Skip to content or view screen version


SHAC | 15.05.2009 11:19

Barclays Global Investors, Barclays Plc, Hartford Investment Management Company, Rice Hall James and Associates LLC and BNY Mellon have all sold their shares in Huntingdon Life Sciences.

After several months of intense global campaigning, Barclays Global Investors and Barclays Plc have sold all of their shares in LSR (Huntingdon Life Sciences).

HLS are now (once again) in breach of their listing standards on the NYSE ARCA, as their market value is now $10.9 million instead of the required $15 million, so please contact and urge them to kick LSR off once and for all.

Thanks to everyone who helped take us another step closer to the closure of HLS, and once again we prove that this campaign is unstoppable.

As well as Barclays; Hartford Investment Management Company, Rice Hall James and Associates LLC and BNY Mellon have all sold up their stakes in HLS.

HLS are £72 million in debt, their 1st quarter revenue for 2009 is down 24% from 2008

"Revenue levels are down from last year and the outlook remains uncertain" - Brain Cass (HLS' Managing Director) - 2009.

Lets make sure it stays that way and smash HLS for good!

Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) are the largest contract testing laboratory in Europe. They have about 70,000 animals on site, including rabbits, cats, hamsters, dogs, guinea-pigs, birds and monkeys. These animals are destined to suffer and die in cruel, useless experiments.

HLS will test anything for anybody. They carry out experiments which involve poisoning animals with household products, pesticides, drugs, herbicides, food colourings and additives, sweeteners and genetically modified organisms. Every three minutes an animal dies inside Huntingdon totaling 500 innocent lives every single day.

Huntingdon Life Sciences is the most exposed laboratory in the world. In recent years they have been infiltrated and exposed at least seven separate times for disgusting animal cruelty and rule breaking. Each time horrific evidence of animal abuse and staff incompetence has been uncovered, including workers punching beagle puppies in the face.

- e-mail:
- Homepage:


What actually happened.

16.05.2009 12:41

The demo's did not directly force Barclays to drop the shares, however the threat of demos did force HLS to br dropped. Prospective buyers of BGI forced Barclays to drop HLS. BlackRock is very interested in buying BGI but can ot afford to be associated with HLS as its subsidaries would be very vulnerable to demo.

So the threat of AR meant that BlackRock put pressure on Barclays to clear HLS off it's books before it will consider a takeover.

BGI made a loss on the deal however the loss is really quite insignifficant when compared to BGI's size. Managers didn't have a clue they had bought HLS shares howevr it was senoir management that decreed tey should be sold

It's fairly common knowledge in financial circles.



Hide the following 25 comments

Brilliant news

15.05.2009 12:06

HLS will be fuming!

Lynn Sawyer

O dear, O dear

15.05.2009 12:25

Poor old SHAC, simply unable to understand how the share market works.

The SHAC website is all in a state because parts of Barclays have sold some SHAC shares, SHAC of course claiims this as a success. A couple of points for you to understand SHAC -

Barclays made a profit on their SHAC shares, the share price had risen that's why they sold. That's how share trading works. Secondly if Barclays sold them that means somebody else bought them, somebody who thinks that the price will rise further.

The ultimate irony of SHAC's actions against Barclays regarding HLS was that it provided valuable publicity for HLS meaning their share price went up !

Barclays 4 SHAC Nil


Seller means buyer

15.05.2009 12:41

Well if Barclays sold them that means that somebody bought them. What we want is a situation where nobody is prepared to buy HLS shares and that clearly is not the case at the moment.

Do we know who bought them ?

Financial Times reader

Dear SHAC Watch Troll,

15.05.2009 12:45

It is you that does not understand the markets, over the years HLS share price has fell due to this kind of tactic.

And what exactly are SHAC shares?? lol


Nice one!

15.05.2009 12:47

This was a key target and they pulled.

We never give in and we always win!

A possible reason why...

15.05.2009 13:07

Barclays in talks to sell BGI


Friday, 15 May 2009

Barclays is in talks to sell its prized asset management arm, a person familiar with the matter said, after the auction of its iShares unit generated more interest in parts of the British bank.

The bank is discussing a sale of San Francisco-based Barclays Global Investors (BGI) asset management operations for about £6.5 billion, the person said, having drawn a raft of suitors for iShares, the exchange-traded funds unit that is part of BGI.

So, it doesn't want its Barclays Global "asset" to be tainted by association with HLS, that kills and maims more than 75,000 animals every year...



15.05.2009 14:16


1. Barclays didn't make a profit on their shares - they bought them back in September when the share price was around $38 a share. They sold them recently while the price was hovering around $6.15 a share. You can see this on the stock exchange website.

