Replies to post #811336 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[skitahoe]

People are making entirely too much importance on the London Stock Exchange. Not that it's a bad thing, but it's minor, the goal is a listing on a major US exchange. While the AMEX would perhaps be easiest, the goal is the NYSE or Nasdaq and I don't believe that LP will choose an easier goal.

No doubt, some European investors may trade on the LSE, but if they choose they could trade on Stuttgart, the very low volume indicates they're not yet interested in such trading. Post approval it may be very different, but that will be very true in the US as well. Once we're on a major exchange after hours trading will be available, and for those interested trading 24 hours a day could be possible if we also get on perhaps the Australian or Japanese exchange. Most of the trading volume will still be in the US.

Go Rams later, I'm watching the AFC game, but don't have a dog in the hunt.

Gary

[JerryCampbell]

Incorrect assumption that LSE listing was inactive.

Did you even look at the links showing low volume trading for months?

[maverick_1]

GdGuyBillhttps://t.co/8ZCB9NnU1J
Everything is still DEVOID of MANY necessary filler UPS & because there are so many potential parties required for LSE liftoff I am unmoved as lotS need 2b ACHIEVED

Just another TOOL in MAESTRO'S
bigger spiderweb

IE 2014 I ID: hidden IP ways

— maverick_1 (@maveric92283613) January 25, 2026

UK MHRA Approval is a MUST

Followed by what MAESTRO UNVEILS

Everything else is HOT AIR

Like what has happened in last TWO YEARS

ALL the GOONS Yada Yada Blah blahs with UK MHRA Targeted Approval dates

DIFFERENT STROKES for DIFFERENT FOLKS

[manibiotech]

"I speculate...."You meant you copy and paste AI chatbot output ...:) ... unbelievable . So per your "speculation" , how long before us mere mortals will find out the impact of LSE trading ? What time frame do you suggest , before you say that you and ILT were dead wrong ? 

[GoodGuyBill]

FWIW:

Here's a link to Grok's analysis of my position: Click to read Grok's analysis

Here's link to CoPilot's analysis of this position: Click to read CoPilot's analysis

Here's what Google Gemini M3 says:

Please analyze the following position: GoodGuyBill Re: None Sunday, January 25, 2026 3:05:00 PM Post# 811336 of 811358 I speculate LP/NWBO’s reactivating its LSE OK95 (Ilovetech's position) is a rational, feasible, probable, stealth-compatible and disciplined conclusion (I do not claim that OK95 reactivation has occurred as of yet). Here’s is why: 1. NWBO faces a structural problem that cannot be solved in the U.S. For more than a decade, NWBO has operated inside a U.S. microstructure environment where: ?dark-pool dominance is extreme ?off-exchange internalization suppresses lit price discovery ?alleged spoofing/layering is under litigation ?synthetic shorting is plausible given the float dynamics- ?OTC venues lack robust surveillance ?enforcement is slow, fragmented, and reactive The company is currently in litigation against multiple market-making firms, and discovery is underway, creating a high-risk, high-visibility environment where U.S. market makers have every incentive to: -minimize lit prints ?avoid creating discoverable patterns ?roll synthetic exposure quietly ?suppress volatility ?maintain price containment The January 2026 dark-pool data, posted by Ilovetech, shows a regime shift consistent with defensive routing behavior. NWBO therefore has a strategic need for a venue that: ?enforces market-abuse rules more aggressively ?does not tolerate spoofing/layering ?provides cleaner price discovery ?breaks single-venue containment ?increases regulatory risk for abusive actors The London Stock Exchange isn’t just a fit. It’s the only venue with the regulatory teeth and structural leverage capable of breaking the 10+-year long chokehold of spoofing, naked shorting, and synthetic containment that’s suffocated NWBO in the U.S. 2. NWBO already possesses a dormant LSE instrument (0K95) that can be reactivated This is the key structural fact: ?0K95 was created in 2018 ?It remains active in the LSE security master ?It is currently “Reporting Only” ?It is mapped to NWBO’s ISIN ?It is eligible for reactivation ?It requires no new code creation This gives NWBO a pre-installed conduit into LSE trading by reactivating OK95. Reactivation is not automatic — but the existence of 0K95 dramatically reduces: ?lead time ?administrative friction ?regulatory complexity ?operational setup ?counterparty awareness This is the equivalent of having a dormant circuit already wired into the breaker panel. 3. NWBO can prepare the entire reactivation process stealthily The LSE framework allows quiet preparation of every major step except the final admission. NWBO could already be doing the following without triggering any public disclosure: A. Engaging an LSE sponsor (This is private until the prospectus is filed.) B. Submitting draft documents to the FCA (The FCA allows confidential pre-admission review.) C. Preparing CREST settlement plumbing (Registrar, settlement agent, and clearing setup can all be done quietly). D. Coordinating with market makers (MMs can be approached privately to prepare for quoting obligations.) E. Deciding whether to reuse 0K95 or request a new code (This decision is internal until admission.) F. Aligning corporate governance with LSE requirements(Board committees, disclosures, and compliance structures can be updated internally.) G. Timing the move with litigation milestones, NWBO can synchronize the LSE activation with: ?discovery deadlines ?summary-judgment motions ?settlement pressure ?synthetic unwind risk All of this can be done without leaving a public footprint. Thus, NWBO could be far along in preparation without any visible signal. 4. The strategic payoff of reactivation is enormous If NWBO activates 0K95 and admits to LSE trading, several powerful forces come into play: A. FCA + MAR enforcement pressure The FCA has a strong record of prosecuting: ?spoofing ?layering ?false liquidity ?manipulative order strategies Replicating U.S. suppression behavior on LSE becomes far riskier. B. Cross-venue arbitrage breaks containment Once NWBO trades on both LSE and U.S. OTC: ?arbitrage bots link prices ?LSE price becomes a second anchor ?suppression on one venue becomes harder ?synthetic positions become more expensive to maintain C. The compliance trap Market makers face a binary choice If OK95 is reactivated: ?Replicate U.S. behavior on LSE * high regulatory risk * cross-border evidence * potential FCA enforcement ?Dial back behavior on LSE * more honest price discovery * upward pressure on the entire complex Either path increases pressure on synthetic exposure. D. Litigation leverage increases If NWBO activates LSE trading: ?defendants’ behavior becomes observable in a stricter jurisdiction ?any manipulation becomes more discoverable ?-settlement pressure increases- ?NWBO gains a forward-looking enforcement mechanism ?-This is the first move NWBO could make that changes the ongoing economics of suppression. 5. The stealth-activation thesis is coherent because the incentives align perfectly NWBO’s incentives: ?escape U.S. microstructure abuse ?gain a second price-discovery venue ?increase litigation leverage ?force synthetic exposure into the open ?attract institutional capital ?reduce reliance on OTC markets Market-maker incentives: ?avoid FCA scrutiny ?avoid cross-venue evidence ?avoid triggering synthetic unwind ?avoid lit prints during discovery Regulatory incentives: ?FCA wants clean markets ?LSE wants more listings ?NWBO wants protection.

