Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Why would you presume that?
<<<battin' a thousand>>>
Perhaps in your very own fantasy league, hasher..... but from what I've seen of your acumen to date, you're little more than just another 'Ofer' in my book.
Perhaps a threat to break above the Mendoza line on your best daze....
<<<Great site, generated from data provided by the SEC>>>
Hi Janice... and I presume, aided and abetted by the DTCC.
Si?
battin' a thousand so far when I challange the NSS freaks on any particular scam site, but dont let that stop you from living in a fantasy world. Dont put up the kids college fund waiting for the next MOASS.
Great site, generated from data provided by the SEC. Look up your favorite stock, and chances are you'll find nothing to get excited about.
<<<Goes to show that whack job websites can be dangerous on different levels, it seems>>>
Yeah, like you blissfully transparent souls have really got it all figured out! LOL!
http://failurestodeliver.com/default2.aspx
Goes to show that whack job websites can be dangerous on different levels, it seems
I've never read the web site. I've read elsewhere if you just ping their web site, they write your name down on a slip of paper.
Kind of like The Out of Towners.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066193/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Out-of-Towners_(1970_film)
Much of the film's humor is derived from the interaction between George, the manic husband desperately collecting the names of everyone he encounters with plans to sue every last one of them, and Gwen, the mousy wife who accepts each new indignation with quiet resignation.
just looking at who supports this fairy tale speaks volumes.
That's not fair. Deep Rapture has lots of iHubbers that read Judy's content, apparently.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/msgsearch.aspx?SearchStr=deepcapture.com
I put deep capture on the same shelf as buyins.net,.. instruments that cater to the NSS freaks. The whole NSS hysteria that shows up everytime the insiders unload a ton of stock and then is sanctioned by these two bodies for whatever gain, never comes to reality.
Its really either a hoax or a farce IMO, but as long as y'all are making money, thats great. What better revenue source than the NSS disciples!! Nice play.
Deepcapture.com is primarily a venue for the publication of investigative work by myself and two other contributors. So, when I refer to "posts" I'm referring to those published by the three of us. Of the 100+ posts made to deepcapture.com in the past two years, none mentions Janice Shell.
Around a year ago, we installed a forum to cut down on off-topic comment threads (encouraging people to take their unrelated discussions there). As Ms. Shell pointed out, there are several forum posts related to her. But these -- as with all forum posts -- have nothing to do with the main site. In other words, she and I were talking about different things.
While we neither endorse nor control content on the deepcapture.com forum, I still refuse to allow it to be a venue for libelous attacks, and so I've invited Ms. Shell to send me any examples of content she feels meets the standard of defamation, and they will be reviewed and removed, if needed.
There's a lot of content on DeepCapture.com, but you're not mentioned in any post...not once
How is a post, posted by a poster, on your board, not considered a post.
We've read all this junk before.
The Simple, Literal Explanation
The “St. Smallcap” example conveyed the dynamics of the manipulation, but it was only a metaphor. This blog will provide an explanation whose truth is more literal.
You and I enter a stock trade. You buy a share of stock from me. You hand over your money, and I hand over the share of stock. That is called, “settlement.”
It may surprise you to learn that there are loopholes in our nation’s regulations that permit some people, when it comes time to settle, to hand over nothing but an IOU. By using one of these loopholes, when the time comes for settlement I can take your money but say, “I’m not delivering you any stock. I’m just giving you an IOU for a share of stock that I will deliver later.”
There are reasons these loopholes came into existence. If someone made a mistake by signing the wrong line on a form, for example, or mistakenly sold more shares than he really had, one would not want the entire system to vapor-lock as the mistake was rectified. So the system has been designed so that the gears do not get hung up on minor mistakes. The general idea is that, if someone sells shares it turns out he cannot deliver, he can create these IOU’s and send them on as though they were real shares, giving himself time to clean up whatever error he is experiencing, and sending the real shares a couple days later.
There is no system in place to alert you to the fact that you sent me your money and received nothing but an IOU. The system treats these IOU’s just as though they were real shares. Your brokerage statement will say that you got shares, even though I never sent anything but an IOU. You can sell them, and that IOU will pass on through the system into someone else’s account.
The problem is, suppose I (having mastered these loopholes) start using the system’s “forgiveness” strategically? Suppose I find a company that is likely to need capital to expand, or simply survive, in the near future? They plan on raising that capital by issuing shares of stock to the public (there is no crime in that: for example, lots of young pharmaceutical companies sip at the capital markets for years as they get going). Imagine that I target one of them, and deliberately go out selling that company’s shares into the marketplace, yet instead of delivering stock, I deliver nothing but IOU’s. I flood the market with them, always standing ready to sell more than anyone wants to buy. My IOU’s are anything but temporary: they drift around in the market for weeks, months, and eventually years. If anyone gets mad and tells me that I have to deliver real shares against one of the IOU’s I sold, I say, “Sure, I’ll deliver shares against that IOU,” but what I deliver is … just another IOU. Eventually I flood the market with so many IOU’s that people end up reselling them, and they go and on until there are more share-IOU’s bouncing around than there are actual shares.