2. Seller doesn't mean buyer. Barclays sell their shares back to HLS.

On a stock exchange, the company says how many shares it's making available for purchase, then companies buy them from the company through the stock exchange as a "middle man". When a company decides to sell them, the shares just go back on to the exchange - in this case, it doesn't mean that Barclays have sold 400, 000 shares and HSBC or whoever have bought them - that wouldn't be a victory at all.

As their previous largest shareholder, this is a massive victory and HLS will be fuming.

To 'trolls' out there - maybe you should learn more about the subject before you decide to make a comment about it.


I seriously hope this is true

15.05.2009 14:17

Is there any proof of this? I can't find any other mention of it on the web. And the volumes of shares traded don't seem to confirm it either.

That said, I'll crack open a bevvy or two if it is.


HLS will never go away I fear

15.05.2009 14:26

Despite the efforts of shac and others the survival of HLS is now so important to the government that they simply will not allow it to fail. It's now a matter of principle and if the government decides that they will provide banking, prop up their debt and use the courts and police to protect them then in relality nothing will work on making them close.


Barclays lost about $13,000,000 due to selling their shares now

15.05.2009 14:33

If you were really following the campaign you would know they bought the shares when they were nearly $40, and they have just sold them for under $7...

And they are LSR shares, not SHAC shares - we don't have shares dumb dumb!

Not holding on to shareholders is a very bad sign for any company, and repeatedly losing large holders devalues the shares - they will have been bought by another company (or sold back to LSR or a broker) for significantly less. The lower the share price, the lower HLS' capital.

This is a massive blow to them, with the key prize still being to delist them from the stock exchange altogether.

And one final note - the more anti-SHAC (police) trolls post things about 'bad tactics' etc... the more effective it means those tactics really are. Otherwise why would the police and HLS supporters want to put people of following those tactics?

Love to Steve Pearl

Silly SHACwatch


15.05.2009 14:35

If the shares were sold back to HLS, would they be reflected in the number of shares traded in a day?

As you seem pretty clued up on this, where is the best place to look for details on individual share dealings?


Calm down calm down

15.05.2009 15:02

OK let's take this out of the realms of fantasy and wishes and review the facts.

Barclays have not lost $13 million dollars on their stock in HLS/LSR

They bought the shares using what is known as Advanced Stock Option Purchase via their ECN
This system forming an important part of a national market system gives opportunities to profit from the spread between the bid and offer price. That is especially true for investment managers that direct huge trading volume, and own a stake in an ECN or specialist firm. For example, in its individual stock-brokerage accounts, Fidelity Investments runs 29% of its undesignated orders in NYSE-listed stocks, and 37% of its undesignated market orders through the Boston Stock Exchange, where an affiliate controls a specialist post.

What this means in lay mans terms is that Barclays bought at about $7.00 a share and sold at about $13.75. In short they made a profit buy betting that the stock would rise which it did. The pressure from SHAC may or may not have been a factor in their decision but my guess is that they probably saw the profit opportunity and took it.

Was once a stock broker


15.05.2009 16:03

Would Barclays buys shares for $7 dollars when they are worth $38? And how would they sell them for $13 when the Baker proposal has effectively capped all share sales under $7.5?

Bottom line is, anyone involved in this campaign knows what an important target Barclays were, and the fact that LSR are now below their listing standards seems to be conveniently ignored by the trolls...

Next stop - ARCA delisting!


Two buyers identified

15.05.2009 16:23

The shares have been purchased by HSBC bank and Harris Financial Corp. HSBC were a previous owner but sold all their shares but have now bought some back. Harris Financial are an exisitng shareholder and have bought more.

This seems to have been the result of an expectation of new improved profit figures from HLS due out next month. Barclays by the way only sold about 30% of their shares, the rest they kept presuambly hoping to take a bigger profit when the HLS share price rises again.

Stock watcher

LSR shares not worth $13.75

15.05.2009 16:29

Is that actually a fact that Barclays sold the shares at $13.75 - who would be stupid enough to buy them for that?

Andrew Baker has offered a buy out of the company and all outstanding shares at $7.50 per share, which has basically set a value on the company, and in fact has stabalised the share price. Just prior to this offer the shares has gone down to $4.12 and still sinking. I don't think Barclays would find someone to buy them back for $13.75.

I also don't understand how they made a profit by betting that stock would rise - because it didn't.

Barclays bought the shares when they were a high price and sold when they were low. And the drop in share price itself couldn't have been predicted as it kicked off when HLS lost two big contracts each costing several million pounds. It sent the share price in to free fall, and then of course the economic down turn added to that. They continued to drop, and then after their disastrous 2008 4th quarter results came out the shares plummeted further.

Also I wonder how much attention Barclays were paying to their shares. The number of shares they actually held were minimal compared to the millions they own in other companies. If they really were buying them specifically to make some money, then they would have bought a lot more. I wonder whether they acquired the shares when purchasing some kind of package.

