Most interesting to me now are the changing patterns... in distribution, and in valuation statistics, and how changes in them show up differently over time in the financial media.
Before the exchange took place, there was already a fairly obvious trend in distribution, but the trend leveled off when showing around 33 million shares in distribution, back when there WERE only 45 million shares... obviously being shorted hard back then...
After the exchange, distribution resumed... now showing that almost 100 million shares have changed hands when there are still only 217 million shares. Shorter range charts are likely more meaningful, but a two month chart still shows 65 million shares in distribution in that period. Short ratio has been declining, from 8 million to 6 million in the last update... but the reporting there is still always well behind the reality. Other features on the Yahoo page also update less often, so that the shares outstanding was quickly updated to the current figure, but the debt conversion that made more shares show up doesn't show as a reduction in the debt... which means the enterprise value figures are wrong by that amount, etc.
Noting that those structured and predictable sets of variation in reporting exist predictably... they may in part define an obvious map of features in the variation between market valuation from the "real" values that are reported... ???
Does it matter in share price that Yahoo doesn't update debt numbers and enterprise value as rapidly as share numbers?
Combine the numbers we see in distribution, along with what has already been reported in new institutional holdings ? We know where 25.6% of the shares are now... which seems it is 55.55 million shares that are being held.
Still a lack of transparency here. The Quattro filing is reported as an investment advisor holding the shares indirectly... so, it still doesn't tell us who the owner REALLY is... only tells us who the owner is banking with ?
ARe the former note holders in fact selling shares ? They must be selling some as the volume is there ? Does that mean that what we see is former note holders NOT reporting their shares holdings from the conversion to the SEC by claiming some exemption related to conversion of one security to another... and the new holdings we DO see being reported are a result of buying new shares in the market ?
It looks to me like the key point to note here is that the market still pretty clearly has vastly more information that is made readily available to insiders than is made available generally... the lack of transparency deliberate... with share sales to longs at retail being reported immediately, while short sales are not reported for a month... institutional conversions and transfers don't show up at all so you don't know who the most influential major holders are... all while the fiction is maintained that the market does in fact provide a high level of transparency ???
We just watched as more than 75% of the ownership in the company changed hands... and you STILL can't tell who owns large blocks that constitute something more than half of the shares outstanding... and another large portion is similarly obscured... with the Quattro filing we know who HOLDS the shares, but not WHO they hold the shares FOR ???
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
