We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now


It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Registration Strip Icon for charts Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.

CODE Northcoders Group Plc

0.00 (0.0%)
30 Nov 2023 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Northcoders Group Plc LSE:CODE London Ordinary Share GB00BL97B942 ORD GBP0.01
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 125.00 0.00 08:00:04
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
120.00 130.00 125.00 125.00 125.00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Prepackaged Software 5.6M 359k 0.0448 27.90 10.01M
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
- O 0 125.00 GBX

Northcoders (CODE) Latest News

Northcoders (CODE) Discussions and Chat

Northcoders Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
25/4/202306:41Northcoders : Creating the coders of the future20
08/1/200315:40Transaction codes on Stocks: Is there a Transaction Code Directory anywhere?15

Add a New Thread

Northcoders (CODE) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type

Northcoders (CODE) Top Chat Posts

Top Posts
Posted at 30/11/2023 08:20 by Northcoders Daily Update
Northcoders Group Plc is listed in the Prepackaged Software sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker CODE. The last closing price for Northcoders was 125p.
Northcoders currently has 8,011,469 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Northcoders is £10,014,336.
Northcoders has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of 27.90.
This morning CODE shares opened at 125p
Posted at 04/2/2022 10:18 by fillipe
CODE - flying high today!

Posted at 31/1/2022 09:54 by fillipe
Tole, thank you for the above link and I certainly agree with their target price.

However, I don't understand the comment in very final part of their note with the mention of " before they get anywhere close to their Admission price."

I would be grateful for any view on that mention, thanks.

Posted at 29/1/2022 08:21 by tole
Posted at 11/11/2021 09:44 by 74tom
Nice one filipe, I think it has to go down as the most under the radar IPO of 2021. As you say the ticker is fantastic and they have a distinctive name, both really important fundamentals.

I just can't believe how tight the float is now, it'll be a struggle for a new buyer to get 5000 shares nevermind a more significant position... And with the market cap at just £15.5m, who's going to be selling?

When I bought in I used Wey Eduction as a guide to what Northcoders could be valued at a few years down the line. They were acquired by Inspired Eduction for £70.4m in April 21 ;

Some extracts from that RNS;

"Wey Education employed 141 employees on average in the year ended 31 August 2020, had annual turnover of £8.4 million and made a profit before tax of £0.5 million."

"At the time of the trading update, being 13 January 2021, the market expectations the Wey Education Board were referring to were those of the forecasts included in the equity research note published by WH Ireland on 10 November 2020 ("Equity Research Note"). In this research note, the equity analyst forecasted for the year ended 31 August 2021 adjusted profit before tax of £1.3 million."

If Wey went for £70.4m then surely CODE looks very cheap at it's current level, particularly as we are already profitable... a future expansion with sites in Birmingham, Newcastle, Sheffield & Nottingham to add to those in Manchester & Leeds should boost revenue further. No reason to think that won't be followed by Liverpool, Edinburgh, Glasgow etc etc.

Exciting times ahead!
Posted at 09/11/2021 11:28 by fillipe
I'm delighted to have bought CODE in July of this year.

Great to see the "CODE" ticker was got by Northcoders ....a stroke of genius there.
Similarly the "Northcoders" title ... another tick-up for the geographical North!

Shares were freely available to buy at the time and I should have taken more last July.
This one's a long term hold for me as I see the future will bear much success for the business and its shareholders.

Posted at 25/10/2021 08:25 by 74tom
Northcoders Group plc, an independent provider of training programmes for software coding, is delighted to announce its proposed admission to trading on AIM (the "Admission") and placing and subscription, conditional on Admission (the "Fundraising"), of 1,944,444 new ordinary shares of one penny each ("Ordinary Shares"), at a price of 180 pence per share (the "Placing Price").

The Fundraising will raise a total of £3.5 million (before expenses). WH Ireland Limited ("WH Ireland") and Peterhouse Capital Limited ("Peterhouse") have acted as joint placing agents. WH Ireland is acting as Nominated Advisor and Broker to the Company.

Admission and commencement of dealings on AIM are expected to take place at 8 a.m. on 27 July 2021, under the ticker CODE. Based on the Placing Price, the market capitalisation of the Company will be £12.5 million on Admission. On Admission, the Company will have 6,944,445 Ordinary Shares in issue and a free float of approximately 29.6 per cent.

Admission Document :

Significant Shareholders (From admission doc & website)

Christopher David Hill 1,523,668 21.94%
David Geraint Llewellyn 1,239,444 17.8%
Amul Batra 969,000 13.95%
Amati Global Investors 1,000,000 14.4%
Stephen Nigel Hill 519,444 7.5%
Anil Batra 500,000 7.2%
Vela Technologies plc 416,667 6.0%
Tom St John Harrison Walton 296,322 4.27%
Jude Nottingham 50,000 0.7%
Janet Hill 41,667 0.6%
Sandra ("Sandy") Lindsay 5,000 0.1%

Total Shares held by above 11 shareholders : 6,561,211

Total Shares in issue : 6,944,445

Estimated remaining float : ~383,234 5.51%

Website :

Investor Site :
Posted at 08/1/2003 15:05 by petercoc
anyone recognise this?

