|
|
Post by tchalaa on Mar 20, 2016 14:02:44 GMT -5
72,48% of the total outstandig shares are of the market: Owned by Institutions 53.80% Owned by Funds 18.38% Owned by Insiders 0.30% (Source: investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-overview.html?t=MNKD®ion=USA&culture=en_US ) Mannkind Corp float is 59.8% (256.47 Mil) of total outstandig shares On Friday MNKD traded more than 40MM (See Nasdaq.com) this was 40 Mil /256.47 Mil=15.6% So I will like to understand, when 72,48% of TOS are owned by institutions, funds, insiders: - how was it possible to trade 15.2% of the float without a 100% share price gap or jump during the trading day ? - where were those +40MM shares coming from to flow the market? Base on the amount of shares traded i will like to call it a Squeeze, but the price movement upwards isn't really that of a short squeeze yet. So where are we then? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2016 14:40:09 GMT -5
on jan 5th 2016 - 47 mil
nov 12,2015 - 41 mil
aug 12,2014 - 44 mil
aug 11 , 2014 - 60 mil
shares get traded back and forth
a share can get traded million times the same day
|
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 20, 2016 14:55:06 GMT -5
The volume looked like an institutional trade. Institution to institution. I do not know if the share volume would show up like that. It would be a set trade. now that I think about that, . When IDPH became biogen idph the trading was a ton of shares, however, price went way down and came back, it wasn't pinned. The shares did show going through though the nasdaq, on that transfer, prior to the announcement.
Not only did price get pinned for options expiry as liane pointed out. Harry pointed out the call volume opened was huge. that too may have worked on the pin.
256.47m/100 times 40m/x = 15.6% of the float. if their was 120 million shares short and it was a cover, 120 - 40 = 80. if it was a buy, an plain old order to buy, then we still have 120 million shorts to cover. the short information I saw on nasdaq site was 12/31/15. old as chit.
15% of float will turn out to be more than 5% total shares, if their was a buyer, for more than 5% a notification of some type?
15% huge.
|
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 20, 2016 15:02:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tchalaa on Mar 20, 2016 15:12:43 GMT -5
on jan 5th 2016 - 47 mil -> Sanofi licence agreement cancellationnov 12,2015 - 41 mil -> TASE introductionaug 12,2014 - 44 mil -> follow up from Sanofi licence agreementaug 11 , 2014 - 60 mil -> Sanofi licence agreementshares get traded back and forth a share can get traded million times the same day Now my question to you @iam2sekc4u2002 : What was on March 18th 2016 ? I need some light here, but first notice that prior to this trading there wasn't any material news. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 20, 2016 15:23:55 GMT -5
72,48% of the total outstandig shares are of the market: Owned by Institutions 53.80% Owned by Funds 18.38% Owned by Insiders 0.30% (Source: investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-overview.html?t=MNKD®ion=USA&culture=en_US ) Mannkind Corp float is 59.8% (256.47 Mil) of total outstandig shares On Friday MNKD traded more than 40MM (See Nasdaq.com) this was 40 Mil /256.47 Mil=15.6% So I will like to understand, when 72,48% of TOS are owned by institutions, funds, insiders: - how was it possible to trade 15.2% of the float without a 100% share price gap or jump during the trading day ? - where were those +40MM shares coming from to flow the market? Base on the amount of shares traded i will like to call it a Squeeze, but the price movement upwards isn't really that of a short squeeze yet. So where are we then? What is your best guess/guesses? |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 20, 2016 15:27:00 GMT -5
Two reasons:
1. What gets reported as "institutional shares" is the summation of reports filed by companies regulated under the 1940 Investment Act. You may have a personal account at one of these "institutions", say a self-directed IRA that is parked at Fidelity, and it shows up as an institutional holding of FMC Corp despite the fact that you can freely trade in and out of that account. Institutional holdings are not what most people think they are. You have to understand what is reported or exempt from reporting under the 1940 Act to make sense of it all.
2. When a stock declines in price and volume, the brokers and market makers will hold less inventory to protect themselves. You might offer to buy retail shares, your broker then has to go to one of the wholesalers for inventory. That wholesaler might buy the shares from a different wholesaler who in turn bought the shares from another retail holder. So what is really a single transaction from one shareholder to another gets recorded up to four times (once by each broker and again by each wholesaler). Since volume of trades is a big deal on Wall Street due to a focus on rankins, every trade that can be counted is counted and that encourages this practice.
In the end the DTCC doesn't care since all the trades cancel out in the end, but the volume reported on the tape is often overstated substantially versus the number of shares that actually trade hands on a given day at retail. In other circumstances or on other stocks, brokers might tend to keep more in-house inventory and fill orders from that supply so there is no double counting there. It all depends on the brokerage and their policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Mar 20, 2016 15:42:11 GMT -5
Two reasons: 1. What gets reported as "institutional shares" is the summation of reports filed by companies regulated under the 1940 Investment Act. You may have a personal account at one of these "institutions", say a self-directed IRA that is parked at Fidelity, and it shows up as an institutional holding of FMC Corp despite the fact that you can freely trade in and out of that account. Institutional holdings are not what most people think they are. You have to understand what is reported or exempt from reporting under the 1940 Act to make sense of it all. 2. When a stock declines in price and volume, the brokers and market makers will hold less inventory to protect themselves. You might offer to buy retail shares, your broker then has to go to one of the wholesalers for inventory. That wholesaler might buy the shares from a different wholesaler who in turn bought the shares from another retail holder. So what is really a single transaction from one shareholder to another gets recorded up to four times (once by each broker and again by each wholesaler). Since volume of trades is a big deal on Wall Street due to a focus on rankins, every trade that can be counted is counted and that encourages this practice. In the end the DTCC doesn't care since all the trades cancel out in the end, but the volume reported on the tape is often overstated substantially versus the number of shares that actually trade hands on a given day at retail. In other circumstances or on other stocks, brokers might tend to keep more in-house inventory and fill orders from that supply so there is no double counting there. It all depends on the brokerage and their policies. I hear you matt, however not that much of the double share count comes through real time. It looked like an institutional trade. mostly because the abruptness of the volume and the price was pinned. It was definitely a transfer of shares, at a fixed price. 15% of the float. 40 million shares times 2 bucks = 80 million.
|
|