What will the effect be on the price of those shares? If I have chosen a company like, for example, IBM, the effect will be negligible (just as in the example of the preceding blog, if the hedge funds brought their money machines to Paris and printed off 100 million “temporary” Euros to spend around France and Germany, it would not cause any real harm before they bought them all back as they departed).
But remember how the hedge fund managers destroyed the economy of St. Smallcap, so that the “temporary” currency they had issued could be paid off in the end for next-to-nothing? Similarly, if instead of choosing IBM I choose a tiny company, and I generate more IOU’s than there are shares of stock in the company, then the market in those shares will crack just as surely as $100 million of fake currency would crack the tiny island economy of St. Smallcap. Once cracked, the stock becomes next-to-worthless. And if I manage to issue enough IOU’s in my target company’s stock that it cracks and becomes near-worthless, they become barely an obligation at all. Who cares about millions of IOU’s, if those IOU’s are for something with infinitesimal value?
I walk away with my winnings. The company, however, is in a fix: they planned on issuing stock to raise capital, but now their stock price has been destroyed through my manipulations, and they cannot raise capital. Maybe they run out of funds and disappear, or maybe they go into hibernation mode in order to nurse what capital they have. In either case, society is deprived of the output and the jobs that would have existed were it not for my villainy.
It may be hard to believe, but such loopholes really do exist (I will be explaining several of them in subsequent blogs). In reality, however, neither you (if you are like most Americans) nor I can actually use them. Only large hedge funds and broker-dealers can access these loopholes to create IOU’s (just as, in the story of St. Smallcap, only hedge funds were allowed to own the currency machines with which to print off that “temporary” currency). As we will see in more detail, these hedge funds and broker-dealers have learned how to manipulate these loopholes in the stock settlement system so as to flood the market with over a billion IOU’s (maybe many billion) in hundreds of companies. In doing so, they have disrupted the market for shares of companies that are researching cures for cancer and other illnesses, figuring out how to make blood substitutes to treat cases of acute blood loss, and building mine-resistant vehicles for troops in Iraq. Hundreds of such corporate “St. Smallcaps” have been damaged or destroyed. Thus, cancer patients are being deprived of treatments, accident victims are dying of acute blood loss, and soldiers in Iraq are dying from IED’s, so that some hedge fund ass-clowns can drive new Ferraris.
It really is that simple.
I have explained the issue through metaphor (“St. Smallcap”), and now, provided this literal explanation. I will continue with more detailed explanations and citations for further reading for those who wish to gain a more thorough understanding of the workings of the US stock settlement system and precisely how loopholes permeate it. The general reader, however, may feel satisfied with the account thus far and, feeling no need to learn intricacies of stock settlement, may wish to move on to subsequent chapters, where I discuss in greater detail the harms being done to society, who is doing it, and who has taken part in the cover-up.
BMFL
next week(s) is here
The Simple, Metaphorical Explanation
Posted on 20 January 2008
When you or I travel to another country, the first thing we do when we land is change some US dollars into the local currency. Perhaps you change enough to get a cab to the hotel, go out and buy a meal, etc. For the duration of your stay you keep changing your dollars into the local currency to get around. Then when you are ready to leave, you take whatever you have left and you convert it back into dollars, or spend it, or give it away, and board the plane back to the United States.
Yet imagine that there are some travelers to whom special privilege is granted. When they go to a foreign country, they are allowed to take a small machine that prints out the local currency. If they are in Paris, it prints out Euros. If they are in London, it spits out British Pounds. When in Mexico City, it prints pesos. And so on and so forth. On every trip, however, this special “currency machine” keeps track of how many Euros, pounds, or pesos it has spit out. When its owner goes to the airport to leave the country, a government official reads the machine’s printout and makes the traveler settle his account. For example, if the traveler visits Paris, then as he stands in the airport ready to depart, the official reads his machine and says, “Monsieur, you printed out €1,000 (one thousand euros) while you were here. At today’s exchange rate that is equal to $1,500 US.” The traveler hands over US $1,500 in cash, then boards his plane for the US.
Why are such boxes allowed? Because the people to whom this privilege is granted are wealthy hedge fund managers and Wall Street brokers. It is more convenient for them to carry these currency machines, and print what is in effect “temporary” local currency, than to do what the rest of us do, changing currency every morning at our hotel’s front desk. Besides, they’re rich. Everyone knows they are good for it: in fact, when one of them arrives in a new country, before he gets to use his curency machine he has to prove that he is wealthy, so that no matter how much local currency he prints and spends, he’ll have the dollars to buy them all back at the end of his trip, at current exchange rates. That way, when he is ready to leave the country and at the airport his machine is read to find out how much of the temporary local currency he printed on his visit, and that number is converted into US dollars, he can simply reach into his valise and pull out the requisite cash, even if it is thousands, or millions, of US dollars.
