the science, and if you see some of the early VC funds remaining in the stock after the IPO you can bet they have thought through retaining their investment as well. Most of the other institutional swings are just noise and should be treated as neither a positive nor a negative sign. Institutional investors come in all flavors; research what each fund does and make informed decisions on whether to follow their lead or not.
The filing points to MANGER 1 and 3 as holding the shares. Manager 1, GOLDMAN SACHS & CO, has 115 funds under that umbrella with about $186.1B under management across all the funds. The funds have different managers and run different strategies. It’s not clear which funds own it though, prob a way to do it….
D. E. Shaw & Company increased their position by just over a million shares to 1,063,148. Not a huge holding but his background is interesting even though he's not really hands on with the company anymore.
Correct me if I am wrong. APRIL 30TH ISH we find out about institutional Holdings? Let's say we either stay at 26% or move higher,how much of a influence will this have on the stock price? I think it would be huge!
You just never know with the institutional holding because it reporting is a minimum of 90 days behind. They could be out for the timer longer we would not know.
Correct me if I am wrong. APRIL 30TH ISH we find out about institutional Holdings? Let's say we either stay at 26% or move higher,how much of a influence will this have on the stock price? I think it would be huge!
Thank you in advance for your thoughts!
I doubt there is a direct correlation. Consider that we've seen increases in institutional holdings in past several quarters that were accompanied by dropping share prices. A further increase in the % of institutional ownership would likely not affect stock price. However, the announcement of a new major (5%) owner might just help a bit, depending on who it is and whether any PR accompanies an SEC filing.
Good fortune to you.
Last Edit: Apr 14, 2016 7:40:00 GMT -5 by mnholdem
Correct me if I am wrong. APRIL 30TH ISH we find out about institutional Holdings? Let's say we either stay at 26% or move higher,how much of a influence will this have on the stock price? I think it would be huge!
Thank you in advance for your thoughts!
Most funds are required to report their portfolio holdings as of the end of the 1st and 3rd quarters, and the report is not due until 60 days after quarter end, which means the next reports are not due until end of May. Funds that are 13F filers have a different set rules for 13F designated securities so the requirements get a little complicated.
Most funds have not updated their reports since the end of November when they reported what their holdings were as of September 30. Since the end of Q3 the company has listed on TASE, there have been two changes in the CEO slot, Sanofi terminated the distribution agreement, the sales and financial results for Q3 and Q4 have been disclosed, and the company has booked a big write-off. Relying on stale institutional information from September to make investment decisions in May probably not the best idea.
Those that understand the institutional filing rules know that all of these reports are due long after the information is no longer relevant. You shouldn't expect much price action just because the paperwork catches up to the trades.
You just never know with the institutional holding because it reporting is a minimum of 90 days behind. They could be out for the timer longer we would not know.
And if one believes in conspiracy theories, I imagine the institutions could very well window dress (buy just before reporting holdings and then sell a day later) so that their reported institutional holdings are not really representative of what they believe.
“Hawaii is rightfully a monarchy, and will be again.”