any comments, thoughts, on this stock.

just getting over-excited at the prospect!

Wonder what this week will bring.

Not sure why streaming prices not working on MoneyAM, but prices seem to be nose-diving. Not sure whether you can trust what's being written, but hedge fund interest in co doesn't seem to leave shareholders with any hope...

Firmly with the bears, gave me a few nervous moments last week, but sentiment now turning strongly against IMHO.

Not a happy bull!

I sold my dabble out at 187p last week on last sp spike at a loss. Can only say that will be useful in offsetting profits. Still be surprised if Company goes to the wall completely with nothing to shareholders. We shall see.

as a bear of this stock, i would be surprised if 100 was not hit, and 50 would scarcely be wildy optimistic .... NIL is a bit more difficult to call, but certainly well on the cards

Down to 160p now...Sell

150 actually, and still falling .... at some point, there will surely(?) be an up-spike, but that would arguably be another good time to sell

It will be interesting to see what RAB do next.

LONDON (Reuters) - Shares in beleaguered bank Northern Rock fell more than 17 percent early on Monday on fresh concerns of a sharply discounted sale and amid negative sentiment across the financial sector.

The Sunday Telegraph reported that the Treasury had given two U.S. hedge funds -- JC Flowers and Cerberus -- permission to start takeover talks with the stricken lender, sparking fresh concerns over a firesale of its assets that would leave shareholders with virtually nothing.

Reports also revived talk Lloyds TSB could take on Northern Rock, but again at a sharp discount.

One trader said a Lloyds takeover would put Northern Rock in administration first, "which means that shareholders get diddly-nothing".

Northern Rock, which has been engulfed in crisis since being offered emergency financing from the Bank of England last month, said last week it had received approaches including a possible takeover offer -- but said it had held no talks on price.

Northern Rock shares, down almost 90 percent from the year's high, were trading at 152 pence at 8:44 a.m. on Monday, down 15.2 percent, having touched a fresh record low of 144.5 pence.

"The stock moves on speculation of the outcome of a sale, regardless of actual value -- it's all about speculation on the extent of the discount at which it will be sold. On a down day like today, that's exacerbated," one analyst said.

Shares across the financial sector were hit on Monday by news of a profit warning from investment bank UBS.

i remain more than happy to keep running my short, and remain amazed that sp still holds 150 or thereabouts .... no doubt i shall be taught a lesson when someone puts an unequivocal 2.50 on the table (or will that be 2.50 for the whole company?)

be that as it may, but it is very much shorter odds than a racing certainty that BoE/gov't will not allow themselves to be suckered into a position where they will seem to be feather-bedding shareholders

I am shorting NRK too, cynic...can't see us losing at this point.

It is quite amazing that with all the highly paid "brain power" in the Treasory, BOE and the FSA they cannot come up with a sensible solution to put NRK into receivership. Or now are they afraid by rushing in to support NRK they wont be able to recover tax payers money?

hyleo .... am actually quite tempted to extend my position, but i fear trhat could be tempting fate.

halifax ..... not for BoE and FSA to force the issue; that would be totally wrong even if technically permitted ..... in due course, sp will find its correct level, though at the moment the market is saying current level is correct!

Putting off the inevitable will only make matters worse, although the government will claim they did all they could (with our money) to save NRK. The vultures have gathered and await the "coup de grace".

Keep looking at these glass rock shares , to buy or not to buy ? a buy at 1.30 ?

buy at 1.30? .... would not have thought so except on an arguable bounce ..... same would apply at 1.00 but with rather more cogency

Feather-bedding shareholders . . . are shareholders some special class of saver?
When NRK was created, savers got shares - so even without intending to be shareholders, they ahve an equitable interest in the business.
Where the Government should address its wrath is towwards the Bank Top-execs that ( it would seem) had no plans for the company's future if the international borrowing-rate went above (say 6%)....that anyone could think this would "never happen" would appear to me to be very silly.
So the Execs should be lined-up for the village stocks - and maybe joined by the Regulator, who presumably between Lunches go round Banks and checks what they are up to.....otherwise he's hardly a Regulator, rather he a waste of space. Then we ahve the BoE who appear to have a Role - yet they don't want to exercise the Role , even though at least one of their tasks is to keep the British Economy strong ( er, internationally).

So as I see it the Public who own shares in NRK are at the mercy of dark-forces - there is no-one that asks Shareholders if this is the way they want their investment to conduct business, AND they are then "blamed" for some dire consequences of a drubbing by both the Press and Government Agencies that are supposed to check on NRK's state of health - before the patient shows signs of a heart-attack
So, IMHO my friend, whilst you may be Right in historical fact-forthcoming, morally shareholders are NOT the root-cause of this fiasco, indeed I doubt if many of them even attend the agm's to vote for Directors' pay.

Of course I know that investing is risky and all that stuff, but here we are facing a different scene - a Government that is both in-control and trying to avoid responsibility....it's a bad place to be invested....

i never remotely intimated that the ordinary shareholders were remotely to blame for the disaster .... however, holding shares in NRK is intrinsically no different from holding shares in SEO .... whether or not the gov't should carry any "blame" is also a pretty tenuous argument, and for sure it certainly has no responsibility of any kind other than to protect, at least to some extent, the savers and mortgagees ..... even that could be argued as debatable, but not to do so would create a truly terrifying scenario, for all sorts of very obvious reasons.