Imagine now that between the two Caribbean nations of St. Bart’s and St. Maarten’s there is a small island nation, St. Smallcap. It may be poor in comparison with the United States, but it has a working, even vibrant, economy. Its currency trades at parity with the US dollar (that is, one of the first converts to one of the other, and vice-versa). No one knows what the future holds for St. Smallcap. Perhaps it will stay as it is for generations. Perhaps it will develop into a prosperous island nation like Bermuda. Maybe it will become a destitute, impoverished nation like many other small island nations. Perhaps it will become an economic powerhouse, like Hong Kong or Singapore. There is no way to tell.
One day, as if on cue, a dozen hedge fund managers and Wall Street bankers show up in St. Smallcap. No one thinks much of it as these fellows start driving around Smallcap with their special machines. They print off the local currency with great abandon, using that currency to buy drinks and dinners on the town, pay for taxis, and gamble at the casino. In time, they begin buying the island’s houses, cars, yachts, and cargo ships. They even buy Smallcap National Airline’s sole 727 jet. They buy anything that is not nailed down, paying for it all along with the local currency, which they print off their special currency machines as they need it.
After a few weeks something funny begins to happen. There is so much extra currency floating around, it begins to affect the economy. As everyone realizes that there is a lot of extra currency sloshing around the island, prices for goods rise in anticipation that Smallcap’s currency will become less valuable. It may even happen that prices soar, as they did in Weimar Republic Germany after WWI, in a bout of hyper-inflation. Of course, as this happens, the rate at which Smallcap’s currency can be exchanged against other currencies, including the dollar, collapses.
There is an even more insidious effect, however, that one can understand by thinking about the nature of prices. There are many ways to think about prices. Often we see them simply as obstacles preventing us from getting what we want (“Jim wants a new Mercedes but on his teacher’s salary he cannot pay the price.”) Another way to think of prices, however (a way many economists think of them), is to see prices as little bits of information passing back-and-forth around the economy, permitting millions of strangers to coordinate their economic activities. Prices for corn are going up and prices for wheat are dropping? That is a signal to farmers that they should cut back on wheat production and plant corn instead. Rents soar in a city while prices for office space stagnate? That is a signal that someone should convert some office space to apartments and condominiums. A city is washed out because of a hurricane, and prices for flashlights are soaring? That is a signal to surivivors within the city to share the scarce resource of flashlights, and a signal to outsiders to start trucking in flashlights for resale (i.e., “profiteering,” which to economists means, “responding quickly to price signals without regard for ethical concerns such as loyalty”).
Like any other normal economy, in order to function St. Smallcap’s economy relies on prices to pass information around the economy. The hedge fund managers and their special currency machines, however, print out so much of their “temporary” currency that Smallcap’s economy becomes awash in it. Imagine listening to a radio playing across the room while someone plays white noise in speakers set up next to your ears: you would not be able to hear what was being said. Similarly, this flood of “temporary” currency washes out the signals that prices normally carry within St. Smallcap’s economy. No one knows whether to grow wheat or corn, and since seed prices are rising but no one knows what income can be generated from any crop, fewer farmers plant anything. Savings drop: it makes less and less sense to save, because what is the point of delaying consumption today in return for a future benefit that cannot be estimated? Since less money is being saved, banks have less capital to loan to businesses to expand, or even maintain, current production. As a result, manufacturing on the island also collapses.
One can imagine a situation where, if Smallcap’s economy were small enough, and the Wall Street bankers and hedge funds swept down on Smallcap with enough currency-printing machines, that they could flood Smallcap with so much of its own currency that the price signals of the local economy would be mostly lost. The white noise of massive amounts of this “temporary” currency would disrupt real economic activity, like farming and manufacturing, until the economy of Smallcap cracked. Hyper-inflation, starvation, and mass unemployment might set in. People would begin trading anything they have in return for a ticket to flee the island.
Throughout it all, the Wall Street bankers and hedge fund managers continue using their machines to print local currency with which they can buy, buy, buy.
After six months, when nothing of value is left on the island that they do not already own, the bankers and hedge fund managers take everything they bought and load it onto their new cargo ships and yachts. They gather at the airport to board their new jet.
A government official arrives and sets about to find out how much of the local currency they printed while visiting the island. The official reads the print-out from each of their machines, sums it up and exclaims, “100 million!”
