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.
SevenTenEleven: Great news! Go FFGO!!!
2Late: I am with you on this. Just a matter of time until we are paid, one way or another. The longer it takes the greater the payment. Go BCIT!!!
*** Here's the VIDEO of yesterday's Ron Paul Congressional Subcomittee hearing on the U.S. gold reserve ***
Gold encumbrances question elicits only hearsay at Paul committee hearing
By: Chris Powell,
Secretary/Treasurer, GATA
Friday, 24 June 2011
Dear Friend of GATA and Gold (and Silver):
The inspector general of the U.S. Treasury Department today testified to a House subcommittee hearing on the U.S. gold reserve that he has been "told" that "not one troy ounce is encumbered," but under questioning he could not say where the gold pledged by the United States to the International Monetary Fund resides or how it has been accounted for, if at all.
The hearing was held in Washington by the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology on legislation proposed by the committee's chairman, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, to audit the U.S. gold reserve. (See http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h1495/text ) Paul opened the hearing with an excellent statement about the secrecy that long has enveloped the U.S. gold reserve, the speculation that U.S. gold has been swapped with foreign central banks or sold, and the inability to arrange a congressional inspection of the gold reserve at Fort Knox, Kentucky. Paul particularly distinguished between ownership of gold reserves and mere custody of them. He complained that the Treasury Department had not released certain information about the gold reserve until his legislation to audit it was filed.
The Treasury Department's inspector general, Eric M. Thorson, replied that Treasury audits the gold regularly, and he denounced those who raise doubts about the reserve.
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-Missouri, noted that the audit documentation submitted to the committee by the Treasury mentioned nothing about encumbrances of the gold reserve, and Thorson replied, "I'm not aware of anything." But Thorson backed off when Luetkemeyer followed up by asking about the U.S. gold pledged to the IMF and when Paul asked if the IMF's supposed gold is being counted twice, once on the IMF's own books and again on the books of the United States and other IMF member nations.
Three years ago GATA pressed the IMF for straight answers to this very question, particularly as to the possession and location of the IMF's supposed gold, eliciting only evasion and then abrupt termination of the questioning:
http://www.gata.org/node/6242
Thorson replied weakly to Paul, "We do not audit the IMF."
Luetkemeyer wouldn't let go. Is the U.S. gold contribution to the IMF, he asked Thorson, counted in the U.S. gold reserve? If it is, Luetkemeyer added, audits of the U.S. gold reserve should record the gold as encumbered.
Thorson replied, "We've been assured that none of it is encumbered." But he added that he would have to research the question before providing a definitive answer.
Of course testimony that one has been "told" and "assured" that nothing is happening is only hearsay, and authoritative answers to questions about the U.S. gold reserve and the U.S. government's officially designated agency for surreptitious market intervention, the Exchange Stabilization Fund, probably can be obtained only from the treasury secretary or the president themselves, who under the law have exclusive control of the ESF and answer to no one for it:
http://www.gata.org/node/10009
Much of today's hearing dealt tediously with procedures for assaying and tallying gold bars, which would seem relevant to the question of surreptitious market manipulation only if gold bars in the U.S. reserve have been replaced with tungsten or other base-metal bars coated with gold -- not that a government that establishes an agency precisely to rig markets surreptitously should be given a pass on even the wildest questions.
While the Treasury's having given the Federal Reserve certificates for the gold that was taken from the Fed to the Treasury in 1933 has always seemed to have little meaning, both Thorson and the hearing's other witness, Gary T. Engel, director of financial management and assurance for the U.S. Government Accountability Office, testified that the Fed could never use the certificates to reclaim the gold. They said that any presentation by the Fed of the gold certificates to the Treasury would result only in the Treasury's paying the Fed in dollars at the statutory rate of $42.22 per ounce.
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-New York, whose work on the committee consists largely of making excuses for the Obama administration and the status quo, made a pompous idiot of herself, arriving in the middle of the hearing and asking the witnesses if they didn't think that Paul's gold reserve audit legislation would duplicate the audits already being done and cost a lot of money. The witnesses had said so in their opening statements and in responses to earlier questions from committee members who arrived on time.
It's not clear where, if anywhere, Paul will take the issue of potential encumbrances on the U.S. gold reserve. But since the most relevant testimony on the issue today was only hearsay, not authoritative, all questions remain open.
The hearing lasted a bit more than an hour and the subcommittee has posted video of it @: http://tiny.cc/e40zj
CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.
http://news.goldseek.com/GATA/1308895620.php
Go FFGO!!!
original post by basserdan
*** Here's the VIDEO of yesterday's Ron Paul Congressional Subcomittee hearing on the U.S. gold reserve ***
Gold encumbrances question elicits only hearsay at Paul committee hearing
By: Chris Powell,
Secretary/Treasurer, GATA
Friday, 24 June 2011
Dear Friend of GATA and Gold (and Silver):
The inspector general of the U.S. Treasury Department today testified to a House subcommittee hearing on the U.S. gold reserve that he has been "told" that "not one troy ounce is encumbered," but under questioning he could not say where the gold pledged by the United States to the International Monetary Fund resides or how it has been accounted for, if at all.
The hearing was held in Washington by the House Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology on legislation proposed by the committee's chairman, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, to audit the U.S. gold reserve. (See http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h1495/text ) Paul opened the hearing with an excellent statement about the secrecy that long has enveloped the U.S. gold reserve, the speculation that U.S. gold has been swapped with foreign central banks or sold, and the inability to arrange a congressional inspection of the gold reserve at Fort Knox, Kentucky. Paul particularly distinguished between ownership of gold reserves and mere custody of them. He complained that the Treasury Department had not released certain information about the gold reserve until his legislation to audit it was filed.
