http://www.falklands-oil.com/

http://www.rockhopperexploration.co.uk

http://www.argosresources.com/




Rockhopper was established in 2004 with a strategy to invest in and undertake an offshore oil exploration programme in the North Falkland Basin. It was floated on AIM in August 2005. Rockhopper was the first company to make a commercial oil discovery in the Falklands. Today Rockhopper is the largest acreage holder in the North Falkland Basin, with interests in the Greater Mediterranean region.

Still that over hang i would of thought, if DES comes good we should see a price jump here, if a duster it will drop a little but DES will crash........big time

you can say that again marky!

Switched into RKH on your advice marky...safer....too much guesswork with DES....at the moment....

RF I think you have made a wise choice if its a duster for DES the down side will be 30p if they hit oil the upside will be 2

yes....and RKH would shoot up to 400p as well...for me DES is a little too risky at the moment....and I wanted a position in RKH....

If only some other sites especially iii was as well policed as this one is.
I had almost given up on this thread, but see we have diverted back to RKH in the last few posts.

Hi Aldwickk,

You ask, 'Internet bulletin board speculation . Can you really move the price that much on bulletin board chat ?
I think the most powerful none fact that can effect a share is a rumor that is given an airing in the media or a bulletin board. Nothing spreads more quickly than a rumor especially a negative one. I am thinking back to the 'Rockhopper Sealion duster rumor' of a few weeks ago. I believe, perhaps wrongly that it started in a small article, in a daily newspaper, once the bbs got hold of it, it spread like wildfire, causing panic with many holders.
I think in all other areas of general discussion, bbs have very little effect, which is probably a good thing baring in mind many of the comments posted.

Regards Greek.

dealerdear, whilst it is a legitimate trade to go short, shorters add nothing to companies.

They do nothing, they only help destroy companies share prices and can destroy companies by destroying their share price and thus their ability to get finance, and destroy jobs and lives by this action.

Therefore I am always happy when shorters get burned and lose.

Proselenes
You must realise that investors and day traders don't necessarily care about the companies they invest in. That applies to shorters as well. I know a couple of traders that trade by charts, momentum etc and often don't even know what business the companies are in. It is a form of possibly scientific gambling. At least a form of gambling where you are in a bit more control. The overall share price is the sum total of market sentiment and that includes the shorters. Shorting is analagous to somemone selling shares that they own. They are betting that the price will fall, so they get rid of their shares. perhaps they should be made to keep their shares so as not to damage the share price. The flip side of shorting is that when someone closes a short the share price gets a boost similar to someone buying the shares.

If I buy shares in a company then do I mind if the company goes bust. Yes, of course I do, at least while I am holding their shares. After that, no I don't care.

Pro

What a load of bollocks, shorting adds liquidity to the markets. Did the ban on shorting stop the bank's SPs tanking? Errr, no. Most company SPs are destroyed by the company, generally by being incompetent or trying to sell something no-one wants to buy.

of course you care if the company goes bust (unless you're short!), but do you care what the company does to make its pennies? ..... i might allow you certain ethical exclusions though i can't think offhand what those might be

Not that Proselenes will be able to read this because I'm supposedly squelched, but that last post is garbage.

Short sellers don't destroy companies. Companies that fail invariably go under because their business model is fundamentally flawed and/or because their directors are incompetent. If the model is sound, the company will survive.

Maybe Proselenes should target his fellow shareholders who are quite happy to lend stock if he's that bothered about short sellers. They don't seem to care too much about their holdings and, without them, there would be no short interest.

Exactly. (Last para hits the nail on the head).

Pros - You really need to get a grip, people are allowed to take profits number one and number two if in your opinion the value of shares in a company are over valued then you are a mug to buy more, so surely that is the most sensible thing to do, sell em. It's not rocket science :O)

The Hang Seng index has no shorting, its gets on fine. The Chinese stock markets have no shorting, they get on fine. Many other markets shorting is not allowed - they work fine.

Shorting is a sick practice that sums up the western world, the want to "make money and profit from bad news and bad luck and bad management" and do not care about companies, the jobs they support and the peoples lives who may suffer when a company goes bust and cannot raise cash as their share price has been shorted to oblivion by sick vulture like shorters.

Shorting is a sick practice by sick people in general - but its legitimate.

And of course if DES has stuck oil I hope lots of shorters lost lots of money yesterday and burnt hard - they deserve it ! ;) What goes around comes around in life - yin and yang and all that !!! ;)

Ive been invested several times in companies that have had their share price knocked by over 50% due to shorting. Usually of course these companies are small cap, but not always.
In one instance, one company I was invested in had a third of its shares being shorted.
It is also difficult to find out how much of a companies shares are being shorted at any one time. Even if you are signed up to receive such information, the figures are often inaccurate and out of date.

Defenders of shorting nearly always are shorters themselves, which to my mind gives the same credibility as banks defending their business models and bankers defending their bonuses. Well they would wouldn't they!
As to shorters themselves, I have no problem. they are playing the system. It is that system that is wrong.

I appreciate we all have our views, and this discussion could go on forever, but everything I have read about shorting, has strengthened my views which is.
Shorting distorts markets. It is as simple as that.

If you own a company that's in trouble and people pile in shorts...at a crucial stage...it will not help that company...perhaps for shorting : legislation ought to be brought in preventing that nothing more than 50% of the total amount of shares can be shorted...something along those lines and not all owned by the same person or group of investors.

Is the problem how you short [ naked shorting ] and bank's using other people's money and nominee account share's of client's

Yes it is. If they want to loan your shares out, there is little you can do. Those who believe that if you leave papers stating that your shares are not to be loaned, they won't be are living in cloud cuckoo land.
It may limit such lending minutely, but that is all.
As to naked shorting, that has to be totally wrong. And remember naked shorting is only for the big players, most PI's are out of the game.

Bullshare used to do a bit of that naked shorting when he had hair.

Am glad to see his using both hand's