TLG Discussion 2022

[Semmel]

Thanks Semmel, I hope your foray over to BRN wasn’t too traumatic! We’re so used to trolls that anyone new is looked on with great suspicion. Come back!!

Not traumatic but I will stick to the TLG side of things. I don't think BRN has much chance of survival until they address the lack of cash flow. No matter what announcements on technology are made. The forum doesn't want to hear that though, so I stay away.

I prefer TLG, where at least I can respectfully disagree with the 'go fever' mentality. It's not all golden in talga land due to the permit situation and the still lacking financing and offtakes, but I am very confident that this will fall into place once the appeals are shredded. The share price will follow the revenue stream. We will have to go through one more CR probably, but that's about it.

 

[Semmel]

Here is a tracer for the absolute incompetency on organizations predicting the need for stationary storage, i.e. LFP batteries. If you look for it online, you will find many versions of this plot, but this one drives it home the best:

Look at it. The data of the IEA WEO is from 2021. With the expansion of PV, i.e. Solar, the need for stationary storage goes in lock step. Think of Tony Seba and his super power. It looks like Tony will turn out to be correct with his predictions. Look at this plot and then look at it again. This is how analysts understand and predict the PV market. And this data is used to predict the stationary storage market. Do you notice the GINORMOUS difference between prediction and reality? And that is one of the reasons why all these predictions of battery demand fall short. Solar (and Wind) is so much easier, cheaper, and cleaner than any other form of power generation. Its not even close. And economics always wins.

Message to Talga: Please... please please please make the Niska expansion as large as the resource will let it and capture that market in Europe. Own that market! We need vast amounts of batteries.

 

[DAH]

I'm pretty sure I read on the Supreme Court site that to get an extension all you need to do is apply via one of the Clerks of the Court. This kind of stuff does not go to a experienced court member just a relatively junior clerk. A bit of a rubber stamp procedure

Literally a face to face conversation with form filling over the counter

Cheers @WheresTheMonkey

I hope what you might have read is wrong as that's pretty poor IMO given the bigger picture. Although if it were to be the case anywhere in the world, Sweden's the place right. It's kinda ironic as they're so fair they're bordering on unfair. I feel like TLG would get on the front foot with this as its a pretty poor excuse for an extension given they've had years to get sorted.

@Monkeymandan - I think an ANN would definitely be needed for such an extension.

I can only assume that other than the legends on here who find such great Intel and share it (like this lawyer update on social media), perhaps no-one else knows and surely the majority of shares are not being traded based on this knowledge. How do we even know it's correct as no TLG update and I can't see it from the court site.

Anyway, this strange caper aside I'm excited for this permits chapter to be nearing an end

 

[cosors]

If I understand it correctly that is exactly the case, isn't it? So they have to submit two justifications against this national interest.

"If your appeal concerns a decision by a court of appeal not to grant leave to appeal, you need to state both why the court of appeal should have granted leave to appeal and why the Supreme Court should grant leave to appeal."
https://www.domstol.se/hogsta-domstolen/om-handlaggningen/overklaga-och-begar-provningstillstand/#:~:text=F%C3%B6r%20att%20H%C3%B6gsta%20domstolen%20ska,dessa%20f%C3%A5r%20drygt%20100%20pr%C3%B6vningstillst%C3%A5nd.

Just out of boredom.

 

[Semmel]

If I understand it correctly, that is exactly the case, isn't it? So they have to submit two justifications against this national interest.

That will cost them double legal fees!

 

[cosors]

That will cost them double legal fees!

1.) We've found mushrooms.
2.) We've found mushrooms.

Dear court,

you gave us the needed time. Thanks for that! We are already searching for more mushrooms.
Above are our two reasons. Please give us right and stop this colonialism and pollution.

Regards

mushroom lover

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

Cheers @WheresTheMonkey

I hope what you might have read is wrong as that's pretty poor IMO given the bigger picture.