The Treasury Department's inspector general, Eric M. Thorson, replied that Treasury audits the gold regularly, and he denounced those who raise doubts about the reserve.
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-Missouri, noted that the audit documentation submitted to the committee by the Treasury mentioned nothing about encumbrances of the gold reserve, and Thorson replied, "I'm not aware of anything." But Thorson backed off when Luetkemeyer followed up by asking about the U.S. gold pledged to the IMF and when Paul asked if the IMF's supposed gold is being counted twice, once on the IMF's own books and again on the books of the United States and other IMF member nations.
Three years ago GATA pressed the IMF for straight answers to this very question, particularly as to the possession and location of the IMF's supposed gold, eliciting only evasion and then abrupt termination of the questioning:
http://www.gata.org/node/6242
Thorson replied weakly to Paul, "We do not audit the IMF."
Luetkemeyer wouldn't let go. Is the U.S. gold contribution to the IMF, he asked Thorson, counted in the U.S. gold reserve? If it is, Luetkemeyer added, audits of the U.S. gold reserve should record the gold as encumbered.
Thorson replied, "We've been assured that none of it is encumbered." But he added that he would have to research the question before providing a definitive answer.
Of course testimony that one has been "told" and "assured" that nothing is happening is only hearsay, and authoritative answers to questions about the U.S. gold reserve and the U.S. government's officially designated agency for surreptitious market intervention, the Exchange Stabilization Fund, probably can be obtained only from the treasury secretary or the president themselves, who under the law have exclusive control of the ESF and answer to no one for it:
http://www.gata.org/node/10009
Much of today's hearing dealt tediously with procedures for assaying and tallying gold bars, which would seem relevant to the question of surreptitious market manipulation only if gold bars in the U.S. reserve have been replaced with tungsten or other base-metal bars coated with gold -- not that a government that establishes an agency precisely to rig markets surreptitously should be given a pass on even the wildest questions.
While the Treasury's having given the Federal Reserve certificates for the gold that was taken from the Fed to the Treasury in 1933 has always seemed to have little meaning, both Thorson and the hearing's other witness, Gary T. Engel, director of financial management and assurance for the U.S. Government Accountability Office, testified that the Fed could never use the certificates to reclaim the gold. They said that any presentation by the Fed of the gold certificates to the Treasury would result only in the Treasury's paying the Fed in dollars at the statutory rate of $42.22 per ounce.
Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-New York, whose work on the committee consists largely of making excuses for the Obama administration and the status quo, made a pompous idiot of herself, arriving in the middle of the hearing and asking the witnesses if they didn't think that Paul's gold reserve audit legislation would duplicate the audits already being done and cost a lot of money. The witnesses had said so in their opening statements and in responses to earlier questions from committee members who arrived on time.
It's not clear where, if anywhere, Paul will take the issue of potential encumbrances on the U.S. gold reserve. But since the most relevant testimony on the issue today was only hearsay, not authoritative, all questions remain open.
The hearing lasted a bit more than an hour and the subcommittee has posted video of it @: http://tiny.cc/e40zj
CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.
http://news.goldseek.com/GATA/1308895620.php
Go SRSR!!!
original post by basserdan
matty: "ithers" is fack's 2nd cousin! lol Go FFGO!!!
Exchanges want delay of SEC's naked access ban
By Jonathan SpicerPosted 2011/06/21 at 4:12 pm EDT
NEW YORK, June 21, 2011 (Reuters) — Exchanges asked their regulator to delay, pending further clarification, new rules that would ban so-called "naked access" to markets, where brokers rent their IDs to unlicensed high-frequency traders trying to gain an edge of microseconds.
NYSE Euronext, Nasdaq OMX Group Inc, BATS Global Markets and Direct Edge asked that the ban be delayed until November 30, from July 14, according to a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission, obtained by Reuters.
The new rule, adopted in the months after last year's "flash crash," would eliminate unfettered access to U.S. stock markets for unlicensed firms, and require brokers to protect against potential mishaps that could destabilize the high-speed electronic marketplace.
The exchanges said they wanted a clearer interpretation of the plan, listing some 35 questions mostly related to how broker dealers would perform the risk checks required by the rule, which was proposed in January last year and adopted in November.
"In making this request, the exchanges believe there are a number of interpretive issues arising under Rule 15c3-5 that should be resolved with respect to routing broker-dealers through further discussions with the Commission," the June 20 letter said.
The four exchanges, noting they made the delay request on behalf of broker dealers, said they were also concerned the costs of maintaining the new risk checks "may be materially in excess" of the SEC's initial estimates.
In November, the regulator said the plan would cost the brokerage industry around $100 million to implement and $100 million to maintain annually. Under the rule, brokers would have to implement controls to prevent the entry of orders that appear erroneous or exceed credit and capital thresholds.
Broker-dealers would also have to develop and maintain a system for reviewing the effectiveness of their risk management controls and for promptly addressing any issues.
More than a third of all U.S. stock-trading in late 2009 was done by firms that had "naked sponsored access" to markets, according to a report at the time by consultancy Aite Group.
COMPLICATED QUESTIONS
In the letter, sent to SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro and others at the government agency, the exchanges asked an array of questions including what exactly is the "short period of time" in which brokers must measure potentially erroneous orders, which orders should be exempt, and how this can be automated.