London Stock Exchange Transaction Codes

F Automated Input Facility
A Automatic Trade (Volume. Last. High. Low)
B Broker to Broker (Volume. Last)
C Bargain Condition (Volume. Last)
Y Contra Trade
D Delayed Trade (Volume. Last. High. Low)
K Block Trade (Volume. Last)
L Late Trade
'c' Late Trade Correction
M Market Maker to Market Maker
N Non- Protected Portfolio
'n' Not to Mark
'r' Non Risk Trade (Volume. Last)
P Protected Portfolio (Volume. Last)

'p' Protection is Applied (Volume. Last)
Z Worked Principal Portfolio Notification
0 Overnight Trade
X Cross at Same Time
W Worked Principle Trade
'w' Worked Principle Notification
Q Volume Weighted Average Price (Volume. Last)
V Converted Price (Volume. Last)
's' Test Security
'k' Single Protected Transaction (Volume. Last)
S Stockswap
't' Risk Trade (Volume. Last)
'o' Result of Options (Volume)
R Riskless Principle at Different Prices
Posted at 23/9/2002 21:54 by zzaxx99
There may well be codes on the trades transmitted into the LSE (and in fact must be, thinking about it), but on the trades published by the LSE (which is what we see on the Trades list), I'm 99.99999% convinced that the broker / MM are not identified.

I believe that the published transaction code forms a unique key into a transactional record within the LSE, but that the details of the record to which that key relates, are not released outside the LSE. In fact, the LSE guarantees anonymity of the counterparties, so (although some educated guessing can take place), the code cannot have identity encoded within in.

Before that thread appeared on the PBB, I'd done a bit of peering at trade reports myself - my conclusion then was that, on stocks with few MMs there were too many different codes - on stocks with many MMs there were not enough codes - this was borne out by the discussion excerpted above.
Posted at 23/9/2002 16:22 by marquis
zzaxx99 - 23 Sep'02 - 13:09 - 5 of 8

May I add thanks to your time and effort.

I copy the page you suggested;

"With effect from Thursday 7 February 2002, Robert W Baird Limited ("Robert W Baird" or "the firm") will trade some of its agency and principal business through the following new additional set of trading codes:

Firm Code: 302
CREST Code: 601

Robert W Baird will continue to act in a principal and agency capacity and as a market maker in UK equities. The firm continues to have access to the SETS order book, the International Order Book and is a registered participant in the International Retail Service with the ability to enter orders.

The firm has a Model A settlement agreement with Pershing Limited and for its agency business, a Model B settlement agreement with Pershing Securities Limited.

Details are as follows with changes in bold:

Robert W Baird Limited
Mint House
77 Mansell Street
E1 8HF

020 7488 1212 (General)

020 7481 3911

Additional Model B - agency/principal-SETS-SEAQ-IRS-SEATS-IOB

Firm Code:


SEAQ Code:

BIC Code:

Model B - agency/principal-SETS-SEAQ-IRS-SEATS-IOB

Firm Code:


SEAQ Code:

BIC Code:

Model A - principal-Market Making

Firm Code:


SEAQ Code:

BIC Code:

Do these codes(Firm, Crest, Seaq and BIC) not translate to identifying which stock broker is trading in the transaction code list? From your comments you suggest not.

In answer to my original question;
"Transaction codes on Stocks: Is there a Transaction Code Directory anywhere?"

