Posted by Yong Ken > 2021-02-15 17:55 | Report Abuse

Apparently, Bursa is a magician. There has no fair game here. Suggest topglove quickly list in Hong Kong... i believe it will be good to us and the Tan Sri.

Posted by Ben Tan > 2021-02-15 18:04 | Report Abuse

Yong Ken, thank you for your comment.

Bursa, like other underdeveloped markets, exemplifies severe inefficiencies in market valuations. As a fundamentalist, I like this very much, because it provides for incredible arbitrage opportunities even with regards to KLCI constituent companies.

The problem, and why most people are unable to do well on Bursa, is because everyone's investment horizon is very short. This is of course partially a function of the fact that there is no capital gains tax or dividend tax in the country, which leads to short-termism and gambling-like behavior.

Posted by CJkenho > 2021-02-15 18:35 | Report Abuse

Thanks @Ben Tan for the update & alert of this abnormally. Hmm.. transactions over-the-counter would probably be a good alternative to save face for jpm. How can they allow Ben to make public their realized losses?? hehe

Just wondering why would the paper loss to date still be so much given the fact that the price is now so near to Jan 4th price?

Btw TG prices are getting more pathetic by the day. The highest generating profit company in Msia just clocked, as of today, the 8th consecutive red candle. Blatant manipulation. How are the IBs gonna unashamedly press down for another 10 more days till end Feb?

Posted by Ben Tan > 2021-02-15 18:52 | Report Abuse

CJkenho, thank you for your comment.

The largest part of the short positions opened since the beginning of the year took place on January 4 itself at average price far below RM6. The average price at which shares of Top Glove have been shorted is therefore RM5.79. So this is the minimal break-even price for the short seller, even if we discount any extra costs, such as borrowing fees, brokerage fees, and so on.

Posted by dusti > 2021-02-16 15:29 | Report Abuse

HI BEN, I’M GLAD THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN THE TROUBLE TO CHECK OUT THE NITTY GRITTY DETAILS OF SUSPICIOUS TRADING ACTIVITIES AND RECORDS.
I USUALLY HAVE SERIOUS DOUBTS ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HOLD HIGH POSITIONS, BUT LACK THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIMPLE FACTS. IS THERE A HIGHER AUTHORITY TO ALERT TO ON THE “OVERSIGHTS” THAT APPEAR TO BE TROUBLING MALAYSIAN INVESTORS? I AM NOT SURE ALL IS WELL

Posted by bpsiah > 2021-02-16 22:43 | Report Abuse

Thanks Ben for the insightful info. I didn't know that Shorties can do overthecounter deals to square their short positions that were done in the open market. This is really something most retailers will not apprehend. Is this a fair market?

Posted by PunTatBerSiul > 2021-02-16 22:49 | Report Abuse

The fact is, hype of glove is fading rapidly.

Only one with an insane mind would think glove is important in diagnosing pandemic.
Those who insist on hugging gloves stock, I wish you good luck!

Achieving past glory is unattainable target.

Posted by Ben Tan > 2021-02-16 22:54 | Report Abuse

dusti, bpsiah, thank you for your comments.

dusti, the highest authority is supposed to be the Securities Commission in this case. However, bear in mind that according to my (limited) research, this is all acceptable, i.e. it technically doesn't go against the rules of Bursa. Thus, the rules would have to first be amended to place everyone in a level-playing field before potentially a complaint could be lodged.

bpsiah, it is certainly not a fair practice, especially when market-moving amounts of capital are poured into shorting the stock. However, bear in mind that this also means that there is a willing seller of the shares the short-seller has bought in the off-market transaction. Also bear in mind that whatever price the short-seller has paid is likely to have been higher (probably substantially higher) than the market price, which means they are cutting losses currently.

Posted by cpchuan > 2021-02-17 09:48 | Report Abuse

HI Ben, same thing happened again on 15-Feb. Also, the same probably happened to Harta. Thx.

Posted by Michael Teng > 2021-02-17 11:20 | Report Abuse

Short sellers covered back 44 480 lots of TopGlove over 3 days by end of business day on 15th Feb. But while the supplies of RSS were duly transacted on market, exerting pressure on prices , the demand for short covering were done via off market transaction. In my simple mind, that is an uneven playing field. I would suggest a email to be forwarded to Bursa Malaysia to seek clarification if any trading rules may have been infringed.

Posted by Ben Tan > 2021-02-17 11:44 | Report Abuse

cpchuan, Michael Teng, thank you for your comments.

Yes, on Monday the short seller has covered some significant short positions:

- 17,680,000 on Top Glove
- 3,000,000 on Hartalega
- 644,000 on Kossan

The Top Glove and Hartalega closing has most certainly been done off-market. This is not a level playing field, and it would definitely be great if Bursa is checked on that. Please feel free to share this article with Bursa if you write to them. I will update the post to reflect the latest changes.

Posted by Michael Teng > 2021-02-17 12:03 | Report Abuse

I have casually checked on OFF Market trades on TopGloves over the last 10 days, and failed to locate significant transactions that are shown on Bursa records. Hence, that beg the question how those short covering may have been done.

Posted by Ben Tan > 2021-02-17 12:06 | Report Abuse

Here is something that was recently posted elsewhere: https://imgur.com/pgXMgOU

Posted by lkoky > 2021-02-17 12:25 | Report Abuse

@Ben

Based on Bursa reply, it looks like for all we know Short sellers could have bought back all their shorted shares, just pending to return to lenders in one shot.

Posted by Seek > 2021-02-17 12:38 | Report Abuse

Why shorties don’t return as they covered their shorts? Interest charges is based on day to day basis? So no sense to return after accumulating for they got to pay interest!

Posted by Ben Tan > 2021-02-17 13:32 | Report Abuse

lkoky and Seek, thank you for your comments.

I will probably write a completely separate post on this, but yes - a number of things don't add up. There is no immediately obvious logic in the short seller returning the shares all at once, as they continue to incur borrowing fees when they hold the shares.

Additionally, the explanation of several days of trading doesn't hold water. I will explain in a separate post why.

Posted by PunTatBerSiul > 2021-02-22 10:32 |

Post removed.Why?

Posted by sourgrape > 2021-02-22 10:35 | Report Abuse

ker liao la