One hedge fund managers speaks for the rest: “Yes, but that is not 100 million US dollars. It is 100 million in your local currency. And while we have been visiting your country your local currency seems to have collapsed. That is hardly surprising, given that your farms are vacant and your factories are boarded up. It seems that on the international markets your currency is worth 1/10,000th of what it was worth when we arrived six months ago. Thus, in US currency, we owe you precisely… $10,000.” He flashes his thick wallet and counts out the sum. Laughing, his hedge fund colleagues and banker friends board their jet and take off, banking to watch their new cargo ships sail out of the harbor loaded with the wealth of the country, for which, in the end, they paid $10,000.
Imagine also that surprisingly few reporters seem interested in these events, or notice the pattern of it happening to one small island nation after another. Those who do notice it take it for granted that small island nations are supposed to be the way they are: destitute and impoverished. Only rarely does a reporter challenge the bankers and fund managers on their actions, but the financiers respond in unison so perfect it appears rehearsed, “Are you kidding? Don’t you know what a dump that island is? The last time I saw St. Smallcap its farms were barren, its businesses were boarded up, and everyone was fleeing. I tell you, the place is just a disaster.”
If you can understand the story above, then you can understand the crime that is occurring in our financial markets (the metaphor is a sound one, if I say so myself). The point of subsequent posts in this category will be to convert the story you just read into Wall Street lingo, one step at a time. You will see how the preceding story precisely expresses behavior that is occurring on Wall Street, routinely, today.
In reality, of course, the “special machines” that bankers and hedge fund managers are using are not actual physical machines, and what they are destroying are not “small island nations,” and what they are printing is not “currency.” In reality, the “special machines” are loopholes in our legal system, what the bankers and hedge funds are destroying are small companies, and the “currency” they are printing off to do so are shares of stock in those small companies.
BMFL
next week(s) is here
A convenient, and tiresome, excuse.
Evidently there are back doors, and loop holes!
BMFL
next week(s) is here
Funny how some evidently don't realize that Reg SHO effectively made abusive naked shorting illegal in the U.S. five years ago.
Funny how some say NSS is a figment
yet the country of Germany bans that figment!
BMFL
next week(s) is here
Germanys ban on NAKED SHORT SELLING
Posted by: eliaman Date: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 11:42:48 PM
In reply to: None Post # of 1653
Germany ban on naked short selling and Goldman Sachs ties
SiriusNews on Jun 7, 2010 06:34 PM
To News Media worldwide, I want to write this letter to clearly put together the story about what took place on Wall Street since the elimination of the uptick rule on July 6th, 2007 up until the current crisis in the United States as of today June 2010, just weeks away from financial reform to be signed into Law here in the United States. May 2007 Goldman Sachs hired math wiz computer programmer Segei Aleynikov July 2007 Up Tick rule abolished and Naked Short Selling Scandal begins as Housing scandal ends July 2007 Massive downgrades in credit ratings as the Housing scandal slows and Goldman Sachs moves into Stock Scandal FY 2008 U.S in a full blown recession due to financial crisis and naked short selling and other scandals tied to Goldman Sachs and others June 2008 Secret meeting in Moscow between Goldman Sachs board members and Hank Paulson Sept 2008 Financial meltdown and Last days of Lehman Brothers. Hank calls Loydd 24 times within a few days July 3rd 2009 FBI arrest Segei Aleynikov as he had sent over 1,000 secret codes and files to German Web Site Feb 24th, 2010 Up tick rule voted back in but with some circuit breakers April 15th 2010 Goldman Sachs tied to Galleon trading investigation April 16th, 2010 Goldman Sachs Civil Fraud Charges brought by Government/SEC May 4th, 2010 Goldman Sachs guilty of Naked Short Selling and pays fine May 6th, 2010 Stock market crash down 700 ponts is minutes to almost down 1,000 points on day. still looking for answers in an ongoing investigation. May 18th, 2010 Germany bans naked short selling. What does the German secret service know about the Goldman Sachs secret files sent to German web site? Now today, Newsweek comes out with a story June 7th, 2010 on page 42, where they state the arrest ofthe Goldman Sachs computer programmer. Newsweek June 7th, 2010 page 42. http://bit.ly/cbM89b Goldman Sachs secret codes/ arrest These facts are all connected, yet the News media has not put the story together. see these two video's on youtube that just came out, that clearly explains the connections and it all leads back to Goldman Sachs. part 1 Utube
I agree so lets eliminate naked shorting as Germany has just done!
I agree there should be zero tolerance
for NAKED SHORTING, and those days are SHORTLY approaching!
BMFL
next week(s) is here
In this day and age there should be a zero tolerance for people hyping naked shorty with ZERO proof on worthless sub pennies
trying to hide the insiders and big position holders dumping
anyone who supports any form of naked short selling either works for wall street or a entity that benefits from this. Naked Shorting = COUNTERFEITING PLAIN AND SIMPLE
In this day and age there should be a zero tolerence for FTD's and there is a simple solution to the problem. Any trade that results in a FTD should be busted with all commissions returned and a flat penalty invoked on the party causing the FTD which would be automatically credited to the party on the other side of the transaction. I would think everyone could support a simple solution like this with the exception of those who profit from creating FTD's.