The questions delved deep into the complicated nature of the stock market, where rules ensure that investors get the best possible price for stocks no matter where that bid or ask may be located. There are dozens of U.S. exchanges and alternative trading venues.
Does a "thorough due diligence" review "require brokers to request the policies and procedures of every customer to whom it provides market access?" the exchanges asked.
"If so, what standards are envisioned for evaluating such policies and procedures?"
The SEC declined to comment on Tuesday.
High-frequency traders, whose computers can send thousands of buy and sell orders a second, pay brokers to get the quickest possible access to exchange servers and databases.
The May 6, 2010, flash crash, in which the Dow Jones industrial average plunged some 700 points in minutes before snapping back up, amplified criticism of such traders, although regulators later said they were not primarily to blame.
The impending naked access ban touches many corners of Wall Street, as well as the electronic firms scattered around the country that have come to dominate trading volumes.
It has prompted some high-frequency traders to convert into formal broker-dealers (BDs), while some existing brokers formed new BD units to secure additional licenses.
FTEN Inc, a risk surveillance provider acquired by Nasdaq late last year, as well as trade-clearing specialists Wedbush Inc and Penson Worldwide are among the companies centerstage in the debate over market access.
(Reporting by Jonathan Spicer; editing by Andre Grenon and Maureen Bavdek)
http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre75k4pd-us-financial-regulation-nakedaccess/
SevenTenEleven: If these reverse mergers are causing problems for short sellers then I am sure the SEC will find a solution promptly. Heck, I bet they won't even have to have a 6 month comment period. Perhaps it is time for a grandmother clause? lol
"No Known Paid Promoters on this board. So none of the above applies to anyone currently posting." SevenTenEleven
How about those paid to post negatively, planting seeds of fear and doubt? Where does that come into play? Any of those folks currently posting? Seems to me money is made on the roundtrip, run it up and bash it down.
[Note: They have pounding settlements down to 10-12 cents on the dollar, then not paying those.]
JUNE 23, 2011, 3:44 P.M. ET
Morgan Keegan's Arbitration Battles Go On
BY SUZANNE BARLYN
Morgan Keegan & Co. may have agreed to a $200 million settlement with regulators, but it remains intent on fighting hundreds of still-pending arbitration claims from investors who lost money in some of its bond funds.
The Regions Financial Corp. unit, which is now up for sale, says it doesn't expect the agreement with federal and state regulators to weaken its ability to challenge those claims.
"The terms of regulatory settlements are normally not considered admissible evidence," a Morgan Keegan spokeswoman said. "Because the regulatory findings and the settlements are so different from the charges, plaintiffs are likely to be ...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303339904576403980701136322.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
original post by Bob41
Morgan Keegan Settles Valuation Fraud Charges with SEC for $200M
Posted June 22, 2011 2:38PM PST
Morgan Keegan & Co. and Morgan Keegan Asset Management have agreed to pay $200 million to settle fraud charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission alleging the firms misled investors about the value of subprime mortgage-backed securities, in the latest example of the SEC's increased scrutiny of asset managers' valuation practices.
Memphis, Tenn.-based Morgan Keegan has invested at least $9.4 million in three PIPEs since 2004, according to PrivateRaise.
The two firms and two executives -- former portfolio manager James Kelsoe Jr. and comptroller Joseph Weller -- were accused of causing false valuation of subprime mortgage-backed securities in five funds managed by Morgan Keegan Asset Management from January 2007 to July 2007.
The order issued today finds that Morgan Keegan failed to employ reasonable pricing procedures and consequently did not calculate accurate "net asset values" for the funds. Morgan Keegan published inaccurate daily NAVs and sold shares to investors based on inflated prices, the SEC said.
"The falsification of fund values misrepresented critical information exactly when investors needed it most - when the subprime mortgage meltdown was impacting the funds," said Robert Khuzami, the SEC's director of the Division of Enforcement. "Such misconduct does grievous harm to investors."
The SEC has stepped up its investigation of asset manager's valuation practice after forming a new Asset Management Unit last year. The N.I.R. Group, Vision Capital Advisors, Yorkville Advisors and RAM Capital are among hedge funds whose valuation practices are reported to have come scrutiny by the SEC or are facing investor lawsuits.
The enforcement action against Morgan Keegan "makes clear that the SEC will deal firmly with those who abuse their responsibility to assign accurate values to securities or other assets held by the firms," said William Hicks, associate director of the SEC's Atlanta regional office, in a statement.
Under the settlement, which was reached without admitting or denying the charges, Morgan Keegan is required to pay $25 million in disgorgement and interest and a $75 million penalty to the SEC to be placed in the Fair Fund for the benefit of investors harmed by the violation. Morgan Keegan also will pay $100 million into a state fund that will also be distributed to investors. The firms also agreed to abstain from involvement in valuing fair valued securities for three years.
Kelsoe agreed to pay $500,000 in penalties and be barred from the securities industry. Weller agreed to pay $50,000.
SEC Weighs Curbs on Backdoor Stock Listing .
By ANDREW ACKERMAN
WASHINGTON—Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro said the agency is considering several options to address its concerns about so-called reverse-merger companies that use legal but backdoor methods to list shares of their stocks in North America.
Though she declined to provide details, she said the SEC is weighing "a menu of ideas" but they aren't "ready for prime time, yet."
