UK 00:04 Tuesday, 22 September 2026
Breaking news and expert analysis on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares
Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
I’ll say from the start here that I have no position at all in New World Oil and Gas (NEW). That is just as well, I suppose, because viewing this from the sidelines is going to be a hoot. But it does ask a few questions of AIM Regulation (the gargantuan nature of this Orwellian misnomer is all too apparent these days), and the Nomad to New World – that fine upstanding firm of Beaumont Cornish.
Already a member? Sign in
• All premium articles
• Tom Winnifrith’s Bearcast
• Access to all the entire nearly 13 year archive
• ShareProphets Daily Newsletter
Cancel any time
This area of the ShareProphets.com site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of ShareProphets.com. ShareProphets.com does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at ShareProphets.com is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by ShareProphets.com and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.
Comments
MASKED
A bizarre, educational and slightly terrifiying story for someone like me who is new to investing in AIM companies. I’m happy not to be involved in this one. What I don’t understand is how it is possible to sell shares that haven’t been issued yet. Wouldn’t a seller have borrowed the shares from a broker to be able to sell them short with the idea that they would subsequently cover their short once the new shares were issued? But how can more than all the shares currently in exisitence have been borrowed? What am I missing?
DUCK AND DIVE
Is the EGM required only because they are disapplying pre-emption rights? Could they avoid the need for an EGM by pulling the placing and launching instead a Placing & Open Offer?
http://goo.gl/22KDP9
TW: No need EGM to issue shares, no permits right nowJ P Spaghetti
MASKED – borrowing more shares than have been issued constitutes naked short selling, a practice that many of even those who defend regular shorting feel should be banned (as it is in many countries). Thank you Nigel for a comprehensive and – given the almost incomprehensible incompetence that has led to this clustereff – comprehensible overview of what has taken place. This is probably a very silly question but I don’t suppose there’s any provision in the Articles for waiving the requirement for the approval of 75% of shareholders? Nah – I thought not, but this is a surreally absurd situation!
DUCK AND DIVE
Articles of Association:
http://www.nwoilgas.com/files/4213/4618/2980/Memorandum_and_Articles_of_Association.pdf
catempire
This should be played out it will be the simplest and most cost effective way for the city minus the few that hold the shorts.. end of the day they are the ones who took and forward sold shares with Zero research, why should the market show them mercy?
As Ben T said you cannot pick and chose who makes money as
TW has completely changed his tune (bit of a sellout) … just because he might have a few mates thinking they were in for a easy 40% with 20m shares and it might wipe them out does not mean he should back track on his views…
Tom imo demands respect because he has always stood for what he believes in no matter what shit has been thrown his way… well in this instance he changed his tune because his mates are holding shorts. Poor form, they signed the weaver, they pick up the bill and maybe think twice before taking discount shares with no research in future.
This could be the shit show needed to clean up the market a bit which long term will only be a good thing!!
Vote NO and lets play it out!
TW Note: You keep saying I have mates who are exposed and that calls me to change my tune. You are talking cockcatempire
Tom – Ok.
So you say you don’t have mates that are holding short shares here. (i don’t know if this is true or not but i will take your word for it).. You also claim to want the best for the Pi…And you want to see the markets cleaned up.. But you believe the people who are involved in Short selling of stock not yet in existence should be let off the hook ?
Time and time again shareholders, normal Private investors (The kind you claim to be out to help) holdings are destroyed in value over and over again by these people who take discount placings, ramp the stock, flip the stock with absolutely no intentions or want for the long term success of the company and yet you think it is right for both the market and “the greater good” that these people are let off the hook?
If I buy a s**t company like UKOG at 4.4p on no research I will lose money especially if i do it on a CFD.. If i buy a stock on a CFD at £5 and wake up one day and 50% down I will get wiped out… If i think i can get a 40% profit at the expense of others on no research occasionally I will lose money (NO research is always a good way to lose money)
As Ben T said what about those shareholders in QPP that lost money “not knowing the full facts” among so many others… why in such a bent market should people who think they can make a fortune with NO research get let off the hook ?
I think it is ludicrous to be honest with you…
You were not more then 2 weeks back referring to ig and how people lost a fortune being over exposed on Forex positions… Your response was along the lines of “If you are going to over expose yourself, then tough shit”.
Not everyone who took the placing forward sold the stock… those that did knew exactly what they were doing and they should have to pick up the bill.
Do you believe forward selling stock is a good thing & do you think forward selling stock should be allowed? Why for those that do it time and time again should be let off the Hook? They signed the weaver, they took the risks and this time they lose… locked in pre existing shareholder (the ones your out to help) walks away the winner from this very one sided playing field.. if the ball was on the other foot some folk in the city would already be celebrating!!
Love to hear your thought on the questions i put to you. No need for abuse we’re both Adults.
TW Note - Read today's article. Many of those who had their stock sold DID NOT KNOW this had happened.catempire
They still signed their money over to a company… the main word being signed.
Much like your comments on the ig forex case .. if they didn’t know what they were signing that their own fault.. it will have been written in the terms and conditions!
I am surprised you are so quick to flip your opinion. ATB.