As I suspect you understand, you're referring to the Deep Capture forums, the content of which we neither endorse nor control (outside of requiring that it meet certain standards of decency and not be overtly libelous...which requires that it be untrue).
If you feel something on that thread -- which I have not taken the time to read -- defames you, I encourage you to take one or more of the following steps:
1- Sue the poster for defamation
2- Show me exactly what concerns you, and if you can demonstrate that it's false and damages you and not merely the poster's clearly-stated opinion, I will gladly remove it.
As I understand it, being a new member here I only get to post three times per day, this post being my third. So I won't be able to interact with you here until tomorrow, and frankly I have no intention of spending any more of my weekend on this site. So, please email me your specific concerns at: jbagley@deepcapture.com.
Thanks.
Must be something wrong with your search engine.
http://www.deepcapture.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=65
Now that you know about it, I'd appreciate your removing it.
There's a lot of content on DeepCapture.com, but you're not mentioned in any post...not once (see for yourself: www.deepcapture.com/?s=janice+shell). So, unless you go by a different name, that's strike two, Ms. Shell (refer to post#1639 to see strike one).
I get the impression you regard yourself as a bit of a player in this silly world of stock message boards, and that may or may not be the case, but one thing I'm sure of is that you've never made it on to our radar.
Maguire not only provided the regulators with a Dummies’ guide to how the manipulation generally worked, but also warned them of a specific crime – a dramatic take-down of the gold and silver markets – that he said would occur at an exact time on a specific date in the near future. That is, Maguire told the regulators that a massive crime was about to happen, and the crime happened precisely as he predicted it would.
Huh? I don't recall any "dramatic take-down" in the precious metals markets. What I see is that every time gold gets toppy, it sinks back under 1200, and then begins to rise again. No biggie.
Why is it that so many people appear to believe that investments should only go up, and that if they don't, "criminals" are involved?
<<<Is he talking about the futures markets?? I mean, that's what futures trading is about.>>>
In that instance, yes he is..... but Deep Capture is definitely not limited to writing about the capture of the futures market regulators of the CFTC, janice, by any means.
Kindly allow me to furnish you the access to answer your question:
http://www.deepcapture.com/manipulating-gold-and-silver-a-criminal-naked-short-position-that-could-wreck-the-economy/
Enjoy the weekend.
Naked short selling of gold and silver -- a threat to the stability of the financial system and evidence that our markets are rigged
Is he talking about the futures markets?? I mean, that's what futures trading is about.
I could show you the "example" of a defamatory page about me that is obviously sanctioned by the site.
<<<It's Deep Crapture that's objectionable. It's all about penny stocks.>>>
No it's not, Janet.... not by a long shot, as this partial list of the titles at the Deep Capture site will attest:
Moral Hazard at the SEC
28 July 2010 by Judd Bagley
When attempting to understand much of what happens at the Securities and Exchange Commission, I believe moral hazard is nearly as important a factor as the much more frequently-discussed matter of regulatory capture.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, Our Captured Federal Regulator the SEC, The Deep Capture CampaignComments (28)
Notes on David Einhorn: The Predator in a Cute T-Shirt
10 June 2010 by Mark Mitchell
David Einhorn would have you believe that he is brave crusader against corporate malfeasance. The truth is, he's a fraud who did serious damage to the markets.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, The Mitchell ReportComments (131)
Europe Comes to Terms With Market Manipulation; the SEC and the American Media Bury Heads in the Sand
21 May 2010 by Mark Mitchell
The markets go haywire, Germany responds sensibly, and the American establishment refuses to contemplate the reality of criminal manipulation.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, The Mitchell ReportComments (120)
On Wall Street, membership has its privileges
13 May 2010 by Judd Bagley
When these two banks enabled manipulative short selling, they were silently transferring wealth from the masses into the accounts of the privileged few.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured StoriesComments (57)
Goldman’s gold has lost its luster
06 May 2010 by Judd Bagley
Goldman may be flush with cash, but with pressure mounting on politicians to reject any of it in the form of campaign contributions, suddenly that cash doesn’t spend nearly as well as it used to.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, Our Captured Federal Regulator the SEC, The Deep Capture CampaignComments (62)
The SEC and its culture of regulatory capture
29 April 2010 by Judd Bagley
But dig a little deeper and you’ll find the Stanford case is the bigger outrage by far, not so much for the scam itself, but for the shocking behavior of the regulators tasked with preventing it. Where Madoff was enabled by SEC bureaucratic incompetence, Stanford was empowered by overt SEC indifference.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, Our Captured Federal Regulator the SEC, The Deep Capture CampaignComments (82)
Podcast: Rexxfield repairs online reputations
23 April 2010 by Judd Bagley
Rexxfield founder Michael Roberts specializes in repairing online reputations.