Ms. Schapiro, at The Wall Street Journal's CFO Network forum in Washington on Tuesday, said backdoor listings are in the agency's sights.
SEC officials have said they are increasingly concerned about the proliferation of small private companies, primarily from China, that elect to merge with public shell companies in lieu of more rigorous methods of becoming public, such as a traditional initial public offering. Last week, the SEC warned investors to be careful about investing in stocks of such companies.
Ms. Schapiro, speaking at The Wall Street Journal's CFO Network forum here, cited as one an example a proposal floated by Nasdaq OMX Group Inc. that would require a certain amount of trading before a company could list on its exchange.
Since January 2007, there have been 600 backdoor registrations, with more than 150 from in and around China, SEC officials have said. The SEC has warned of systemic concerns with the quality of the auditing of these firms' financial reporting as well as the limitations on the ability of regulators to enforce the securities laws and for investors to recover losses tied to fraudulent disclosures.
Ms. Schapiro said Tuesday that the SEC is working with Chinese regulators to address these concerns. A key issue is an inability of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to inspect these firms in China, she added.
In an April speech, SEC member Luis Aguilar acknowledged that the agency is probing some of these firms. "While the vast majority of these companies may be legitimate businesses, a growing number of them have accounting deficiencies or are outright vessels of fraud," Mr. Aguilar said.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303936704576399600864490440.html
original post by player one
Union Equity, Inc. Moves Corporate Headquarters to Downtown Orlando
Today : Friday 24 June 2011
Union Equity Inc. (PINKSHEETS: UNQT) is pleased to announce that the Company has signed a lease for its new offices located at 301 East Pine Street in beautiful Downtown Orlando. The newly upgraded and expanded space includes executive suites, an accounting department, investor relations center and employee offices. The new office space also provides access to a dedicated customer support/sales center and office space for its wholly owned subsidiaries Easy Semi Truck Leasing America LLC and Union Equity Investments, Inc.
Union Equity's new wholly owned subsidiary, Easy Semi Truck Leasing America LLC, is a commercial truck leasing business engaged in leasing class 8 commercial trucks to owner operators throughout the nation.
Easy Semi Truck Leasing America, LLC's goal is to increase its inventory while increasing its market share in the transportation industry.
Union Equity Investments, Inc.'s objective is to provide the best possible risk-return value for its shareholder, by making direct investments into or outright purchases of revenue generating foreign and domestic private/public companies, which are in the need of a strong management team and capital in order to make it to the next level.
Union Equity, Inc. moved into its new offices last month. The new office suite gives Union's administrative staff optimal work space to perform their duties. The space will allow Union Equity to proceed with plans to grow its staff and operations throughout 2011.
"This move provides new opportunities for growth and gives Union Equity the ability to increase its inventory and company size significantly," stated Joam St Jean, CFO of Union Equity, Inc.
Contacts:
Union Equity, Inc.
Email Contact
Union Equity, Inc. Moves Corporate Headquarters to Downtown Orlando
Today : Friday 24 June 2011
Union Equity Inc. (PINKSHEETS: UNQT) is pleased to announce that the Company has signed a lease for its new offices located at 301 East Pine Street in beautiful Downtown Orlando. The newly upgraded and expanded space includes executive suites, an accounting department, investor relations center and employee offices. The new office space also provides access to a dedicated customer support/sales center and office space for its wholly owned subsidiaries Easy Semi Truck Leasing America LLC and Union Equity Investments, Inc.
Union Equity's new wholly owned subsidiary, Easy Semi Truck Leasing America LLC, is a commercial truck leasing business engaged in leasing class 8 commercial trucks to owner operators throughout the nation.
Easy Semi Truck Leasing America, LLC's goal is to increase its inventory while increasing its market share in the transportation industry.
Union Equity Investments, Inc.'s objective is to provide the best possible risk-return value for its shareholder, by making direct investments into or outright purchases of revenue generating foreign and domestic private/public companies, which are in the need of a strong management team and capital in order to make it to the next level.
Union Equity, Inc. moved into its new offices last month. The new office suite gives Union's administrative staff optimal work space to perform their duties. The space will allow Union Equity to proceed with plans to grow its staff and operations throughout 2011.
"This move provides new opportunities for growth and gives Union Equity the ability to increase its inventory and company size significantly," stated Joam St Jean, CFO of Union Equity, Inc.
Contacts:
Union Equity, Inc.
Email Contact
OldBen: Thanks for one amazing post! You exposed some folks with your amazing ability to demonstrate just how foolish their claims are. Well done! Go FFGO!!!
SRSR is being held down by those who are short. SRSR is fully aware of this and with the upcoming spinoffs is going to burn the shorts. Expect to see lots of posts from those who don't own shares but will benefit if you follow their advice. The longs here know what they own and are comfortable and confident with management so holding long is a no brainer. Fry shorts fry! Go SRSR!!!
Wow almost 800K of volume today. Wonder how many of those are short? Go RENS!!!
saplyak: That would be a beautiful thing if the investigation revealed a large short and it would be awesome if revenues increased as well. I am sure everyone that has felt so badly for those of us who own shares would be thrilled to see us not only recoup our investment but to profit from it. Go CDIV!!!
Ask now $5.00! Go NMGL!!!
Challenges in Chasing Fraud
SEC Actions—and Non-Actions—Illustrate the Difficulties of Pinning Blame for Soured Deals
JUNE 23, 2011
By JEAN EAGLESHAM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303970604576402164214639534.html?reflink=barrons_redirect
Michael R. Llodra and Edward S. Steffelin both worked on the disastrous J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. mortgage-bond deal called Squared.
