Serious carnage on those who bought into the three counters and not able to off load in time.
Possibly losses for clients can amount from $20000 to a few hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Investing in shares that we know little about the business and it's intrinsic value is a dangerous thing.
What abt the Dangers of crossing the Road? or Dangers of rolling off the bed? no one consider those dangers?
“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”
― Martin Luther King, Jr.
OUT WITH THE SHIT TRASH
https://www.facebook.com/shutdowntrs
Company related to Dian Lee suspended by Singapore Stock Exchange after plunge
http://aseantradinglink.blogspot.sg/
There is always a good chance of insider trading, clever accounting in the firm or big funds collaborating to screw the small investors.
for the record i have cleared all my positions and on sideline i got NO appetite for risks...i feel that i loose too much sleep and always on the edge and cannot enjoy quality time with my family![]()
In the final analysis.....its NOT whether you have a diploma,degree,masters OR PHD....its whether you have a HDB/PC/EC or LANDED...
David Gerald
ST reported that for the 3 designated stocks, if u buy with cash today, u can only sell on t+4 after the shares are credited into your cdp account on t+3!![]()
Yes you are correct
Started on Monday
very troublesome...TT monies over
took a photo using smartphone on the bank statement
and whatsapp over to broker
as Proof before they allow to buy on your behalf
Shares must be in your CDP account before you can sell
So its usually T4
bought some...Vested
Maybe I am a fool .....time will tell
Fools rush in where angels fear to tread
Level the playing field on trading curbs
Advance notice on restrictions will add to transparency
By Goh Eng Yeow
07 October 2013
Five years ago, just weeks before the sub-prime crisiserupted in the United States and spawned the worst financial crisis in decades,brokerages here took a drastic decision to impose trading curbs to slam thebrakes on a super bull run by penny stocks.
In hindsight, that turned out to be a wise move, as itsaved many remisiers and their clients from getting badly mauled by thesubsequent global stock market rout as financial assets of all shades and huescrashed.
But rather than feel happy about a safeguard that savedthem time and time again from market calamity, remisiers are more likely thannot to complain about how much their business is being affected each timebrokerages impose the same tough measure whenever exuberance in penny stocktrading gets out of hand.
Trading curbs are a regular feature on the local bourse.They typically involve limiting clients’ exposure to a speculative counter byrequiring them to make their stock purchases in cash, rather than get the usualthree days’ payment grace that forms the bedrock of our contra trading system.
The curbs first made their appearance about 15 years agowhen they were imposed by brokerages to curb a penny stock frenzy which eruptedafter the end of the Asian financial crisis.
They turned out to be crude but effective weapons used bybrokerages to protect themselves from the huge “contra” losses once suffered bytheir clients each time a stock market rally reversed gears.
Still, there may be some justification behind theremisiers’ gripes.
Mr Jimmy Ho, the president of The Society of Remisiers(Singapore), observes that remisiers do not begrudge the broking houses formanaging their credit exposures and risks by resorting to trading curbs.
But what irks many traders is the arbitrary manner in whichthe restrictions are being imposed, as brokerages are given a free hand to slapon the curbs whenever they see fit.
Experience has shown that when a large retail-basedbrokerage imposes such a curb in the middle of trading, it can create panic astraders try to unwind their positions ahead of the squeeze which takes place ascontra trading is disallowed and cash payment is required for purchases. Thiscauses the affected stocks to plunge as the speculative fervour is stamped out.
One good example would be Rowsley, which suddenly plungedby 17.5 per cent in a single day in March, following the curbs slapped on it byUOB Kay Hian during trading hours.
Equally disconcerting is the spate of unsubstantiatedallegations that parties with advance knowledge of the trading curbs have beenable to profit from by “short-selling” the affected stocks, then buying themlater at a much lower price after they have plunged.
So what should be done?
Now, some will argue that if there are fundamentalssupporting the run-up in a stock in the first place, it should not have fallensharply when a trading curb is imposed on it.
But then a market is driven as much by sentiment as bycool logic, and the price of a stock is likely to be affected equally by itsbusiness fundamentals, as well as actions taken by a brokerage which mayinfluence the way the investing public views the stock.
As such, there is merit in the argument that tradingcurbs should be treated as “material information”. When trading curbs firstmade their appearance 15 years ago, there were about 30 broking firms servingretail clients like those who invest in penny counters.
But over the years, this number has dwindled to just nineas the financial landscape changed and brokerages consolidated to fightcompetition.
This means that any action taken by one of the biggerbroking houses now to curb trading on a stock will inevitably reverberatethroughout the market and sometimes cause mayhem, as traders scramble for theexit, in case some of the other remaining houses follow suit.