Read the full story
Posted in AntiSocialMedia with Judd Bagley, Deep Capture Podcast, Featured StoriesComments (35)
Goldman Sachs, John Paulson, and the Hedge Funds that Pumped and Dumped Our Economy
20 April 2010 by Mark Mitchell
The Goldman CDO scandal and other evidence suggests that the U.S. economy was set up for a fall by market manipulating hedge funds.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, The Mitchell ReportComments (78)
Two must-read books for any market reformer
16 April 2010 by Judd Bagley
Regular readers of this blog come from remarkably diverse backgrounds, but seem united by at least one shared experience: the act of having examined some aspect of our capital markets only to conclude that much of what the world has accepted as fundamental simply does not make sense.
Read the full story
Posted in Featured StoriesComments (41)
Manipulating Gold and Silver: A Criminal Naked Short Position that Could Wreck the Economy
02 April 2010 by Mark Mitchell
Naked short selling of gold and silver -- a threat to the stability of the financial system and evidence that our markets are rigged
Read the full story
Posted in Featured Stories, The Mitchell ReportComments (170)
All can be found at:
http://www.deepcapture.com/
Ahem...deepcapture.com is about manipulation of major exchange traded stocks. Any references to penny stocks are purely ancillary. I'd like to see you find a example to the contrary.
It's Deep Crapture that's objectionable. It's all about penny stocks.
Then what about Patrick Byrne?
Why can't we speak of him, is HE-WHO-MUST-NOT-BE-NAMED on this board, have something to say that others are afraid to here. What could he have to say that is so terrifying, that we are not allowed to speak of him.
BMFL
next week(s) is here
That's because this board is not about penny stocks.
And Faulk is long gone. He finally realized that Urbie Casavant was a crook.
So posts about Patrick Byrne and Mark Faulk
are not allowed, is that because they speak the truth about NSS.
At one time our Founding Fathers were not allowed to speak in public because of the British King.
Tell me, why can't we speak of these two men. Is there something to hide.
BMFL
next week(s) is here
Hopeably, some will make sense...
We are going to see a load of new rules over the next 6-18 months
I'd like to know more about this, too...
Theresa Molloy: Okay, Clarke. A question that comes up from many, many, many of our
issuers regarding short sale is -- an issuer will say, well, they've got to disclose everything that's
material in an 8-K as soon as it happens. And institutions who short their stock are not -- don't
have to follow the same type of rigor in reporting that an issuer does.
So, as part of this regulation, do you see that it could potentially impact institutions? And, do
you think that there is a possibility that it -- that institutions would have to file their short
positions on a monthly basis?
Clarke Camper: Yes, that's a great question, Theresa. And, yes, the answer is unequivocally
yes, but that possibility exists. It depends how the SEC ends up interpreting this provision. Like
I said, there's broad latitude. It's Section 929X. And the X shows you that they basically, again,
jammed this in at the last minute, a bunch of provisions, and said, oh, we'll stick them in Section
929 and just give them A through X numbers.
But, yes this is a license for the SEC to do almost anything. And to your point about will it
require institutions to disclose to the SEC monthly, my guess is the disclosures will be much
more frequent than monthly. But then, in fact, the public disclosure will be monthly.
Theresa Molloy: Right.
Clarke Camper: But some -- I would not be surprised to see traders, for instance, have to
report on a daily basis to the SEC. And, again, you would hope that there would be some kind
of tiered -- appropriately tiered reporting mechanism in terms of timing to the SEC, depending
upon what kind of market participant you are. But my guess is it's going to be whoever you are,
if you're shorting a stock, you're going to have to report to the SEC regularly.
Theresa Molloy: Okay. And what about a timeframe for implementation, discussion, looking at
six months, 12 months? We know that wheels of progress turn pretty slowly.
Clarke Camper: Yes, and -- again, a great question. When you read the language, if you're
lucky enough to do so -- I hope you know I'm saying that with a smile.
Theresa Molloy: Well, 2,300 pages -- you've got a long weekend coming up, guys. So, we're
going to put this in NYSE Connect, and I'm sure that all of you will be downloading it and
bringing it for beach reading.
Clarke Camper: Right. It's best if you have trouble sleeping. But you'll see that the SEC is
required just to issue regulations. And so, there are very few cases where they actually give a
requirement. For instance, on the proxy -- I'm sorry -- a chair and CEO position issue, the
number two issue on the slide, that one the SEC was required to issue a rule within six months
after the act.
The others are typically there is no timeline on these. I know that the SEC -- obviously, they're
going to be prioritizing themselves. Clearly, say on pay it's going to be a priority for them --
something they care about and are going to get out. Proxy access is going to be the same way. I
expect that there are going to get those things out quickly.
