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.
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.
patchman do you have a link to this announcement..couldn't find it..although I found one similar dated June 2008.
this is getting complex and i am not familiar with all the excruciating details of how ex-clearing transactions are tracked.
if customer A and customer B are from the same broker then the trades get settled relatively fast i.e assuming A & B have settled trades i.e their shares positions have been cleared i.e no FTDs.
on the other hand if customer A from broker XYZ makes a purchase from customer B of broker ABC and ABC/B enter into a contract with broker XYZ to deliver the shares later at a specified price, then this would one example of ex-clearing. But there several other examples....I am not sure what exactly triggers ex-clearing..probably something a broker would want to hide their counterparty risks as well as their own. it is a very manual process...it is a similar process to the trades hitting the tape but done manually and with lot of deviations! I am sure you are throughly confused by now!
Just google ex-clearing and you'll find lot of help!
So member firms of FINRA and DTC are supposed to report short sales inclusive of proprietary accounts...great...so there is nothing to hide...open up the blue sheets for all of SPNG trades. But that does not alter the fact that DTC is in the business of creating NSS and off shore companies NSS like hell
! Are all member firms compliant??
This is indeed a change in the right direction...do their offshore affiliates file short interest...very conveniently, when the date for reporting comes along, they transfer their huge naked position to their offshore affiliate.
no, i am not patchman but things will change when the Obligation Warehouse goes into production end of 2010. If you are interested in knowing more about the OW please visit the DTCC website.
patchman...the FINRA short rule clearly states that proprietary accounts do not need to report their short positions which normally are all NSS...this is what the Haverford Group is referring to.
Now since SPNG is in judicial labor, and is being prosecuted for securities fraud, it just behooves the SEC that they open their books too, especially since Silverman states NSS could be 50 B!
loanranger, I believe the article states that the FTDs that occur in ex-clearing mode never show up in the published FTDs...that's the way ex-clearing works. Hence it is not unusual if someone finds a
large NSS position in ex-clearing.
In ex-clearing, customer A & B are not from the same broker.
Tha Haverford Group had this say about the FTDs
Neither the sec nor the exchanges will disclose the names of the
institutions failing to deliver on the grounds that “fails statistics of individual firms...is proprietary information and may reflect firms’ trading strategies.” That statement seems odd; what is proprietary about data on illegal trading activity
Good question....hopefully he will back it up or redact it but an investigation into it is deemed necessary. Let them Blue Sheets speak the truth.
I am not looking for peace.....the NSS could be as high as 50B shares....spoken by Trustee Silverman. So far NSS have been getting away...not any more....they'll wake up soon in the jail cell! IMO.
and NSS loons will only wake up in jail!
When are the NSS loons going to jail...they should be in there already!
Probably, he did that with a purpose.em.
That would be Regulation S shares....I can't find any filings regarding reg S and neither did SEC mention in their complaint....do you have a reg S filing link??
I don't know why posts are getting deleted but here are some differences between trades that hit the tape & ex-clearing trades...
1. Trade transactions that are conducive to automatic settlement systems and need to be backed by DTC kept physical certs hit the Tape instantaneously.
2. Ex-clearing trades are labor intensive and as such take a minimum of 1 day or more, some take days, weeks , months and yes, even years....all that the B/Ds do is write up monthly contracts for delivery of shares between themselves and keep renewing the contract till the company dies!! Great strategy.
3. Ex-clearing trades are mere Electronic entered shares that are not backed by Physical certs.
I must say that both of you have displayed exceptional brilliance! But unfortunately that was not the topic under discussion....the topic in focus was 'do ex-clearing trades hit the tape?' and 'there is a large amount of NSS hidden in ex-clearing mode'.
Let me address REFCO first....your research is shallow but Refco has been involved in NSS actively, be it Bonds, Equities or Derivative contracts..............for starters here are some links...I am not going to rehash everything that I read about Refco and it really is irrelevant to me if you believe my statements or not as it has been a while since I did my research....................
http://www.thesanitycheck.com/BobsSanityCheckBlog/tabid/56/EntryId/261/Weekend-Update-Milberg-Guilty-REFCO-Revelations-CXN-Firestorm.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refco
I consider Refco Holdings Group and its subsidiaries as one entity.
In the U.S. capital markets, the industry is well-served by an automated post-trade process that seamlessly clears, guarantees and settles trades that on a peak day can top 19 billion shares, or average about $2 trillion. However, regulators, policymakers and financial firms are justifiably concerned about ex-clearing trades, which are managed broker-to-broker using highly manual and error-prone processes, including phone calls and faxes to exchange information to ensure final settlement. The process is inefficient and expensive – and, more significantly, fraught with operational and counterparty risk.
“Because ex-clearing trades are currently processed outside NSCC’s systems, they are highly manual, time-consuming and risk-prone,” said Susan Cosgrove, DTCC managing director, Clearance and Settlement/Equities.
