So why did the others bail? We're not talking small change here. That's what I'm wondering most about. At some point it doesn't make sense to sell and yet these bigger players, except one, are seemingly done with SGR. There has to be some rationale but ya got me (maybe it's a tax loss or margin thing, numbers. I ain't no accountant)

Given LM's data, it's hard to argue that Dundee are not accumulating. The retail investor doesn't seem to be their target, though, does it? Maybe we're just collateral damage, akin to the buffaloes and villagers in Vietnam.

I'm thinking the others bailed due to share price performance, which has been held in place with the helping hand of Dundee (and perhaps GS). I don't think it took any direct message of the "this ain't going to move until we say it will, and we ain't saying when" sort. It's just plain old shareholder fatigue, albeit on a larger scale than we're used to. With the assymetry of information inherent in the suppression assumption (it must certainly help to know to what extent, exactly, you have had control of the share price), it isn't a stretch to see why Dundee has kept adding.