Just a note, in case the shorter reads this board: Shorting with the intent of manipulating the price of a stock is quite illegal; and I think it is obvious to anyone who analyzes the data that that is the purpose here.
I think a lot of these shorts were covered intraday, so - after netting the shorts and covers out - the remaining volume was pretty tiny.
Last Thursday the short transactions also accounted for 49% and last Friday it was 48%.
Someone is working pretty hard at shorting this stock.and we were still green today.
I think someone knows something. If an investment advisor had issued a buy, the buying pattern during the day would have been much different. This looks like one determined buyer came in early and then left.
Out of 301762 total volume, 113844 was accounted for by short sales. 38%
Even if all short sales were covered intraday (I doubt that this time), that would mean 75,000 was accounted for by true long transactions. Given what I have seen over the past month, that would be the most for quite a while. I think some buyer waded in in early drove the price up resulting in a mini-squeeze of those with short positions. When it topped, I think the shorts resumed shorting and found resistance at just above $1.
Hopefully, some of them will soon get caught with their pants down.
And there were only 4 trades. For 5, 1000, 1000, and 500 at the end of the day. So the last trade - the one that took us from .85 t0 .81 had to be the short trade.
Maybe the player who was shorting and covering in large amounts has given it up as I suggested he/she might. Now we see the real volume: 5 shares traded in 4.5 hours.
My theory is that we are seeing a lot of short trades and covers intraday, so the net at the end of the day could be zero short trades, which would not have an impact on a short interest report. I think someone has been trying to make it look like there is a sell off to get retail longs to sell, and they have been pretty successful the last month. But I also think that strategy seems to have run out of gas, as the price has stabilized at around .80. Thursday and Friday we had high overall volume of which 49% and 48% was short volume and still only negligible price movement. So the support seems to be very strong right where we are. I think the institution that has been behind this has got to give it up soon.
And the short volume was 55K shares, which just happens to be the volume of that strange trade at the end of the day.
That's about the best smoking gun for validating my theory.
About 55K from what I see. So total volume today is 115K.
Anyone really think that there was a 55k trade at the end of the day, or just the delayed reporting of trades made during the day? I think the latter.
Interestingly, Schwab has the last trade going off at 2:29 pm, and the yahoo chart is also stuck at 2:29.
But the IHUB chart clearly shows the 55K trade at the end of the day. And the volume number I was watching was about 60K until at least 3:30.
Combine these observations with the fact that we have a bid going out 4 decimal points and it is quite clear we have some institution playing with this stock.
Daily short volume will be available at 5:30. I'll be back
There you go again. Whoever said anything about a short squeeze? What part of "intraday cover" do you not understand? I explained this in detail in response to the last thread you started. Go read.
Excuse me, but which deal do you think was signed in Houston? The pacific coast deal referred to in the article? Why would the Nic government and a British and Norwegian company choose to sign a deal in Houston? Perhaps they closed at the lawyers' offices?
Today is like yesterday until it isn't. My view on this is simple: over the last few years there have been a number of steps taken to get us to the point where we can sign a deal to finance the drilling of one or more exploratory wells on the concession. We are now at that point. We were almost at that point 10 months ago until Noble reported that it had plugged its well. Consequently we had to do more to prove the potential of our concession by conducting new seismic. That has now been done.
So now we have another deal window. If the new seismic does not net us the well finance, we have serious issues. But your posts always make - IMO - the logical error of looking back at your past disappointments in a way that jades your ability to look objectively at current events.
For me it boils down to this: IFNY has something of value they want to sell, but they want to sell as little of it as possible and at the highest price. I am absolutely certain there are interested parties on the other side, so it ultimately will come down to what IFNY can negotiate. They may negotiate a good deal, they may negotiate a bad deal, but a deal there will be because we pretty much have no other choice but than to accept the best deal we can negotiate today. Whatever that deal is, even a bad deal, it will almost certainly make IFNY stock worth a lot more than 80 cents. IMO, at this price, this stock is a no-brainer.
Also, the extended silence from IFNY (not a word or SEC filing in 4 months) tells me that something is being worked on. If I were in a cash-strapped company working on a transformational deal, I would not waste money putting together a 10Q (which was due in August) that will be made irrelevant a few weeks after it is filed.
Manny, I think we should thank the short for the cheap shares we got today. I don't think it worked out for him today.
No doubt in my mind that games are being played, which simply reinforces my belief that the near term direction for this stock is up. Significantly up. Otherwise, why bother playing such games with such a thinly traded stock? If someone knew it were going down, the shorting would be much more severe than what we are seeing.
The ask that shows after the market has closed is irrelevant. What I find more interesting is the 11000 shares that appear to have been traded at the close. It could also be that those trades were only reported at the end of the day.
Over 25,000 shares have traded at .87. Anyone in their right mind would have moved that ask up by now.