For those genuinely interested, it is all there on web....ex-clearing is very manual process and it could take days , weeks or months to settle....even years....it is all between two brokers who could even right up a contract between themselves to deliver the shares later!! What hits the tape daily are trades that settle through automated systems.
Then ask the DTC to step up and put it in Black & White...finito!!
Then why does the DTC refuse to clarify this???
His response...
DTCC refuses to clarify this. Ex-Clearing makes no provision for trade reporting.
Well..there is a huge overhang of 50 Billion shares, a supply that far exceeds demand....which puts heavy downward pressure on the PPS. It is not necessary to hit the tape...ex-clearing trades are not reported.....this is all shadow markets, electronic entries, etc...when there are so many shares available and the naked positions do not get covered for prolonged periods of time, the PPS has nowhere to go but under.....fundamental economics. Do a search on REFCO and you'll find why it went bankrupt....a huge NSS position was hidden!!!
50 Billion Naked Shares...number arrived at by talking to SEC. No wonder SEC wants to kill SPNG!!! And all those theories by lunatics that SPNG is fraud must be just that ...Theories......but NSS lunatics are getting cornered. TOAST!
wow....look at this.................read the bold, underlined phrase
Indeed, in affirming the bankruptcy court in Integrated Resources, the District Court noted that “the management of a bankrupt company [in this case, the Dicon Trustee] must further the diverse interests of the debtor, creditor and equity holders, alike.’”
patchman, do you have any comments???
SpongeTech Trustee Silverman objects to Dicon Trustee's motion to sale Dicon.
"Kenneth P. Silverman, the chapter 11 Trustee (the “SpongeTech Trustee”) of SpongeTech Delivery Systems, Inc. (“SpongeTech”), by his attorneys, SilvermanAcampora LLP, respectfully submits these objections to the Amended Motion dated August 31, 2010 (the
“Motion”) of Lloyd T. Whitaker, the chapter 11 Trustee (the “Dicon Trustee”) of Dicon Technologies, LLC (“Dicon”), and represents as follows:
1. Underlying the seemingly garden-variety Motion, which seeks authority to sell substantially all of the assets used in Dicon’s business, is
(i) a massive fraud perpetrated on public holders of SpongeTech stock,
(ii) the highly suspicious sale of Dicon’s membership
interests to SpongeTech by Wayne Celia (“Celia”), a principal of Diversified Technologies, Inc. and JKA, Inc., the current, putative purchaser of Dicon’s assets (collectively, the
“Bidder”)," etc.
SPNG continues to be traded.....just need the right broker! Some Euro people can trade too.....I believe it is through a single MArket participant!
Something to keep in mind....the current TA inherited a lot of the NSS from Olde Monmouth who really effed up the shares OS!
When the T/A refuses to issue shares then they are complicit with the NSS.
I think you are wrong Patchman, I have seen those TA reports and there is a minimum of 1.5B NSS shares. As far as Silverman, he is not going to present something pulled out of the hat to the Judge. This is the court and he jolly well do things with credence!
patchman, I believe when Mr. Silverman said 50B NSS, he was figuratively speaking, indicating that there is indeed a very large NSS presence in SPNG. Now think about this.....Silverman has years of experience and the very fact he has been assigned to this role is due the fact he has credibility...the point being that he would not have blurted out 50B without seeing some kind a documentation and what that is I do not know!!
However, there is no need to pass comment on how the SLB reacts or does...tell me do you get pleasure on purposeful ridicule?? How does it affect you or some other Joe Blow when SLB does something??
So what??/ How does it matter who edited it?? It is the content that matters. Are you feeling left out??
WOW!! 4.7M at .005!!! ready to go????????????
How much of a fraud can that be when compared to the fact that he sold Dicon for $4.5 M which includes SPNG to payoff $2.5M loan to Wachovia Bank and then turning around, forcing (indirectly) Dicon into BK with about $150K in Liabilities and further offering to buy Dicon for $825K which is less than the value of the inventory and has a break up fee clause indicating about $70K! I think what he has in hand is the agreement with HHBrown & Diversified Technologies (Note: WC is owner or principal of DT LLC). HHBrown questionably terminated the agreement with Dicon.
edit: HOWEVER, it's possible that WC could establish that he was fraudulently induced to sign the agreement in the first place. In which case you can probably trash this whole post :O)
O.K, Thx.....I hope to see more on D'Amaro...what role did he play....what role did Harmon Trading play.........I guess Harmon could be a trading/playing ground for ????
D'Amaro's colorful background.........................
http://www.finra.org/web/groups/industry/@ip/@enf/@adj/documents/ohodecisions/p011615.pdf
Scion, how did you come across this file...isn't this file related to some other case that D'Amaro is involved in??? Just curious>
I should say he is a smart bloke~!!
Lastly I asked him if he ever answers anything with "no".
He responded with "no"... which sort of has left be confused about the entire situation...
How do you know???? /em
Looks like you know all the loopholes of the US Security's Industry!!!
You are right. Also, I think it traded after being revoked..is this correct??