miserableoldgit Posted 30 December, 2008 Posted 30 December, 2008 Oh Pleeeeeeeeeeze! Don`t start dalek2003 off again.
saint lard Posted 31 December, 2008 Posted 31 December, 2008 I'm afraid i have no real sympathy. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/4010895.Wilde__Lowe_lose___1m_each_as_share_price_tumbles/
Amesbury Saint Posted 31 December, 2008 Posted 31 December, 2008 two lots of 100,000 trades http://www.londonstockexchange.com/en-gb/pricesnews/prices/system/detailedprices.htm?sym=GB0007922114GBGBXAIMI0792211SOO
bridge too far Posted 31 December, 2008 Posted 31 December, 2008 two lots of 100,000 trades http://www.londonstockexchange.com/en-gb/pricesnews/prices/system/detailedprices.htm?sym=GB0007922114GBGBXAIMI0792211SOO I think they're one and the same deal - sales. http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=SOO&share=SOUTHAMPTON_LS.
Mole Posted 31 December, 2008 Posted 31 December, 2008 I think they're one and the same deal - sales. http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=SOO&share=SOUTHAMPTON_LS. £18,325 traded in w h ireland on the 23rd £18,500 traded in slh on the 30th mmm....
Amesbury Saint Posted 1 January, 2009 Posted 1 January, 2009 Also 200,000 sold at end of Nov. Someone slowly selling their shares without drawing too much attension to it?
trousers Posted 2 January, 2009 Posted 2 January, 2009 Also 200,000 sold at end of Nov. Someone slowly selling their shares without drawing too much attension to it? ..
BGF Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Share price still dropping now 19.25 http://www.londonstockexchange.com/en-gb/pricesnews/prices/system/detailedprices.htm?sym=GB0007922114GBGBXAIMI0792211SOO
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Share price still dropping now 19.25 http://www.londonstockexchange.com/en-gb/pricesnews/prices/system/detailedprices.htm?sym=GB0007922114GBGBXAIMI0792211SOO I was going to post this earlier when it was 20p. It looks like city have got wind of something as the FTSE has been on the rise the past few days.
bridge too far Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 All the markets are down today by about 2%.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 I was going to post this earlier when it was 20p. It looks like city have got wind of something as the FTSE has been on the rise the past few days. I bet its a takeover. It has to be, it has happened so many times before to us. Oh.
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 I bet its a takeover. It has to be, it has happened so many times before to us. Oh. Takeover speculation (genuine takeover speculation that it is i.e SISU) makes the share price go up. The share price is falling at present with a .75p drop being significant given the share price. It equates to circa 4%.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Takeover speculation (genuine takeover speculation that it is i.e SISU) makes the share price go up. The share price is falling at present with a .75p drop being significant given the share price. It equates to circa 4%. It's a sh1t product in a recession. It's not surprising or bucking the trend is it?
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 It's a sh1t product in a recession. It's not surprising or bucking the trend is it? The FTSE trend in recent days has been upwards. The trend at SFC has been downwards.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 The FTSE trend in recent days has been upwards. The trend at SFC has been downwards. The clue might be in the length of this "trend" you speak of.
St Marco Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 19p a share.... Didn't SISSU offer 50p a share or something?
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 The clue might be in the length of this "trend" you speak of. Southampton Leisure 3 month trend FTSE 100 3 month trend Over the past 3 months the FTSE has been up and down a bit but is currently near enough what it was 3 months ago. SLH shares have been constanly sliding. This clearly shows that we are not following the trend of other companies.
Scummer Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 To be fair, our share price has never followed the FTSE trend. It's a very illiquid share, not much trading, and the majority of the shares are allied to large blocks.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Southampton Leisure 3 month trend FTSE 100 3 month trend Over the past 3 months the FTSE has been up and down a bit but is currently near enough what it was 3 months ago. SLH shares have been constanly sliding. This clearly shows that we are not following the trend of other companies. They both look down on three months ago to me, despite the patter.
corky morris Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Value by Market Cap now is £5.3m! Watford £3.5m Preston £4.1m Millwall £6.4m Birmingham £16.7m Celtic £34.5m Spurs £75.4m So when the club was listed at £1 we have seen a drop in value of over 80%. God Mr Lowe is some kind of financial genius!
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 They both look down on three months ago to me, despite the patter. Well you obviously aren't very good at reading charts. I'll simplyfy the data for you. Over the past 3 moths the FTSE 100 is : -2.65% Over the past 3 months SLH is : - 25% I hope this helps.
trousers Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 (edited) Administration? Well, the drop in price would tend to indicate that somone is trying to sell more shares than anyone (or the 'market') is willing to buy Edited 29 January, 2009 by trousers
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Well you obviously aren't very good at reading charts. I'll simplyfy the data for you. Over the past 3 moths the FTSE 100 is : -2.65% Over the past 3 months SLH is : - 25% I hope this helps. Helps? It more than helps. It is complete confirmation. They ARE both lower. Many thanks.
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Helps? It more than helps. It is complete confirmation. They ARE both lower. Many thanks. Yes they are both lower, but in comparitive terms we are not following the trend. It's a sh1t product in a recession. It's not surprising or bucking the trend is it?
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 It's a sh1t product in a recession. It's not surprising or bucking the trend is it? Helps? It more than helps. It is complete confirmation. They ARE both lower. Many thanks. Yes they are both lower, but in comparitive terms we are not following the trend. Well "the trend" would be that all markets are down by some degree. I stated that we are not bucking it, in that we are not up when the market is down, plus we have a crap product which will have an effect. Why are you arguing that I have said what you are stating as if I haven't?
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Well "the trend" would be that all markets are down by some degree. I stated that we are not bucking it, in that we are not up when the market is down, plus we have a crap product which will have an effect. Why are you arguing that I have said what you are stating as if I haven't? You keep digging.
slickmick Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Well "the trend" would be that all markets are down by some degree. I stated that we are not bucking it, in that we are not up when the market is down, plus we have a crap product which will have an effect. Why are you arguing that I have said what you are stating as if I haven't? In all fairness you did give the impression that you were compairing the market slide on a similar scale to our own.
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 (edited) In all fairness you did give the impression that you were compairing the market slide on a similar scale to our own. Not really. I reasoned that we were in recession and further had a **** product. A "double wammy" of reasons why even in a pile of **** we would look the more like ****. Oh, and we do. Edited 29 January, 2009 by JohnnyFartPants
JohnnyFartPants Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 You keep digging. I don't think so. It's there in black and white to see exactly what I said. Perhaps in your haste you misread a word in a sentence of mine?
jonah Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Value by Market Cap now is £5.3m! Watford £3.5m Preston £4.1m Comparing market caps at the current time is a bit pointless, they are dozens of companies whose prices have dropped 90% on no news. But if you're going to do it then it would be worth commenting that Watford and Preston have had 2 of the wealthiest owners in English football in recent years and (I think) a hell of a lot less debt. So when the club was listed at £1 we have seen a drop in value of over 80%. Only they didn't list at £1, they listed at 46p. The current share price is barely lower than when we beat Spurs 4-0 and started our road to Cardiff and 8th place in the league - hard to believe given our fall to the bottom of the CCC and a mountain of debt. Over the past 3 months the FTSE has been up and down a bit but is currently near enough what it was 3 months ago. SLH shares have been constanly sliding. This clearly shows that we are not following the trend of other companies. Are you trying to imply there is normally a positive Beta correlation between the Saints share price and the FTSE100? Or were you just trying to start more rumours? The share price movement is absolutely meaningless and irrelevant to anything other the opportunity for certain types of fans to spread daft rumours - shares like Saints can appear to move 10% without a trade even changing hands. As it happens, several spread betting companies have changed their margins again this week so it's possible some punters are having to close their long positions - this will have a general affect on small caps (possibly why AIM All Share is lower than the FTSE100 in relative terms this week). A complete non-event.
Mole Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 The share price movement is absolutely meaningless and irrelevant.
corky morris Posted 29 January, 2009 Posted 29 January, 2009 Comparing market caps at the current time is a bit pointless, they are dozens of companies whose prices have dropped 90% on no news. But if you're going to do it then it would be worth commenting that Watford and Preston have had 2 of the wealthiest owners in English football in recent years and (I think) a hell of a lot less debt. Only they didn't list at £1, they listed at 46p. The current share price is barely lower than when we beat Spurs 4-0 and started our road to Cardiff and 8th place in the league - hard to believe given our fall to the bottom of the CCC and a mountain of debt. Are you trying to imply there is normally a positive Beta correlation between the Saints share price and the FTSE100? Or were you just trying to start more rumours? The share price movement is absolutely meaningless and irrelevant to anything other the opportunity for certain types of fans to spread daft rumours - shares like Saints can appear to move 10% without a trade even changing hands. As it happens, several spread betting companies have changed their margins again this week so it's possible some punters are having to close their long positions - this will have a general affect on small caps (possibly why AIM All Share is lower than the FTSE100 in relative terms this week). A complete non-event. I have a porspectus here that states £1!
Wade Garrett Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 Down to 18p now. 50,000 just been traded. At this rate even I'll be able to afford to buy Lowe and Wilde out soon.
so22saint Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 Down to 18p now. 50,000 just been traded. At this rate even I'll be able to afford to buy Lowe and Wilde out soon. Thing is, put a buy in for 12 million or whatever it is and watch the price sky rocket. On the other hand, if you approached them in corporate with a couple of million in used 50s and I reckond they'd bite your arm off . I would
OldNick Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 and compare a graph with the banks shares i doubt that they would have performed any better.We all have said that the SFC shares have been unrealistically high and now they are going to their real level and probably have a lttle more to fall.
Wade Garrett Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 Thing is, put a buy in for 12 million or whatever it is and watch the price sky rocket. On the other hand, if you approached them in corporate with a couple of million in used 50s and I reckond they'd bite your arm off . I would OK. I'll hold off on the 12 million deal, and do it in hits of 20 and 30.
Wade Garrett Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 and compare a graph with the banks shares i doubt that they would have performed any better.We all have said that the SFC shares have been unrealistically high and now they are going to their real level and probably have a lttle more to fall. Nice comparison. We are the Northern Rock of football. Man Utd are probably Barclays.
trousers Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 Down to 18p now. 50,000 just been traded. At this rate even I'll be able to afford to buy Lowe and Wilde out soon. 6,807 went for a tidy 16.50p earlier
TheSaint75 Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 It looks as though someone has bought 50,000 rather than sold.....don't know if thats good or indifferent really
OldNick Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 It looks as though someone has bought 50,000 rather than sold.....don't know if thats good or indifferent reallyyeah but it also means somebody has sold 50000
Mole Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 The share price movement is absolutely meaningless and irrelevant. At the rate the share price is sliding they'll soon be worthless. Is the movement still meaningless and irrelevent?
sidthesquid Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 Just to drop an amusing little t*rd in the punchbowl - but maybe it's crouch selling and Rupert buying
ShirleySaint Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 6,807 went for a tidy 16.50p earlier At that price to buy 1% of saints you would need about £47,000. All you people who think Rupes is doing a good job can form an orderly queue outside his office for your allocation.
WealdSaint Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 The fact that even small share transfers send the price down means to me (who know little I admit!) that were any of the major shareholders to release even part of their holding onto the open market that the share price would tumble to nearly nothing. Perhaps a few people who were offered the chance to sell up in the past are deeply regretting their decision (and maybe not happy with the people who advised them not to)
aintforever Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 At that price to buy 1% of saints you would need about £47,000. All you people who think Rupes is doing a good job can form an orderly queue outside his office for your allocation. That means that soon the whole club will be worth less than what we paid for Rory Delap.
Thedelldays Posted 3 February, 2009 Posted 3 February, 2009 That means that soon the whole club will be worth less than what we paid for Rory Delap. now that is fecking tragic
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now