I take it that you are suggesting there is not.
Posted at 23/9/2002 12:09 by zzaxx99
If you have access to the PBB, have a look at - which goes into this in extensive depth. If you don't have access, here are some relevant highlights:Here's some info - well lots actually, on individual Marker Makers and their codes, Crest, Firm Code, SEAQ, BIC Code. Doesn't seem to be a connection with any of those codes and the individual trade codes. In fact the trade code only needs to be a unique code that can be cross-referenced with another set of records containing all the necessary information - no need for it to be everyone has said sadly the year number at the end is actually the most useful piece of information.The first digit or letter identifies a sequence of numbers. There appear to be 16 sequences from which numbers are allocated (perhaps there are 16 servers receiving trades from the market). The digits after the first digit (apart from the last two which are the year) form the sequence number, again using both letters and digits. If you take all the trades with codes beginning with a given digit or letter, you will see that the sequence number increments with each successive trade, taken across the whole market chronologically. Not very useful.There are often batches of trades in which the variable elements are minimal; only one character differing in each ten-character set.Eg: Go the top page of today's trades (25 June) in BT.A and look at AT trades numbered 2069-2072 timed at 16:27:30.The first character is from the usual 16; the letters A-F and numbers 0-9 (randomly selected server? but in this case not changing). And the last two as usual are the year 02.Only the last of the middle seven characters differs..Thus:2072.... 901XUK3Q022071.... 901XUK3O022070.... 901XUK3M022069.... 901XUK3K02Uniqueness attributable to only one alphabetic character? What does that tell us?;O)PS: If I was able to pick that out of the first page I looked at, I presume there must be millions of such examples out there.PPS: If these 'unique transaction identifiers' involve only 36 choices of character (26 letters and 10 numbers) in each of seven positions, I presume they are only used to distinguish between trades within a set period - and can be reused the next day, next week, next month, whatever. In which case does something within the code identify the time period in which it was used? (it might be a sequential rolling stream within one column - but the sequence need not be a standard numeric one). There aren't enough possible combinations to use for individual trades ad infinitum.... When they get to the end of the odd letters they then run through the odd numbers, then the even letters/numbers, and repeat. But the trades listings are full of such batches with only one character differing. Just going back one page on BT.A (and that's enough for me now thanks..) look at 2001-2003, 2042-2045 (where the sequence is 5,7,9,B) and 2059-2061. Always using alternate sequence. Giving no more than 36 differs before some other column needs to change. Here are a nice set of trade codes in sequence for TSCO today going up in odd twos.A01VAFHF02A01VAFHD02A01VAFHB02A01VAFH902A01VAFH702A01VAFH502 and another4011EYU5024011EYU3024011EYU1024011EYTZ02 showing Z going to 1 and the T clocking up to UThis looks pretty much like a sequence number and not a code. If you were thinking of designing a system to uniquely identify trades then I think you would come to the conclusion that the sequences should have no meaning of their own. They should only have a meaning when looked up on the LSE server. I can't believe that the designers of the computer system would have embeded anything in the code itself. There is no need to do this. If the number is mearly a look up reference then it makes the system more flexible. The data items being looked up via the sequence number can then be as rich in meaning as is needed and can me modified and added to later with the minimum of alteration. I think this is a dead end. How the different sequences are chosen is more of a problem. It may be that it changes after a certain number of trades on the LSE or it may be pseudo random. Re: when the numbers recycle - does anyone know how any trades there are on the LSE in a given period (day/month/year) - not the volume traded, but the number of discrete trades.If the number sequence uses only the 7 digits, then there are 36^7 combinations, or 78,364,164,096 different trades that can be uniquely identified before the codes repeat.Give that the last 2 digits represent the year, ISTM that this is likely to represet a year's worth of trades - but can anyone confirm that this volume is reasonable?Thinking about it, it should be possible to work this out. There are something like 3500 stocks; VOD does maybe 7000 trades per day. At most then, there's 3500 x 7000 trades per day (a wild exagerration, as most stocks won't do anyting like VOD's trading, but let's see how the numbers come out) - that's 24,500,000 individual trades per day. That allows for 3,198 days of 24.5m trades per day - comfortably 10 times more than the most wildly overstated number of trades likely in a year.Re: the alternate letters issue raised earlier - I don't think there is anything terrible significant about this - I suspect that there were a rapid spate of BT trades that were assigned nearly-contiguous numbers; but across the market aas a whole, there were trades happening at the same time that got assigned numbers in between. Pretty coincidental that that sequence would all step in 2s rather than by a random interval, but it was only a single sample of trades, and is not impossible.For example, if you look at these trades from VOD for today:Num.CodePriceSizeTypeCTBidOffer Time 5829F01Y18ET0286.53446AT 86.2586.5 16:20:103,446 242,250,534 224,014,888 27,383,808 5828D022D3C50286.2510381AT 86.2586.5 16:20:09 10,381 242,247,088 224,014,888 27,383,808 58275027FA5C0286.510206AT 86.2586.5 16:20:0610,206 242,247,088 224,004,507 27,383,808 5826102190GN0285.524624O L86.2586.5 16:01:20 4,624 242,236,882 224,004,507 27,383,808 58255027FA510286.525000AT 86.2586.5 16:19:5625,000 242,236,882 224,004,507 27,379,184 5824601ZIDE70286.527703AT 86.2586.5 16:19:4827,703 242,211,882 224,004,507 27,379,184If you look at trades 5825 & 5827 you'll see that the last (pre-year) digit increments from 1 to C - a jump of 11 – which isn’t terribly obvious significant!I don't think the use of alternate numbers is for the coincidental reason you suggest - it is consistent, even when rolling over from numbers to letters to numbers within a run.Anyway, between us, I think we've demolished the code idea. Pity. I like unravelling codesI have found a use for the sequences though. If you have a stock where a trade is in the undefined column rather than an obvious buy or sell then it is possible to see sometimes (and I stress sometimes) the real sequence and it's buy/sell status. You need to look at a couple of heavily traded stocks such as TSCO, VOD etc. Looking at a few of these will tell you the actual time sequence the trade was reported at. It doesn't always work, because the trade may have been notified late already. However I have used it to work out when some trades were done. It works particilarly well on trades done at the start of day and delayed. It works because you know it cannot have startd before a certain time in this case. I have found trades at 10:00 that were allocated a sequence number at around 8:00 and looked like a buy before I checked. This is interesting on lightly traded stocks.No significance to italicisation above, just used to identify different messages. Hope that clears it all up!
Northcoders share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange

Your Recent History

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 |