Unfortunately I read it correctly.....

Questions & answers

Here are some answers to frequently asked questions about ongoing cases at the Supreme Court.

www.domstol.se

How do I request more time?

Contact the court in writing or by telephone. Court clerks, drafting law clerks
and judge referees can grant extensions. Ultimately, extension requests can
be presented to a justice of the supreme court.

 

[brewm0re]

Unfortunately I read it correctly.....

Questions & answers

Here are some answers to frequently asked questions about ongoing cases at the Supreme Court.

www.domstol.se

How do I request more time?

Contact the court in writing or by telephone. Court clerks, drafting law clerks
and judge referees can grant extensions. Ultimately, extension requests can
be presented to a justice of the supreme court.

 

[DAH]

Unfortunately I read it correctly.....

Questions & answers

Here are some answers to frequently asked questions about ongoing cases at the Supreme Court.

www.domstol.se

How do I request more time?

Contact the court in writing or by telephone. Court clerks, drafting law clerks
and judge referees can grant extensions. Ultimately, extension requests can
be presented to a justice of the supreme court.

Gees! Here's hoping the CRMA captures these appeals as part of the "process" and therefore its needs to be all wrapped up within 24 months.

 

[cosors]

 

[Semmel]

View attachment 46388

Looks like a data error, we had that a few times before already

 

[cosors]

Looks like a data error, we had that a few times before already

There is no data error. Maybe it was unloaded and will be refreshed like BRN often or it follows the trend like others and it is simply an unloading.
What makes you think there is a data error? Are analysis algos getting it wrong lately?
Ok, analysis algos are thinking this up for the first time as far as we know.
Of course, it can start up again. But the drop can not invent even the crudest mathematics.
Since the ASX is so fair and gives those who pay the ASX all data earlier than anyone else we will wait a few days to see if it was a miscalculation of algos.)

Talga's SP jumps by 10%. No sorry, was a data terror.

___
An oscilloscope shows wrong, I try to imagine it.

 

[Semmel]

View attachment 46388

And the shorts are back where they were 2 days ago. Looks like a data error to me.

 

[cosors]

Ok, I am open minded and therefore imagine three scenarios:
1.) The north bridge of the 20a old win xp personal computer was overloaded/overheated (responsible for error correction back than).
2.) It was some kind of transmission and briefly not in the pool.
3.) It was an offload.

With variant one I can imagine a calculation error and the ASX should urgently invest. I have also seen such spikes on others and my imagination has so far not allowed me to think of miscalculations. But who knows. A theory is not wrong until it is disproved, which applies to all three variants.
IMHO

 

[curiousmagpie]

Ok, I am open minded and therefore imagine three scenarios:
1.) The north bridge of the 20a old win xp personal computer was overloaded/overheated (responsible for error correction back than).
2.) It was some kind of transmission and briefly not in the pool.
3.) It was an offload.

With variant one I can imagine a calculation error and the ASX should urgently invest. I have also seen such spikes on others and my imagination has so far not allowed me to think of miscalculations. But who knows. A theory is not wrong until it is disproved, which applies to all three variants.
IMHO

The volume should have been the clearest indicator that it was a data error. A drop of 1% in shorts in a single day would be 3.6m shares, so that happening on a day where 600k shares were traded doesn’t add up. This sort of error Seems to happen periodically with shortman

 

[cosors]

The volume should have been the clearest indicator that it was a data error. A drop of 1% in shorts in a single day would be 3.6m shares, so that happening on a day where 600k shares were traded doesn’t add up. This sort of error Seems to happen periodically with shortman

I don't believe in such miscalculations. Those days with overheated north bridges are long gone.
They just weren't there to count for a short time. Nothing unusual I think. I am not an IT admin at the ASX as aren't you. So any theory is right or not wrong until disproved.
The last thing I believe is that an algo miscounts. There are other reasons for these not unusual spikes of which I am sure. And we will never know the reasons unless we meet one of the admins.
Imagine your theory and calculation errors in labs. Oops, miscalculated. Then I guess I'll have to run a correction round before I post the result.
But it doesn't matter what you or I believe in. For me it is only maximally improbable and I believe in it like in the fact that a CPU develops fantasy.

