Bruce, Thanks for trying to explain about "taking out", but as Cathy pointed out, what you are describing (holding back orders) is against TSE market regulations.
For more info about Canadian market regulations, you can check out the MSE and TSE FAQs on their web sites. The TSE's is:
tse.com
The story is that the stock went down because professionals "took out" a limit order. Any interpretation that I can take from this story is that something happened contrary to market regulations, contrary to a client's interests, and probably contrary to the law.
Let's say that it did happen.
Ask I were a trader involved, would I tell anyone? Would I tell the company's PR agents who would certainly spread it around? What would I have to gain? I'd certainly have much to lose. I believe that I and everyone else involved would keep our mouths shut.
So who could be the source of this story? That is why I was asking for a name (because it seems so unlikely that a PR agent like Grant would be privy to this information).
Let's say that it did happen and that Grant did somehow find out about it. Would he not alert the TSE? If Grant knows about this story and still believes it to be true, he should alert them immediately, if he hasn't already.
Then there is the other possibility: the story did not happen; it was a fabrication or distortion.
If that is true (and it does seem the simpler explanation to me), then it raises some serious questions:
1.Is someone fabricating stories to quell investors' fears whenever WT dips?
2.Is the company's PR firm passing on stories as fact, when in fact, they are merely speculation or worse?
3.Is the firm making any effort to substantiate the stories it hears and passes along?
4.Is the firm presenting these stories to WT investors as fact or as speculation?
From my readings here and at Stockhouse, I have major problems with these stories attributed to Grant's office. First inaccurate claims about shares short and now this story about improper trading--what can we believe. If these aren't true, what about WT is? Who's to say?
Bruce, just out of interest, are you standing by your report of the trading story from Grant's office? If so, what do you think of it in light of recent discussions here? Do you think it happened as Grant explained or are you starting to have questions? Or in hindsight, is it possible that he meant something completely different and that your report was accidentally misleading? Just what do you think it was all about?
I'll be very interested to read your follow up.
Mike |