And both men were warned by U.S. securities regulators in January that they could face civil-fraud charges related to the $1.1 billion deal, which plummeted in value soon after being sold in 2007.
But their fates couldn't be more different. The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil-fraud lawsuit Tuesday against Mr. Steffelin, a former executive at GSC Capital Corp., the firm that managed the assets in the Squared deal.
Mr. Llodra, the former head of asset-backed collateralized debt obligations at J.P. Morgan, wasn't accused of any wrongdoing as part of the bank's $153.6 million settlement with the SEC, and officials at the agency said no current or former J.P. Morgan employees are facing enforcement actions stemming from the Squared deal.
The outcome is another instance of the SEC deciding it doesn't have the evidence to bring cases against individuals at financial firms blamed for triggering or worsening the financial crisis.
Some legal experts said the SEC's struggles reflect the difficulty of going after specific individuals and companies when so many more made decisions that backfired into catastrophic losses during the financial crisis. Corporate executives argue that the crisis was caused by good-faith moves that went sour rather than by the desire to short-change investors.
Some lawyers say that the agency's enforcement lawyers haven't done enough to prove that high-ranking executives bore the ultimate responsibility for the most controversial mortgage-bond deals.
The latest example came Wednesday with the SEC's lifetime ban of James Kelsoe Jr., once a star bond-fund manager at Regions Financial Corp.'s Morgan Keegan & Co. unit. Mr. Kelsoe's lawyer was unavailable for comment Wednesday.
The SEC also accused the company—but no top executives of the Memphis, Tenn., brokerage firm—of defrauding investors. A spokesman for Regions declined to comment.
In an interview, SEC enforcement chief Robert Khuzami said nearly 50 individuals have been charged by the SEC for wrongdoing related to the financial crisis. More than 30 are or were chief executives or other senior corporate officials. "That's pretty impressive and telling statistical evidence of our commitment to follow the evidence where it leads and look up and down the corporate structure and in the executive suite," he said in the interview.
Mr. Khuzami said the SEC's enforcement actions against "very senior bank executives…involved institution-wide disclosures and risk issues. Actions related to CDOs, which are single transactions structured and sold by a single desk or division, are by their nature likely to focus on individuals who are further removed from the boardroom."
Zachary Brez, a former SEC lawyer who now is a partner at law firm Ropes & Gray, said the agency is working hard to "satisfy the public call for sacrificial lambs."
But this week's J.P. Morgan settlement and separate suit against Mr. Steffelin are reminders that it is "easier for the SEC to bring a case against a junior employee who sends a badly worded email than to successfully build a case against the senior executives making the actual decisions," Mr. Brez added. J.P. Morgan neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing as part of its deal with the SEC.
The SEC was sharply criticized last year by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff over what he called a "half-baked" settlement with Bank of America Corp. over disclosures about its takeover of Merrill Lynch & Co. The Charlotte, N.C., bank agreed to pay $150 million, but no individuals were charged.
Even when the SEC has gone after employees at Wall Street firms, it has faced outside scrutiny about whether the targets were big enough. Before Goldman Sachs Group Inc. agreed last year to pay $550 million to settle claims it misled investors in a CDO called Abacus 2007-AC1, the SEC warned two Goldman employees they could face civil charges, according to people familiar with the matter.
The SEC filed civil-fraud charges against Fabrice Tourre, a relatively junior bond trader. The other Goldman employee, executive Jonathan Egol, wasn't charged. No fraud allegations have been filed against Mr. Egol or any other Goldman executives tied to the Abacus deal. A spokesman for the SEC declined to comment on the specifics of individual cases. Mr. Tourre is fighting the SEC's accusations. Representatives for Goldman, Mr. Tourre and Mr. Egol declined to comment.
The SEC's decision not to file charges against the Goldman or J.P. Morgan executives reflects common stumbling blocks in bringing enforcement actions against top company officials, according to former SEC lawyers. The first hurdle in bringing claims against Mr. Llodra was a lack of sufficient evidence that he intended to mislead investors, according to people familiar with the matter.
These people said the decision not to file charges against him also reflected the fact that J.P. Morgan's in-house lawyers signed off on the relevant information related to the Squared deal. That information failed to disclose that Illinois-based hedge-fund firm Magnetar Capital LLC was betting against the deal while also helping choose the underlying assets. Any suggestion Mr. Llodra was personally liable for this lack of disclosure would have to address why he was wrong to rely on the advice of the bank's legal experts, according to lawyers uninvolved in the case. A lawyer for Mr. Llodra declined to comment.
Alex Lipman, a lawyer for Mr. Steffelin, said in a statement Wednesday that the case against his client was a "real reach."
The decision to file negligence charges against Mr. Steffelin for disclosure failures in statements made by another firm, J.P. Morgan, "would appear to fall short of the SEC's mandate to protect investors against actual wrongdoers," Mr. Lipman said.
The SEC complaint against Mr. Steffelin cites emails the SEC says show he was seeking employment with Magnetar while working on the deal. His lawyer said the SEC's conclusion is based on a misstatement of the record.
The SEC also quoted an exhortation from an unnamed J.P. Morgan employee to a sales team, which was told to offload the rapidly deteriorating assets in Squared onto investors.
"We are sooo pregnant with this deal....Let's schedule the cesarian, please!" the email, with its misspelling, said.
