UK 18:16 Friday, 23 October 2026
Breaking news and expert analysis on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares
Yesterday I reported the story of an AIM CEO, who shared his first hand experience of the City corruption that enables the illegal forward selling of placements. Today I publish a second account, from a separate CEO, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity. Over the years, a number of companies on AIM have suffered illicit coordinated market attacks against their share prices. There has long been a suspicion of direct City complicity in these abusive assaults, involving regulated brokerage firms and market makers. Thanks to the vagaries of libel law and the City’s conspiracy of silence this is a story nearly impossible to report on, but the comments of CEO 2 serve as a warning to private investors in this utterly bent market.
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
VINES
Was this written by a woman. calls the Nomad him instead of them, must be a woman. can we guess? I’ll go with raylene whitford from sefton and yesterdays was andrew bell
Woody44
CEO 1 from yesterday’s article had some good points, although having worked in broking, I know for sure there are plenty of brokers who do not carry out the behaviour he referred to; in fact, price leaks are usually the exact opposite of what the house broker wants as it puts off investors who are already committed to the placing. Those investors who come in early are usually those with good relationships with the broker, which the broker will wish to preserve. The CEO did identify this so I find the chain of events particularly mystifying.
CEO 2 on the other hand does, without wishing to be too rude, sound like a moron. I have never heard such nonsense about getting a reputation as a troublemaker. The FCA and the LSE and all (honest) market participants would welcome an investigation into market abuse / insider trading. There is no chance on earth that going to the authorities would damage the company and lock it out of the City. This is utter garbage and if these are CEO 2’s genuine fears then I’m not surprised the company’s broker thought he was seeing things that weren’t there… he (or she) sounds like a conspiracy theorist. If the company has problems, then the CEO and the Nomad should report it. The FCA and the LSE are motivated and engaged as far as their competence and resources (not massive, admittedly) allow.
AIM is indeed a vipers nest which could do with some tighter regulation (not to the rules but just the enforcing of the rules) but so is the LSE. As for the ASX, if you really want to hear some inside information on mining stocks, go and hang out in Perth for a few nights out.
DUCK AND DIVE
The BBs are hotbeds of disinformation, misinformation and insider information. Short of shutting them all down, the only remedy would be to require people to post under their own, verified name.
Kudos to CEO2 for speaking out but we shouldn’t think that all CEOs are innocent victims. Many are accomplices, or even instigators.
Ben Turney
@Vines – Not playing a guessing game.
@Woody – Having worked in the markets, you will know the abysmal stats concerning enforcement. Neither the FCA nor the LSE/AIM Reg is remotely interested in properly policing this market. Your comment about both being limited by competence and resource has made me chuckle. Think I might steal this.
In terms of CEO 2’s story I am full aware of the background to it and who the participants are. Unfortunately it is not a story I can publish, as much as I would love to and believe it deserves airing. These people are rich thanks to their abuse and for someone on the outside to prove the market abuse is impossible.
As an aside I am aware of an unrelated case where three separate FCA authorised bodies have reported a party for clear market abuse, for which there is indisputable public evidence. Not a finger has been lifter in response.
@Duck and Dive – agreed
rob shelley
I thought yesterdays suggestion of requesting a suspension before the process begins was a superb idea. What better way to avoid manipulation. Bring it on !
Sweet Karolina
Underneath where one writes one’s post on ADVFN there is this very clear warning.
“Important Message from the Financial Conduct Authority Posting inside information that is not public knowledge, or information that is false or misleading, may constitute market abuse. This could lead to an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison. If you have any information, concerns or queries about market abuse click here”
As there have been no unlimited fines or seven years in prison for any poster, surely that is proof that no poster ever posts inside or misleading information.
I jest of course! FCA could threaten to emasculate you and sell your children into slavery, but everyone knows what complete chocolate teapots they are and would not be put off in the slightest.
Unfortunately all CEO2’s comments will do is give succour to the morons who respond to any negative post, no matter how well researched and reasoned, by accusing the poster of being part of some conspiracy to bring the company down for whatever bizarre reason.
Companies can request a suspension at any time. If a CEO is truly worried, why not suspend before they start the placing?
J P Spaghetti
“Why should those who ignore the laws be allowed to get away with it so easily?”
I guess because AIM CEOs feel they “cannot risk gaining a reputation for causing trouble”! Easy for me to say but the interviewee seems to have pretty much answered his or her own question. Not that I don’t take the point about having no or little faith in the regulatory authorities.
Perhaps the honest ones should form a union (just kidding!)…
colombo73
All are as bad as one another and in most cases the CEOs are the worst culprits. Invariably the companies seeking AIM finance are worthless and cannot secure funds elsewhere. The company announcements via the RNS feed are the most prolific and serious forms of disinformation and misinformation. The sole purpose is to entice private investors to purchase the stock whilst the CEOs give the green light to forward selling.
My sympathies in the cesspit that is the AIM lies in only one place and that is with ordinary private investors.
Woody44
Ben – thanks for your reply. It’s great that you always respond, and without the abuse that TW usually hands out. I agree that the stats for enforcement are disgraceful but I can’t emphasise enough the extent of CEO 2’s misunderstanding of the situation were he to report the suspected perpetrators to the FCA or LSE; there is no risk of his company being locked out of the City or suffering as a result of gaining a reputation for troublemaking. This suggestion is unhelpful and could discourage others from reporting. It’s not like school where you get bullied for telling tales! Please help quash this CEO’s misapprehension!
As an aside, Shareprophets often publishes pretty accurate scoops about upcoming placings. Surely someone in the information chain has been insider dealing? Perhaps that’s a good place to start investigating?