But, yes -- so, in some cases, the wheels are going to turn quickly, other cases, not so much.
But the takeaway I would say is, again, if you care about any of these provisions -- all of them
are important. You can't assume that you can sit back and get to these after -- right after your
summer vacation; you really should jump on them right away.
http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/ViewWashingtontranscript.pdf
A Few Things in the DFA You May Not Have Heard Much About
07/28/2010
By Cydney Posner
http://www.cooley.com/shownewsbrief.aspx?Show=64089
Below are a few additional items in the Dodd-Frank Act that you may or may not have heard about (there are probably plenty more to come to light):
BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP AND SHORT-SWING PROFIT REPORTING (Sections 766 and 929R)
The Act deletes the requirement in the Exchange Act that beneficial ownership reports under Section 13 be sent to the issuer and the applicable exchange and that short-swing trading reports under Section 16 be sent to the applicable exchange. In addition, for purposes of Sections 13 and 16, the Act expands the concept of acquisition of beneficial ownership of an equity security to include the purchase or sale of a security-based swap, to the extent determined by the SEC.
WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION (Section 922 et seq.)
New Section 21E of the Exchange Act adds incentives and protection for whistleblowers in any "covered judicial or administrative action" brought by the SEC under the securities laws that results in monetary sanctions exceeding $1,000,000. The awards payable to whistleblowers who voluntarily provide original information to the SEC leading to the successful enforcement of a covered <br>judicial or administrative action, or related action, can range from 10 % to 30% of the amount of the monetary sanctions collected in the action or related actions. In addition, the Act expressly prohibits retaliation against whistleblowers. The prospect of a 30% reward just might be enough to encourage some otherwise shy whistleblowers, but in some cases, it may just be an opportunity for some (perhaps disgruntled employees?) to try to catch the gravy train.
SHORT SALE REFORMS (Section 929X)
You may recall that in the middle of the crisis, there was a lot of concern about short sales and their potential use to manipulate stock prices. The DFA amended Section 13(f) of the Exchange Act to add a new section requiring the SEC to issue rules for the public disclosure of the aggregate amount of the number of short sales of each security, and any additional information determined by the SEC. (Presumably this disclosure will be limited to investment managers.) The DFA also makes it unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to effect a manipulative short sale of any security. The SEC will also be issuing rules about enforcement and related remedies. In addition, Section 15 was amended to require brokers to notify their customers that they may elect not to allow their fully paid securities to be used in connection with short sales. Whether these rules will be enough to put an end to concerns about short sale manipulation remains to be seen.
CONFLICT MINERALS ORIGINATING IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO (Section 1502)
Reportedly, this provision was co-sponsored by Senators Brownback and Feingold. That odd pairing should be enough to get your attention.
The provision is designed to help address the exploitation and trade of conflict minerals, originating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which are then used to finance "conflict characterized by extreme levels of violence in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly sexual- and gender-based violence, and contributing to an emergency humanitarian situation therein…."
The Act adds new Section 13(p) of the Exchange Act, which requires the SEC to issue new rules within 270 days after enactment mandating annual disclosure by reporting companies of whether "conflict minerals" that are "necessary to the functionality or production of a product" manufactured by the company in the reporting year originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (the "DRC") or an adjoining country. "Conflict minerals'' include
- columbite-tantalite (coltan), cassiterite, gold, wolframite, or their derivatives; or
- any other mineral or its derivatives determined by the Secretary of State to be financing conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an adjoining country.
(Note, because of a lack of clarity in the drafting, some commentators are contending that the provision may even apply to private companies. The SEC rules should straighten that out).
The Washington Post reports that NGOs and others are concerned that DRC groups are financing themselves with minerals such as gold and the "three T's" -- tin, tungsten and tantalum (apparently, derivatives of the minerals identified above). The Post reports that the new provision could apply to electronics companies (laptops, cell phones, PDAs, DVD players, televisions), which are major users of Congolese tantalum, but also to companies that use tin and gold. Conflict minerals may also be present in medical devices. An "adjoining country" is one that shares an internationally recognized border with the Congo: looking at a map, that's Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia.
When the conflict minerals used in the company's products did originate in one of those countries, the company must submit to the SEC a report that includes the following:
- a description of the measures taken by the company to exercise due diligence on the source and chain of custody of the minerals, which measures must include an independent private sector audit of the report submitted through the SEC that is conducted in accordance with standards established by the Comptroller General, in accordance with SEC rules and in consultation with the Secretary of State; and
- a description of the products manufactured or contracted to be manufactured that are not DRC conflict free (i.e., products that do not contain minerals that directly or indirectly finance or benefit armed groups in the DRC or an adjoining country), the entity that conducted the independent private sector audit, the facilities used to process the conflict minerals, the country of origin of the conflict minerals, and the efforts to determine the mine or location of origin with the greatest possible specificity.
