Thank you Saragian . For anyone else interestedin minutiae, and...

Thank you Saragian .

For anyone else interestedin minutiae, and for the record, here is an image of the price action today.
V.W.A.P. was $184.8, Volume 1,237,741



I suspect the sale order circled in red in the thumbnail below (from the closing auction) was to force any sellers to come in lower. It has now disappeared :


Over two days, since gaining our first Rio contract of the year yesterday, volume has been higher .
The shorts yesterday were substantially lower :


I think this means - as per the Hartleys recommendation - there is accumulation going on. (@Pioupiou I cannot access your report)
Out of curiosity I counted (...and checked the figures a few times) all the shares traded since the FMG contract until the day before the RIO one yesterday.
Then I deducted the volume of short sales.
While I may be in error , I think over the 16 days there were only 4,785,722 shares traded that were NOT short sales
In the two days since the RIO contract was announced there have been 2,331,033 shares traded. (That is not counting today’s short sales but is after I deducted the 226,681 shorts from yesterday .)


From a fundamental perspective I assume there have not really been many opportunities for heavy accumulation at the lower prices we have been seeing recently and the main benefit has been to the shorters and retail buyers who collected ‘bargain shares’.

I presume at current price levels there are institutional sellers prepared to deal.



As to the question “does the value of the contract justify the gap left at $1.75.”
I don’t know.....but I think from the reckoning shown above there are effectively two contracts that may be currently being ‘valued in ‘ due to relatively low volume since the FMG one.


I hope everyone has a nice weekend ,
Cheers