RNS

[bruncher]

I always find these difficult to read

Holding(s) in Company

TR-1: Standard form for notification of major holdings

2. Reason for Notification

An acquisition or disposal of voting rights

It would be much easier of there were separate forms for aquisitions and disposals. I often can't tell which it is. If anyone has a tip to share about how to quickly ascertain whether the news is purchase or disposal, I would be grateful.

[Hallucigenia]

Just go down to section 7, "Total positions of person(s) subject to the notification obligation".

Trouble is it gets complicated - you could have someone selling shares while increasing their net exposure via CfDs for instance, do they use the "sell" or "buy" form for that?

[bruncher]

Just go down to section 7, "Total positions of person(s) subject to the notification obligation".

Yes Section 7 shows the current new position but (in this case at least) the previous position is left blank, so I have no idea if the buyer has bought in from a zero holding previously or whether they bough an amount which slightly increased their already large holding and which takes them over the line for statutory notification.

[Itsallaguess]

If anyone has a tip to share about how to quickly ascertain whether the news is purchase or disposal, I would be grateful.

Hopefully the tips already provided will at least help with that particular question, although as also stated, it gets complicated in some circumstances.

I also wanted to highlight, in case you weren't already aware, that Investegate has an 'Advanced Search' facility where it can help list historical RNS releases for a user-defined company, and which can be filtered to show Director Dealing RNS releases, which might help people to build a longer-term picture of a particular director's dealings over and above looking at a single RNS news release.

The specific Investegate URL linked below has been set by me to look for Imperial Brands (IMB) RNS news releases over the past 2 years containing the word 'Director' -




Source - https://www.investegate.co.uk/AdvancedSearch.aspx?qsArticleType=ann&qsSearchFor=S2&qsSpan=24&qsKeyWord=director&qsContains=IMB

If this is something that might benefit anyone, then I think it's worth noting that the above Investegate search process is looking in 'All Categories' of news released for a given company EPIC, but then filtering on the keyword 'director', and it's worth noting that the above 'Advanced Search' process seems to indicate that the 'All Categories' filter can actually be set to 'Director Dealings', which I think we'd fairly expect to work in a similar way, but I've never had any joy at all in using the specific 'Director Dealings' filter under the 'All Categories' drop-down (which on the above example will return no results, exposing the issue...), and so I much prefer to use the 'director' word-search filter, leaving the 'All Categories' filter looking at all RNS released to search for that particular word...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[bruncher]

The FCA is responsible for what has to be included in the RNS form. I may write to them about the format, if I can find the energy ....... dealing with FCA bureaucracy not my favourite pass-time.

[Hallucigenia]

Yes Section 7 shows the current new position but (in this case at least) the previous position is left blank, so I have no idea if the buyer has bought in from a zero holding previously or whether they bough an amount which slightly increased their already large holding and which takes them over the line for statutory notification.

If the previous holding was notifiable (ie over 5% or 3% depending on reporting requirements), then it will appear in section 7, so a blank can be taken to imply that the previous holding was non-notifiable. At least that's my understanding, although I'd welcome proof of companies leaving blanks when they *did* already have a notifiable holding.

To be honest, as someone who parses TR-1s for my RNSbot, I kind of prefer a blank, it's better than trying to parse all the creative ways that companies have of otherwise saying "not notifiable". It's all a bit of a mess, in this day and age companies should be filling in a standard webform which then outputs an RNS in a standard XML format - they can't even use the same identifiers in the HTML at the moment.