The company submitting the report must certify the audit described above, which will constitute a critical component of due diligence in establishing the source and chain of custody of the minerals, unless it's determined to be unreliable. The disclosure must also be posted on the company's website. <br> <br>The Post reports that "[m]any firms in the high-tech sector have been trying to ensure their suppliers don't use ‘conflict minerals,' jointly running a pilot program at smelters to identify where minerals come from." However, "U.S. executives say it can be exceedingly difficult to figure out whether there are ‘conflict minerals' in their products. Such minerals may, for example, be smuggled from Congo through Rwanda, mixed with ore from other countries in a smelter in Kazakhstan and then sold to a company in Southeast Asia that supplies a parts manufacturer in China…. Robert Hormats, the undersecretary of state for economic affairs, said in an interview that tracing the source of minerals is much more complicated than tracing the source of diamonds. For one thing, he said, diamonds ‘aren't melted down.' In addition, the rebels sometimes gain or lose control over mines."
If the SEC was reluctant to comment on SOX 402 (loans to executives, reportedly on the basis that it really wasn't within the SEC's province), it should be just ecstatic with its role in developing these rules. There is a fair amount of uncertainty regarding the provisions –e.g., the rules for the required due diligence, the meaning of "necessary to the functionality or production of a product" – that will need to be clarified. Companies all along the supply chain may be affected, whether or not they themselves are required to report.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING COAL OR OTHER MINE SAFETY (Section 1503)
Public reporting companies that operate, or have subsidiaries that operate, coal or other mines will be required to include, in each periodic report filed with the SEC, information regarding health and safety and other violations at each mine, including the total number of "flagrant violations" and " imminent danger orders," the total dollar value of proposed assessments for violations and the total number of mining-related fatalities. Operators will also have to file an 8-K regarding the receipt of an imminent danger order and other specified health and safety notices.
DISCLOSURE OF PAYMENTS BY RESOURCE EXTRACTION ISSUERS (Section 1504)
The Act adds Section 13(q) of the Exchange Act requiring each public "resource extraction issuer" to include in its annual report information relating to any payment made by company, its subsidiary or any other company under its control to a foreign government (including companies owned by that government) or the Federal Government for the purpose of the commercial development of oil, natural gas or minerals, including the type and total amount of the payments made for each project and made to each government. "Commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals" includes exploration, extraction, processing, export and other significant actions relating to oil, natural gas or minerals, or the acquisition of a license for any such activity, as determined by the SEC. "Payment" includes any (not de minimis) payment made to further the commercial development of oil, natural gas or minerals, including taxes, royalties, fees (e.g., license fees), production entitlements, bonuses and other material benefits, that the SEC determines to be part of the commonly recognized revenue stream for the commercial development of oil, natural gas or minerals. The information is required to be in XBRL. The SEC is required to issue rules within 270 days after enactment.
I hadn't even heard of it until today.
no clue--only just now read your post about it.
Did "Section 929X(a)" make the final cut?
I don't *think* I really care about individual IDs. But accurate, net totals would be nice, as opposed to the confusatron we have now. (*Note* the SEC and SROs should be able to see individual IDs, at a the click of a mouse...)
Followers
|
41
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
1794
|
Created
|
07/16/08
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
If Your Government Says It, It Must Be True.
All posts about naked short selling of listed stocks, how to do it, and why it's a good idea are welcome.
If you have that kind of information, after all, The Government wants to speak with you.
What got this board started?
Cox, Paulson and Bernanke went before Congess and suggested a short selling ban.
They helped perpetuate the "illegal naked short selling" myth...
The myth of "NSS" is everywhere on stock message boards.
It's like people think there is a secret vault somewhere hiding mythical naked shorts from the markeplace.
If that's true, somebody with AUTHORITY should PLEASE FIND IT!
To those who want to post about a stock that they claim has a Naked Short Position:
1. Prove it. (It is highly doubtful you can provide any verifiable proof, since short data is only published twice a month, and you would have to have information from a SRO).
2. Company claims in press releases are not a legitimate source of naked short claims or information. (Don't bother calling this "proof" of anything).
3. Posts about Patrick Byrne and his conspiracy theories are well covered elsewhere. No Sith Lord posts, please.
4. Mark Faulk and his get shorty campaign? Forget it.
5. Any more conspiracy nutjob people out there that claim to have proprietary models that produce daily short position data on stocks? Again, not interested.
This board was created to discuss PROVEN naked short positions in LISTED STOCKS.
This means using REGULATORY or GOVERNMENT data on naked short interest in a stock.
You got that? Post it.
P.S. Open invitation to the ANY SEC EMPLOYEE or REGULATORY AUTHORITY -- PLEASE join iHub and post about all these mythical naked short positions.
Bring your unicorn!
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |