Popular Holdings

[zhangwuji]

Could she missed out the 3 zeros behind.

[changwk]

Could she missed out the 3 zeros behind.

The chairman is known to do this. on 9 Feb 2012, he sold 3000 shares at a price of $0.18. Then from Mar to May 2012, he purchased approx 13mil shares at around the same price.

illogical ??? i think so.

[KopiKat]

Could she missed out the 3 zeros behind.

The chairman is known to do this. on 9 Feb 2012, he sold 3000 shares at a price of $0.18. Then from Mar to May 2012, he purchased approx 13mil shares at around the same price.

illogical ??? i think so.

OMG, same pattern again. After selling that 20lots @ $0.29, now buy back (both times under wife's name). See SGX Annc, summary,

1-Apr : 1,500,000 @ $0.287
2-Apr : 530,000 @ $0.29

Looks like difficult to go lower....

[zhangwuji]

Could she missed out the 3 zeros behind.

The chairman is known to do this. on 9 Feb 2012, he sold 3000 shares at a price of $0.18. Then from Mar to May 2012, he purchased approx 13mil shares at around the same price.

illogical ??? i think so.

OMG, same pattern again. After selling that 20lots @ $0.29, now buy back (both times under wife's name). See SGX Annc, summary,

1-Apr : 1,500,000 @ $0.287
2-Apr : 530,000 @ $0.29

Looks like difficult to go lower....

Don't tell me she was trying to cause some panic sell down to collect cheaply later?

[a74henry]

Insiders buying implies the intrinsic value is higher than the current MV. The founder probably sold the earlier batch by mistake.

(Vested)

[kazukirai]

Don't tell me she was trying to cause some panic sell down to collect cheaply later?

I believe that amounts to market manipulation which is illegal. Or is there some other line of reasoning that would make it legal?

[zhangwuji]

Don't tell me she was trying to cause some panic sell down to collect cheaply later?

I believe that amounts to market manipulation which is illegal. Or is there some other line of reasoning that would make it legal?

Market manipulation takes place almost everyday. Especially on penny stocks like this one. Do you think the price run up to 32.5cts days before released of Q3 result was just coincidental? I am in the market long enough to know all these.

[CityFarmer]

Don't tell me she was trying to cause some panic sell down to collect cheaply later?

I believe that amounts to market manipulation which is illegal. Or is there some other line of reasoning that would make it legal?

Market manipulation takes place almost everyday. Especially on penny stocks like this one. Do you think the price run up to 32.5cts days before released of Q3 result was just coincidental? I am in the market long enough to know all these.

Well, definition of market manipulation base on Law of Singapore is shown below. I am not so sure it happens daily, but I believe that there are sufficient whistle-blowers to uncover most of them if it happens, unless it happens in a form that not as defined here.

"Section 198(1) of the Securities and Futures Act provides that a person shall not carry out two or more transactions in securities of a corporation which will have the effect of affecting or maintaining the price of the securities, with intent to induce other persons to subscribe for, purchase or sell securities of the corporation or of a related corporation. Section 198(2) provides that a ‘transaction’ includes the making of offers to buy or sell securities, and invitations to treat."

[zhangwuji]

Don't tell me she was trying to cause some panic sell down to collect cheaply later?

I believe that amounts to market manipulation which is illegal. Or is there some other line of reasoning that would make it legal?

Market manipulation takes place almost everyday. Especially on penny stocks like this one. Do you think the price run up to 32.5cts days before released of Q3 result was just coincidental? I am in the market long enough to know all these.

Well, definition of market manipulation base on Law of Singapore is shown below. I am not so sure it happens daily, but I believe that there are sufficient whistle-blowers to uncover most of them if it happens, unless it happens in a form that not as defined here.

"Section 198(1) of the Securities and Futures Act provides that a person shall not carry out two or more transactions in securities of a corporation which will have the effect of affecting or maintaining the price of the securities, with intent to induce other persons to subscribe for, purchase or sell securities of the corporation or of a related corporation. Section 198(2) provides that a ‘transaction’ includes the making of offers to buy or sell securities, and invitations to treat."

The rule states only "a person", how about a group people working in concert? Does the rule cover that?

[CityFarmer]

Don't tell me she was trying to cause some panic sell down to collect cheaply later?

I believe that amounts to market manipulation which is illegal. Or is there some other line of reasoning that would make it legal?

Market manipulation takes place almost everyday. Especially on penny stocks like this one. Do you think the price run up to 32.5cts days before released of Q3 result was just coincidental? I am in the market long enough to know all these.

Well, definition of market manipulation base on Law of Singapore is shown below. I am not so sure it happens daily, but I believe that there are sufficient whistle-blowers to uncover most of them if it happens, unless it happens in a form that not as defined here.

"Section 198(1) of the Securities and Futures Act provides that a person shall not carry out two or more transactions in securities of a corporation which will have the effect of affecting or maintaining the price of the securities, with intent to induce other persons to subscribe for, purchase or sell securities of the corporation or of a related corporation. Section 198(2) provides that a ‘transaction’ includes the making of offers to buy or sell securities, and invitations to treat."

The rule states only "a person", how about a group people working in concert? Does the rule cover that?

The details of Section 198(1), (1A) and (2) are below.

198.—(1) No person shall effect, take part in, be concerned in or carry out, directly or indirectly, 2 or more transactions in securities of a corporation, being transactions that have, or are likely to have, the effect of raising, lowering, maintaining or stabilising the price of securities of the corporation on a securities market, with intent to induce other persons to subscribe for, purchase or sell securities of the corporation or of a related corporation.

(1A) No person shall effect, take part in, be concerned in or carry out, directly or indirectly, 2 or more transactions in securities of a business trust, being transactions that have, or are likely to have, the effect of raising, lowering, maintaining or stabilising the price of securities of the business trust on a securities market, with intent to induce other persons to subscribe for, purchase or sell securities of the business trust.

(2) A reference in subsection (1) or (1A) to transactions in securities of a corporation or securities of a business trust, as the case may be, includes —
(a)
a reference to the making of an offer to purchase or sell such securities of the corporation or such securities of the business trust, as the case may be; and
(b)
a reference to the making of an invitation, however expressed, that directly or indirectly invites a person to offer to purchase or sell such securities of the corporation or such securities of the business trust, as the case may be.