SEC officials declined to comment on the decision not to charge any J.P. Morgan employees. They also wouldn't elaborate on specifics of their case against Mr. Steffelin.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303970604576402164214639534.html?reflink=barrons_redirect
original post by scion
gold1625:
Congrats on your millionth share aquisition! 68 here and looking forward to seeing the IPO's trading. Confident we have the goods and the management and that we made the correct choice to hold and accumulate. Go SRSR!!!
Now that is awesome! Patrick Byrne is a true American hero. I can't wait for the Overstock trial to start. He will accomplish what the SEC nor FINRA could, he will expose the maggots at trial for what they are and how Wall Street has been raping investors at every opportunity for years via naked shorting.
SEC seeks $50-million (U.S.) from pump-and-dump lawyer
http://www.stockwatch.com/News/Item.aspx?bid=Z-C%3a*SEC-1853870&symbol=*SEC®ion=C
2011-06-21 15:14 ET - Street Wire
Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Also Street Wire (U-DPRK) Deep Rock Oil and Gas Inc
Also Street Wire (U-NLST) National Storm Management Inc
by Mike Caswell
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has filed a motion seeking $50.3-million in penalties against David Gordon, an Oklahoma lawyer jailed for his part in a 2005 market manipulation. (All figures are in U.S. dollars.) The regulator says there is no genuine dispute that Mr. Gordon participated in a scheme in which he and others pumped and dumped three companies. A jury in Oklahoma convicted him of parallel criminal charges on May 3, 2010.
The SEC's request comes nine months after a U.S. federal judge sentenced Mr. Gordon to 15 years in jail on charges that stemmed from the three pump-and-dumps. Prosecutors argued that he and others, including fugitive Canadian promoter Dean Sheptycki, participated in a market manipulation that defrauded investors of millions. The stocks they promoted included one company they held out as a storm reconstruction outfit in the wake of hurricane Katrina, the storm that devastated New Orleans in 2005.
Mr. Gordon unsuccessfully fought the criminal charges, arguing that there was no proof he was responsible for boosting the stocks. He sought a light sentence on the grounds that he had already suffered the loss of his profession and would be banned from penny stocks. He still maintains his innocence, and is appealing his conviction.
The SEC, meanwhile, says that the courts must impose appropriate civil penalties for Mr. Gordon. In a motion filed on June 16, 2011, it is seeking an order requiring him to disgorge the entire $43.9-million that he and others made in the pump-and-dumps. After deducting $3.9-million that the government has already collected in the criminal case and adding an appropriate amount for interest, the SEC says a $50.3-million disgorgement order is appropriate. On top of that, the SEC is seeking a third tier civil penalty, which can be anywhere from $130,000 to the total amount of investor loss. The regulator is also asking that the judge permanently ban Mr. Gordon from participating in penny stock offerings.
Should the SEC succeed in its request, Mr. Gordon's penalty could be close to the judgment that the regulator won against Mr. Sheptycki. On March 11, 2011, a Tulsa judge ordered him to pay $98.7-million. Roughly half of the amount was disgorgement of profits from the scheme, while the remainder was a civil penalty. The decision was a victory by default, as Mr. Sheptycki did not respond to the SEC case and is a fugitive in the criminal case.
SEC's complaint
The SEC launched the case against Mr. Gordon and others on Feb. 10, 2009, when it filed a civil fraud complaint in the Northern District of Oklahoma. According to the complaint, Mr. Gordon and others, relying on fraudulent legal opinions, acquired millions of shares in three companies. They then sold their stock during fraudulent promotions, realizing millions in illegal profits. The other defendants were Mr. Sheptycki, who helped send faxes touting the companies in return for 10 per cent of the profits, and a former broker from Texas named Joshua Lankford.
One of the three stocks that the SEC accused the men of manipulating was National Storm Management Inc., a purported storm reconstruction company. Some time in 2005, Mr. Gordon and Mr. Lankford acquired nearly all of the company's tradable stock, the SEC said. They then hired Mr. Sheptycki to promote the stock with mass faxes, and arranged for spam e-mail campaigns.
The faxes typically predicted massive price increases for the stock. The spamming, which went out in September, 2005, after hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, stated that the company "is poised for a massive run up as demand to repair homes skyrockets." The stock went from 50 cents to a $2.80 high. (It was last at 0.45 cent.)
As the spam went out, Mr. Gordon and Mr. Lankford carried out a series of manipulative trades, which they concealed through nominee accounts, according to the SEC. "To ensure that the market price remained artificially elevated, Gordon and Lankford coordinated their trading so as to not dump too much stock into the market during the promotions and provided buy-side support when there were too many other retail investors selling stock," the complaint read.
The other two stocks that the SEC listed in its complaint were Deep Rock Oil and Gas Inc. and Global Beverage Solutions Inc., which were the subjects of similar promotional campaigns. Deep Rock went from 12 cents to $1.13 in 2005, and was last at 0.15 cent.
The SEC sought disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, appropriate civil penalties and penny stock bans.
Fugitives
While the SEC has secured a penalty against Mr. Sheptycki and is seeking a default judgment against Mr. Lankford, the regulator may have a difficult time collecting from either man. Mr. Lankford, who was last known to live in the Dallas area, fled before prosecutors filed the criminal charges. He did so despite having young children, possibly on the advice of Mr. Gordon, according to prosecutors.
