Less number of application for Vallibal One

smallville wrote:

mark wrote:

econ wrote:one of a new strategy of our lankan companies is to give small number of shares to retailers at IPO and give large quantitiies as PP before the IPO.
then they can increase the demand for shares and get massive profit by selling thier holdings at the initial day.
this ia another good example of exploiting retailers by lankan big companies.

Why SEC do not take anything regarding the number of shares companies offer at IPO and PP before the IPO?

exactly........agree,in any IPO even in soflogic or expo,if you can issue limited number of shares,then price will fly in first day trading.its all depending on liquidity,see ppl wont get much on VOL,so prices will fly........

Being a bank, and with 100 shares to most of the small fella, UBC didnt run as expected so I dont think its the number that counts, its the ability of the big fellas to push up the price for them to drop on poor retailers.
Surely we all will sell this with a 25% gain even cuz we're getting very smaaaaaalllllllll amt, then big fella will buy from us and sell it even higher.. Thinking that it wud go more we'll buy again.. and the rest of the story is cyclical

UBC started at 45 . price increase from 25 to 45 just because of small quantity they issue at IPO.then big fellows sold it with a massive profit. prices come down due to that.
same thing may happen with vallibel. then big guys can sell thier large quantities at higher price than IPO price.
regulators should regulate the number of shares that issue in the private placements and IPO. there should be fair allocation between private placement and IPO.

these big fellows try to create artificial demand for their shares and earn massive profit at initial day of IPO using this private placements.

i even did not try to lock my money for two weeks it is better to buy from secondary market May 2012

econ wrote:

smallville wrote:

mark wrote:

econ wrote:one of a new strategy of our lankan companies is to give small number of shares to retailers at IPO and give large quantitiies as PP before the IPO.
then they can increase the demand for shares and get massive profit by selling thier holdings at the initial day.
this ia another good example of exploiting retailers by lankan big companies.

Why SEC do not take anything regarding the number of shares companies offer at IPO and PP before the IPO?

exactly........agree,in any IPO even in soflogic or expo,if you can issue limited number of shares,then price will fly in first day trading.its all depending on liquidity,see ppl wont get much on VOL,so prices will fly........

Being a bank, and with 100 shares to most of the small fella, UBC didnt run as expected so I dont think its the number that counts, its the ability of the big fellas to push up the price for them to drop on poor retailers.
Surely we all will sell this with a 25% gain even cuz we're getting very smaaaaaalllllllll amt, then big fella will buy from us and sell it even higher.. Thinking that it wud go more we'll buy again.. and the rest of the story is cyclical

UBC started at 45 . price increase from 25 to 45 just because of small quantity they issue at IPO.then big fellows sold it with a massive profit. prices come down due to that.
same thing may happen with vallibel. then big guys can sell thier large quantities at higher price than IPO price.
regulators should regulate the number of shares that issue in the private placements and IPO. there should be fair allocation between private placement and IPO.

these big fellows try to create artificial demand for their shares and earn massive profit at initial day of IPO using this private placements.

I believe that most of the retailers applied for 500 or below thinking that they will not receive even what they applied, but I had a different idea an applied for 4000 shares in my personal account and another 500x2 using my relatives accounts (You may ask why I did not split 5000 evenly(rounded as necessary) between three accounts-simple answer is other two accounts are maintained only with IPO shares with long term perspective, therefore I do not like to tie much cash up there).

My view is based on following things;
1. Most of the retailers are not familiar with VOne name;
2. Most of them are not from Colombo and support above 1;
3. Most retailers have no free cash flow to apply for IPOs as there losses are mounting due to the decreasing value of their portfolios;
4. Retailers expect to get first day gains and recent experience are not good;
5. Browns is more known to retailers from outside Colombo and Rs 5 is preferred to Rs 25.
6. Retailers can apply for 5 times more from Browns and risk of loosing on the first day is lesser.
8. Browns offer 2.5 times shares.

Due to these reasons I am confident that I will receive above 3000 shares.

Hiru wrote:I believe that most of the retailers applied for 500 or below thinking that they will not receive even what they applied, but I had a different idea an applied for 4000 shares in my personal account and another 500x2 using my relatives accounts (You may ask why I did not split 5000 evenly(rounded as necessary) between three accounts-simple answer is other two accounts are maintained only with IPO shares with long term perspective, therefore I do not like to tie much cash up there).

My view is based on following things;
1. Most of the retailers are not familiar with VOne name;
2. Most of them are not from Colombo and support above 1;
3. Most retailers have no free cash flow to apply for IPOs as there losses are mounting due to the decreasing value of their portfolios;
4. Retailers expect to get first day gains and recent experience are not good;
5. Browns is more known to retailers from outside Colombo and Rs 5 is preferred to Rs 25.
6. Retailers can apply for 5 times more from Browns and risk of loosing on the first day is lesser.
8. Browns offer 2.5 times shares.

Due to these reasons I am confident that I will receive above 3000 shares.

Good acceptable reasoning (+ rep). One addition, if you exceed 4000 , you will be in non-retail category. This was a concern for some. What do you think?

"Good acceptable reasoning (+ rep). One addition, if you exceed 4000 , you will be in non-retail category. This was a concern for some. What do you think?"

Yes. This too was considered when I limited to 4000. Normally, non-retail category is over subscribed as big players apply for entire quantity of the category, so it would be a waste of money.

RIO wrote:

rijayasooriya wrote:

RIO wrote:

rijayasooriya wrote:
This will be massively oversubscriped.....Then number of application will be main decisive factor for minimum amount offered.....That is what I am looking for

Brother you have smistaken...No ..number of applicatuions are not subjected for the % of allotment of shares...the Total Number of shares applied under each catogery is the factor considered for deciding the % of share allocation....

Still u can't take get my point friend.....I am talking about minimum amount offered.....
If there is 60000 applications most probably we will get 100 shares...but if it is 15000 applications minimum amount MAY BE 200 or 300.

Oki....I like to learn your new system of allocation...

Say an IPO for 20,000 shares & received 5 applications as follows
1 - 2000
2 - 2000
3 - 3000
4 - 5000
5 - 8000

Pls explain your calc marvels....! the minimum allotments depending Number of applications as you firmly says...

Offer 20,000 /5 applications = 4000 minimum....!

I feel very sorry about u because it u have common sense or u do not use it....
U can not even read properly that I have mentioned PROBABLY AND MAY BE....
I do not want comtinue this argument or discussion with a guy like u.....It is waste of my time...