Not an expert


15.05.2009 16:30

15.05.2009 16:03
Would Barclays buys shares for $7 dollars when they are worth $38? And how would they sell them for $13 when the Baker proposal has effectively capped all share sales under $7.5?

Because Barclays neither bought or sold these shares in the conventional manner. The Advanced Stock Option Purchase (ASOP) gives a buyer the ability to bet on the difference between the bid and offer at a point in the future, a sort of spread bet. ASOP allows brokers and investors to make a profit on a rising or falling market if they bet right. It's how many hedge funds were set up. The NYSE doesn't regulate this type of trade and does not inlcude in value forecasts so the loss or profit is hidden and not relevant to the listing criteria.

Once a stock broker

Further information

15.05.2009 16:43

Also I wonder how much attention Barclays were paying to their shares ?

It doesn't work that way, these shares were bought and probably sold by the same person, the individual within Barclays who has been given responsibility for the account. As HLS/LSR is not that volatile a stock in the bigger world it would have been a low level junior broker just getting started but I have to say he has probably done quite well out of this trade my estimation based on the share quantity and profit is that he or she probably walked away with a commision of about $9000 today for himself.

Once a stock broker


15.05.2009 17:56

I don't think that Barclays could have made a profit from this - how could they have predicted last October that HLS would lose two key contracts and their shareprice would plummet?

As for this post:

"The shares have been purchased by HSBC bank and Harris Financial Corp. HSBC were a previous owner but sold all their shares but have now bought some back. Harris Financial are an exisitng shareholder and have bought more.

This seems to have been the result of an expectation of new improved profit figures from HLS due out next month. Barclays by the way only sold about 30% of their shares, the rest they kept presuambly hoping to take a bigger profit when the HLS share price rises again."

Where has this come from? Expectation of Improved profit figures? First quarter results are already out with Cass stating that 2009 looks uncertain. With the proposed Baker buyout it seems unilkely the share price is going up anytime soon. Barclays sold all of their shares and not directly to another buyer - hence the market value dropping significcantly.


Sorry for the caps, but in amidst all of this negativity it is important for people to see that this is a victory, and one achieved by SHAC activists. Or is it coincidence that before Barclays; Marsh, BOC, NatWest, Phillips and Drew, Charels Schwabb and hundreds of others gave HLS the boot? And to have 4 shareholders dropping them at once..?

Not convinced

What the nice man is saying is..

15.05.2009 19:49

That there is little or no connection between Barclay's Global investments taking profits from their HLS shares and the SHAC campaign outside Barclay's retail banks.

Don't, however let that stop you claiming a victory.

Double decaff latte

It was only a matter of time!

16.05.2009 00:52

Don't listen to the lies - the cops, the corporations and the state needed Barclays to "stay in the game" to hold back the movement to close HLS.

Afterall Barclays are still one of NYSE's top investors so they were probably keen to play ball with their allies, no doubt realising they were going to become a target eventually - so bought the LSR shares in spite of this.

As another person said, its irrelevant... "We never give in and we always win!"

It took a fair few months but we got there in the end.


Inside Info

16.05.2009 14:59

I have a friend who works at Barclays (Canary Wharf). Apparently the office gossip is that the protests were pissing off senior management, but the final straw was Varley's daughters house getting targeted by animal extremists. Management weren't happy as they made a loss, and they feel they gave in to intimidation.

Not saying it's 100% accurate - but that is what they are saying in the offices. I don't know if SHAC should want to take responsibility as it seems to be the criminal elements that forced this decision, but it seems the protests had some effect.

Steve McCarthy

who bought the shares (if any)

16.05.2009 17:46

does HSBC now have shares in HLS?


Wells Fargo also dumped shares

16.05.2009 18:24

LSR Shares: 147,511 - All gone!

Source -

Ongoing campaign -

Win Animal Rights (W.A.R.)
- Homepage:

Very weird

18.05.2009 15:02

The Wells Fargo shares have also been bought by HSBC who have promptly sold them to Barclays ! As well as that HSBC has bought more today. It looks as though the old boy handshake network knows something - profits up , new contract, new customer etc because it looks as though there is interest.

share watching

Share watching is lying

18.05.2009 20:55

Share Watching HSBC have not bought the shares and Barclays have not bought any from HSBC. You info is completely false.

What is happening is there is a LSR board meeting in Mexico to discuss the buyout. The market for LSR shares is currently capped at 7.50 because of the buy back offer and will not fall below 6.65 also because of this offer. The market is treating it as a Special Case scenario and some smaller investors are buying at around 6.85 in anticipation of the 7.50 buy back. No-one wants the shares. Most are gambling that the buy back will happen.

The mexican meeting will determine the future outlook for the shares. If the board rejects the buy back offer then it is likely that many who bought it for a Special Case play will dump their shares as they see the 7.50 buy back offer as being over the intrinsic value for the company.

Share watching please stop spreading mis-information.

Insider - trader