Mr. Sheptycki was not initially as fortunate, as police arrested him in the Bahamas on a U.S. warrant in February, 2009. The U.S. attempted to have him extradited, but the attempt failed after U.S. authorities did not file an authority to proceed on time. A Bahamian judge threw out the case and released Mr. Sheptycki. It is not clear where he went from there.
The SEC was not the first regulator to impose a fine on Mr. Sheptycki. In 1998, he agreed to pay a $15,000 fine to the Alberta Stock Exchange and to serve an 18-month ban from the brokerage industry. He had been working at the Calgary branch of C.M. Oliver & Company Ltd. at the time.
The fine stemmed from unauthorized trading, in which he bought $95,472 worth of shares in an ASE listing called Timbuktu Gold Corp. The trading left one of his clients with a debt that was beyond his means. Canadian Securities Administrators records show he did not return to the brokerage industry after his suspension expired.
At the time of the National Storm promotion, he was working for a Florida tout service called Stockwire.
http://www.stockwatch.com/News/Item.aspx?bid=Z-C%3a*SEC-1853870&symbol=*SEC®ion=C
original post by no dummy
6Class: You have lots of fellow long longs on this board. I am not one of them but I am really looking forward to seeing the long longs like yourself that go back to the Great West Gold days rewarded for their loyalty. Go FFGO!!!
RocketMan: One year anniversary tomorrow. All shares held at that time now subject to long term gains. A declaration on the anniversary would be a beautiful thing. Go FFGO!!!
New expert advisors! I love it! Happy Birthday btw! Go FFGO!!!
Dunphy777: I must admit I do enjoy watching every share purchase go through since I know it is a short sale. Nothing will please me more than seeing those who sold non existant shares forced to buy them back at a premium price. I think every FFGO long wants to see shorts get a taste of their own medicine I know I am looking forward to it and suspect FFGO management is smiling every day knowing shorts bury themselves a little deeper. Go FFGO!!!
Big Banks Lose Ruling on Research
By PETER LATTMAN
A federal appeals court ruled on Monday that investment banks could not stop a financial Web site from immediately publishing the research recommendations of their stock analysts, delivering a blow to Wall Street and a win for the investing public.
Perhaps more significant, the decision was a victory for Internet companies whose business models depend upon summarizing and commenting on others’ original content. Yet media businesses also cheered the ruling because it left in place legal protections against rogue competitors who copy and resell original news reporting at little or no cost.
“It’s a great decision for the free flow of information in the new media age,” said Kathleen M. Sullivan, a lawyer who filed a brief in the case on behalf of two clients, Google and Twitter.
In a lawsuit closely followed by the world’s largest financial, media and technology businesses, a panel of three judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan ruled that Barclays, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America could not dictate who reported news about their stock research — nor when they reported it.
The decision leaves in place all traditional federal copyright protections. For example, a site can report on the content of Wall Street research, meaning that it could run a headline like “Morgan Stanley’s semiconductor analyst upgrades Intel.” But the site would violate copyright law if it reprinted the analyst’s report on Intel verbatim.
“A firm’s ability to make news — by issuing a recommendation that is likely to affect the market price of a security — does not give rise to a right for it to control who breaks that news and how,” Judge Robert D. Sack wrote in the court’s 88-page opinion.
The ruling reversed a controversial lower court decision made last year that required a financial Web site, theflyonthewall.com, to wait until 10 a.m. to publish news about Wall Street research that had been issued before the stock market’s 9:30 a.m. opening bell. The site was also ordered to delay its headlines during the day by two hours.
The ruling effectively gave the banks’ clients a chance to digest market-moving research before everyone else.
The banks had argued that the Web site’s publishing headlines about a bank’s upgrade or downgrade of a company’s stock — often before the information was fully disseminated to the banks’ clients — was tantamount to stealing intellectual property. They contended that delivering stock recommendations exclusively was key to their business because clients were more likely to trade with them if they learned of a stock recommendation from them rather than elsewhere.
Benjamin E. Marks, a lawyer for the banks, said in a statement that they were “disappointed in the court’s decision, and we are reviewing the decision to determine our next steps.” He added: ”Each of the plaintiffs remains committed to protecting their equity research against unauthorized appropriation.”
The banks’ lawsuit against theflyonthewall.com was based on a legal doctrine called ”hot news misappropriation,” which is meant to protect organizations from stealing original content generated by competitors and reselling it. The original “hot news” doctrine evolved from a famous Supreme Court case in 1918, when The Associated Press successfully prevented the International News Service from appropriating its wire reports on the war in Europe.
With the rise of the Internet and digital media, the largely dormant “hot news” doctrine has become more relevant, as competitors can now copy content and repackage it as their own product with just a few keystrokes.
While the Second Circuit upheld the viability of a “hot news” claim — where one organization copies and resells news originally gathered by another — it said that the banks’ case did not fall within this law. In this instance, the court said, the Web site was not “free-riding” on Wall Street firms’ stock recommendations.
“The firms are making the news; Fly, despite the firms’ understandable desire to protect their business model, is breaking it,” Judge Sack wrote.
Corynne McSherry, a lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an Internet freedom advocacy group, said that while the ruling preserves the protections of the “hot news” doctrine, it seems to limit its use.
“While it may have survived this case, it now appears to have been narrowed to within an inch of its life,” Ms. McSherry said.
Media outlets applauded the ruling. The Associated Press, which submitted a brief to the court along with 13 other news organizations, including The New York Times, said in a statement that it viewed the decision “as a victory for the news media and the public.”
