Great news everyone! With the departure of Wells Fargo as a top institutional investor and Bank of New York Mellon selling most of their shares, Win Animal Rights can finally take a break. Nah, just joking! WAR returned to the streets to the homes of those responsible for financing the torture and death of thousands of innocent creatures. The wicked do not rest and neither does WAR. While activists would have preferred better weather conditions, they knew someone needed to be out there speaking for the animals.

Demo #1: Robert Kelly, Chairman and CEO of Bank of New York Mellon

WAR once again stopped by the home of Robert Kelly, Chairman and CEO of the Bank of New York Mellon. While BONY is no longer one of Huntingdon Life Sciences' top 5 institutional investors, they still hold 26,634 shares. Pressure will continue until they sell all of their shares. This campaign also has a good memory and recalls the fact that BONY was a target in the early years of the campaign. In 2001, Pirates for Animal Liberation sunk the yacht of a BONY executive. Seems like they haven’t learned a thing!
For details see:  http://www.skeptictank.org/ecowar/gen01152.htm

 http://www.war-online.org/DemoReport02-22-09.htm

HLS' (LSR) share price is the lowest it has been in over 4 1/2 years - which shows that the campaign carries on in strength despite the round up and imprisonment of SHAC activists.

you don't think that could be the credit crunch?

your right mate its certainly helped but the pressure from the campaign has forced many companys to sell out and has created negative press and people are put off investing because of all the protests that you become subject to if you do invest. its a mix of both. also the last conference call regarding their shares was listened in to and we know that they lost two large contracts due to the shac campaign, this news effected their shreprice aswell.

Was what appeared to be a flashmob outside Waterloo station in fact a SHAC demo, at about 7.15pm. Critical Mass was passing at the time.

Wells Fargo, Bank of New York,and other institutional investors had dumped so many shares of puppy-killing Huntingdon Life Sciences that they have slipped below the "20% of stock held by institutions" requirement for continued listing by NYSE-ARCA.

Let's see if the NYSE will respond by enforcing their own regulations...

(transcript)

Huntingdon Life Sciences is a contract animal testing laboratory. Seven undercover investigations have caught workers there punching beagle puppies in the face, dissecting live monkeys without painkillerrs, and worse.

Stockholders in Huntingdon "Life"Sciences have divested themselves of an estimated 15% of all shares in response to an overwhelming campaign of protest and direct action.

As a result, the percentage of LSR stock held by institutions fell from 20.1% to 17.7%, leaving them below the minimum listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange, a major target in the campaign to close down HLS.

Wells Fargo, who were one of LSR's top five institutional investors has sold all their 147,511 shares and the Bank of New York Mellon, previously third largest investor, sold most of their LSR stock dumping 149,157 shares. BNY-Mellon now has only 26,634 remaining of the original 175,791 shares, with Turner Investment Partners Inc also selling their 56,880 stock.

This announcement came one day before activsts began a week of protests and direct action striking at Huntingdon Life Sciences investors and customers.

HLS have been suffering from a serious lack of investment since December 2007, with over a dozen corporations selling all their shares in LSR. Their share price as of February 25th is $5.78, the lowest since their high of nearly $40 in September 2008. With an unstable share price, activists continue to increase the pressure against HLS shareholders, particularly largest investor Barclays.

here's how...

(Next item on playlist: repeat coverage of Valentine's Day HLS home demos)
 http://dc.indymedia.org/feature/display/131694/index.php

Price has risen since to $7.11

I think this article is assuming that people are selling shares for ethical reasons rather than market forces which looks like an incorrect conclusion