 

[cosors]

Ok, as mentioned I'm open for thoughts. Can someone explain to me how this calculation error happened in practice and what exactly happened technically so that the charting system got it wrong and it was a data error?
Maybe the addition of why this does not happen in the SP chart will help my with my question.
It is still difficult for me to imagine how a charting algo could produce such data errors.)
It seems more likely to me that the shorts were not in sight at the moment of the investigation. For whatever reason. So it is easier for me to imagine that the software is working correctly and representing what it was set to.
So the further question for me would be how these spikes occur and that's aside from a simplistic answer, it's a data error, server made a mistake, was different.

I think that this block of shorts at the moment was not 'visible' for the software.

 

[Semmel]

I dont know the details either, but there are so many ways it can go wrong. Just a few possibilities:
* I bet there is some element of manual intervention in there. Someone misplaced a decimal point.
* Or the data is generated by scraping the info off of some other data stream and the interface changed without adapting it on the short collection side.
* Or you have some special circumstance that will throw in a wrench in the program, maybe on a completely unrelated position but it causes the computation to be interrupted and restarted, which then forgets part of it or does the computation wrong.
* Or some bug that only happens once per full moon caused a miscalculation.

I mean, the possibilities are endless. If the SW is simple, ok, fat chance of getting it wrong. But my bet is, its a giant steaming pile of shit that accidentally work most of the time and this is one of the times where it doesnt. If you have ever seen software from the inside, there is practically no way all of it always works. There is always something going wrong at some point for some input.

 

[Proga]

Ok, as mentioned I'm open for thoughts. Can someone explain to me how this calculation error happened in practice and what exactly happened technically so that the charting system got it wrong and it was a data error?
Maybe the addition of why this does not happen in the SP chart will help my with my question.
It is still difficult for me to imagine how a charting algo could produce such data errors.)
It seems more likely to me that the shorts were not in sight at the moment of the investigation. For whatever reason. So it is easier for me to imagine that the software is working correctly and representing what it was set to.
So the further question for me would be how these spikes occur and that's aside from a simplistic answer, it's a data error, server made a mistake, was different.

I think that this block of shorts at the moment was not 'visible' for the software.

It's a random file loading error which doesn't affect every stock when it happens. It's been going on for years and quite common. If you look up a few different companies in shortman, you'll see the same thing happen to every stock at least once in a 12 month period. Obviously, the greater the percentage being shorted, the deeper the V. Any stock under 2% has little v's which most people don't pay much attention to.

I read a post on HC about 5 years ago explaining in detail how it happens. I didn't understand much of it and didn't really need to. Just that it happens and know to wait another 24hrs. As Semmel explained, the give away is going back and looking at the volume for the day.

 

[cosors]

It's a random file loading error which doesn't affect every stock when it happens. It's been going on for years and quite common. If you look up a few different companies in shortman, you'll see the same thing happen to every stock at least once in a 12 month period. Obviously, the greater the percentage being shorted, the deeper the V. Any stock under 2% has little v's which most people don't pay much attention to.

I read a post on HC about 5 years ago explaining in detail how it happens. I didn't understand much of it and didn't really need to. Just that it happens and know to wait another 24hrs. As Semmel explained, the give away is going back and looking at the volume for the day.

Just as I said, it has a reason and is not just a calculation error - IMO. I can't imagine that. You're right it happens here and there. But everything has a reason. I suspect quite simply that the package in question is not visible to the algos at the time of the survey. Maybe some kind of transmission. But it doesn't matter either.
Wasn't the ASX going to switch to a new system then pulled back and burned ~250M in this process?

____
Perhaps we should have first defined what we mean by errors in IT.