Now, when companies make important announcements, allattempts are made to ensure they disseminate the information as widely as possibleto ensure that investors have a fair chance of making an informed decision onwhat to do with their shares.
But there are no clear directions from the regulators onhow trading curbs should be handled, even though calls were first made as longas 15 years ago for such precautionary measures to be regulated.
It is time for the Singapore Exchange (SGX) and itsregulator, the Monetary Authority of Singapore, to examine the steps needed tolevel the playing field on trading curbs.
For a start, let’s at least consider making it mandatoryfor broking houses to announce on the SGXNet any trading curbs they plan tomake, to ensure the widest dissemination of the information possible.
Announcements should include the names of the stocksinvolved and details of the measures to be imposed.
Such a move will hopefully make the trading curb processmore transparent to all concerned.
Speculators are on the prowl. They normally target penny stocks as these stocks do not have big institutional investors to stop the boom and crash that they are planning to create.
Be careful if you are investing in penny stocks .
bottomline big fish eat small fish...so please stay out of the way unless u are a......piranha
![]()
In the final analysis.....its NOT whether you have a diploma,degree,masters OR PHD....its whether you have a HDB/PC/EC or LANDED...
Penny stocks are not for novice retail investors because they get second hand information on the companies and stocks . The consequence is that they will be slow to react to sudden shifts in the stock performance.
Speculators are quick to take advantage of the general sentiment driven retail investors to pounce at unexpected moments, leaving investors at a loss. Don't feed the sharks.
US-based bank triggeredsell-down
The Edge Financial Daily
Written by theedgemalaysia.com
Wednesday, 16 October 2013
KUALA LUMPUR: The sell-down of three stocks two weeks ago on the SingaporeExchange (SGX) was mainly triggered by a leading US-based investment bankfollowed by a Singapore broker, said industry executives.
An industry executive said the investment bank was particularly a major sellerof LionGold Corp Ltd and Blumont Group Ltd.
The short selling of the stocks was followed by a leading Singapore broker.
“The selling by the two started the fall of the two stocks. Eventually Asiasons[Capital Ltd] also felt the effect because it was the single largestshareholder of LionGold,” said a broker.
But to be fair, the US-based investment bank, being a LionGold shareholder,disposed of its equity interest in the company, followed by short selling thestock, because it felt the valuations of the stock were high.
It is learnt that the US-based investment bank took up a position in LionGold
during a roadshow late last year.
“Since shorting of shares is allowed in Singapore, the US-based investment bankprobably decided to sell because of the steep rise in the price of Blumont andLionGold.
“The short selling by the Singapore broker exacerbated the situation and causedthe collapse of the share price,” said a broker.
It was speculated Malaysian brokers were hit by the sell-down to the extentthat executives of a top brokerage had to go to Singapore to check on thebooks.
However, an investment banker familiar with the operations of Malaysianbrokerages with presence in Singapore, said the broking firms were notaffected.
“For instance, brokerages such as Maybank and RHB stopped extending credit toclients wanting exposure to the stocks affected a few months ago. It was waybefore the sell-down occurred,” said the investment banker.
Malaysian banks were not the only ones imposing trading curbs on some Singapore small-cap stocks.
On Oct 3 — a day before the sell-down — UOB-Kay Hian, which has a large retailpresence in Singapore, imposed Internet trading curbs on a string of small-capstocks, including Asiasons, Blumont and LionGold.
Among Malaysian brokerages, CIMB Group Holdings Bhd, Malayan Banking Bhd andRHB banking group have large presence in Singapore through mergers andacquisitions in recent years.
CIMB has a large presence in Singapore since 2005 through the acquisition of GKGoh Securities while Maybank’s presence is underlined by its purchase of KimEng Securities in January 2011.
RHB banking group extended its presence in the republic when it acquired OSKInvestment Bank Bhd that owns DMG & Partners Securities. AmBank Group alsohas a presence in Singapore via its associate stake in Frasers Security PteLtd.
There was speculation Malaysian brokerages were affected because the threecompanies that saw a massive sell-down on Oct 4 — Asiasons, LionGold andBlumont — were substantially controlled by Malaysians or companies linked toMalaysians.
On that day, Asiasons fell 63% to close at S$1.04 (RM2.66) while LionGold andBlumont shed 56% and 42% respectively to close at 87.5 Singapore cents and 88Singapore cents before the three counters were suspended by the SGX. It liftedthe suspension but designated the three stocks before trading was resumed onOct 7.