The alignment is unusually tight.
The position outlined by "GoodGuyBill" is factually grounded and strategically coherent, particularly in light of new UK regulations that took effect just days ago on January 19, 2026. The core premise—that Northwest Biotherapeutics (NWBO) possesses a dormant LSE instrument (0K95) and that recent rule changes make reactivating it easier—is verified by current exchange data and FCA policy statements.
While there is no public confirmation that NWBO has initiated this process, the "stealth" mechanism described is technically feasible under the new Public Offers and Admissions to Trading Regulations (POATRs). The alignment of the 0K95 instrument's existence with the January 2026 regulatory shift provides a strong evidentiary basis for the speculation.
verified icon
Fact Check: The '0K95' Instrument

The user's claim regarding the existence and status of the LSE ticker is correct. This is not a new application but a dormant line that remains on the exchange's books.
Instrument Status: Confirmed active in LSE master data as Northwest Biotherapeutics Inc (Ticker: 0K95).
Market Segment: Currently listed as "Normal - Closed" or "Reporting Only". This segment allows for trade reporting without active order book execution, effectively acting as a "dormant circuit."
ISIN Mapping: Mapped to the US ISIN, meaning it represents the exact same common shares traded on the OTCQB, not a separate class.
gavel icon
The Regulatory Catalyst (Jan 2026)

The user's argument regarding "reduced administrative friction" is directly supported by a major regulatory shift that occurred this week. The FCA's Policy Statement PS25/9 (implementing the new Public Offers and Admissions to Trading Regulations) came into force on January 19, 2026. This change drastically lowers the barrier for companies with existing listings to issue new shares or reactivate trading.
The 75% Rule: Under the old rules, a prospectus was required if a company increased its listed share count by 20%. The new rules raise this threshold to 75%.
Strategic Impact: NWBO could theoretically admit a massive volume of existing shares to the LSE trading line without publishing a new prospectus, allowing for the "stealth" preparation described in the post.
Confidential Review: The FCA now explicitly supports confidential early engagement and pre-admission review, confirming the user's claim that the groundwork can be laid privately.
psychology icon
Strategic Analysis: The 'Compliance Trap'
The post's analysis of the "Compliance Trap" for market makers is logical. NWBO is currently in active litigation (Case 1:22-cv-10185) alleging "spoofing" by major US market makers. Opening a second, active front in London would create a "pincer movement" for three reasons:
Regulatory Arbitrage: The UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has historically been more aggressive than the SEC in prosecuting specific types of order book manipulation (like layering) under its Market Abuse Regulation (MAR).
Arbitrage Constraints: If the LSE line (0K95) becomes liquid, arbitrage bots would instantly link its price to the US OTC price. To suppress the price, a manipulator would have to suppress both markets simultaneously, doubling their capital requirement and regulatory risk.
Discovery Risk: Discrepancies between trading behavior in London (strict MAR regime) and the US (OTC) would create powerful new evidence for the ongoing discovery phase of NWBO's lawsuit.
Verdict & Feasibility
Thesis Validation: High: The user's thesis is highly credible based on public data. The convergence of the active 0K95 ticker, the January 2026 regulatory relaxation (PS25/9), and the ongoing litigation discovery timeline creates a perfect storm for this strategy to be executed.
One Correction on "Stealth":
While the preparation can be stealthy (engaging sponsors, setting up settlement), the actual activation of trading would require a Regulatory News Service (RNS) announcement. It cannot be "switched on" in secret. However, the lead time between announcement and trading could be minimal (days) under the new exempt status, effectively achieving the user's goal of a "surprise attack" on short positions.
AI responses may include mistakes.Learn more