“The ruling upholds the traditional protections of the news media against competitors who would copy the gathered news and resell it in direct competition with the original news gatherer,” Andrew L. Deutsch, a lawyer who filed the brief on behalf of the companies. “It preserves the economic incentive to engage in news gathering.”
Lawyers for Google and Twitter had argued that it was antiquated for a court to ban a Web site from immediately disseminating news. A Web site’s swift republishing of facts — whether a bank’s investment recommendation or a scoop from The New York Times — has become a firmly entrenched part of the news reporting ecosystem, they said.
“This ruling acknowledges the reality of new media,” said Ms. Sullivan, the lawyer for the Internet companies. “Hot news goes cold in a nanosecond.”
Theflyonthewall.com, a small outfit in Summit, N.J., has exploited this new reality. The site, which charges $65 a month and has thousands of subscribers, has called itself the “fastest news feed on the web” and ”a one-stop solution for accessing analyst’s comments.” In a statement, the company called the ruling ”a complete victory in its long-running battle with the investment firms.”
Even though the ruling directly affects cases only in the Second Circuit — New York, Connecticut and Vermont — the decision by the influential court is expected to reverberate in cases across the country.
Judge Sack is considered one of the country’s leading experts on copyright law, which could enhance the ruling’s influence.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/wall-street-banks-lose-ruling-on-research/?pagemode=print
original post by BullNBear
I try to keep an open mind and not come to conclusions without having facts to back them up. One fact I do have is a statement in writing by Nazir made about 3 weeks ago stating that the outstanding sharecount had not increased by a single share in well over a year. I believe the short here is significant but in time all the facts will come out. Go CDIV!!!
basserdan: Thanks. I posted that at several locations seeking folks to ask that the hearings be televised. The post was removed at a couple of locations, obviously it must intimidate some. Can you imagine how high the price of gold will go if the audit proves that they are a tad short? Ron Paul will ask the hard questions and that is a great first step.
RocketMan: Imagine what the price of gold will go to if the audit reveals that not all the gold claimes is there? Randi Paul is not owned by those on Wall Street so I am really looking forward to the hearings and I am hoping the hearings will be televised and email cspan requesting same. Hope lots of other folks do as well. Did you see where the CocaCola company accused GoldmanSachs of manipulating the metals market? The changes are coming fast and furious and well when the Overstock trial starts that will be the cat's meow! Go FFGO!!!
Hearings on the audit of gold on June 23rd and Randi Paul is going to be asking some hard questions. Stay tuned this should get lots of coverage! Go FFGO!!!
There is a new rule coming that upon implementation will require all brokerage firms to audit the shares of stock held by their clients in their accounts and make sure that the approriate number of shares are equal to those on deposit at the DTCC and file that documentation stating same with the SEC.
Now most folks would have thought that was already being done but then most folks would never have believed that Madoff would be allowed to operate a Ponzi scheme for years even after it being reported several times to regulators. Those very folks liked Madoff so much they named the exemption that allowed naked shorting to run rampant calling it the Madoff exemption. The good news about these new share audits is that whoever signs it is exposing themselves to serious charges if they lie. I am sure everyone here wants justice for the shareholders. Lets get everything out in the open and let justice be served. If management is innocent thanks to a small burn rate they should be able to hang in until the new rule/regulation is in place. If management or Monk is crooked then throw the book at them but lets get everything out in the open and lets all work to see that justice served. If a naked short exists as I believe it does then lets all see that those who sold what did not exist be forced to buy back every single non existant share they sold. Go CDIV!!!
4xy62: Actually I notice the price is not only holding firm but actually creeping upward. I for one am going to hang on and see what happens. Seems to me, going from memory there was supposedly a large naked short position here. If true, that could account for the firmness in the price. Not saying this is the case mind you but I have held for years and may as well continue to hold and see if the bid gets upped as time passes. Go UNQT!!
PS: I read recently that a new rule is coming which will require brokerage firms to audit the shares held by their clients vs what they have on deposit at the DTCC and report same on a quarterly basis to the SEC. If the brokerage firms fail to tell the truth they would be exposing themselves to criminal charges and jail sentences. On top of that the Overstock trial begins later this year and it includes RICO charges. Holding till some of these things are exposed to the public makes sense to me.
SRSR shareholders: We can all help ourselves by asking C-span to televise the hearings on June23rd. I am told that lobbiests are doing all they can to prevent the public from seeing what is going on. Lets support Ron Paul in making the public aware of just what the situation is. Please be proactive. Go SRSR!!!
http://news.goldseek.com/GATA/1308467100.php
How can something like this be happening? Looks like the regulators have some explaining to do:
http://www.examiner.com/headlines-in-new-york/rupert-murdoch-s-media-empire-reveals-unprecedented-8-trillion-sec-scandal?CID=examiner_alerts_article#ixzz1PtBzLGkq
Sure looks like the regulators got some explaining to do:
http://www.examiner.com/headlines-in-new-york/rupert-murdoch-s-media-empire-reveals-unprecedented-8-trillion-sec-scandal?CID=examiner_alerts_article#ixzz1PtBzLGkq
Go BCIT!!!
Nice that we agree that non existant shares were sold to us by our brokerage firms. This went on for a few months as I recall and where were the brokerage firms sounding the alarm and living up to their fiduciary relationship to their clients who purchased them? As my broker who owns a few shares btw has repeatedly stated once your money has been stolen by theives don't expect them to give it back unless forced to do so. We all know the regulators know what happened here so why are they ignoring the issue? Where are the fines? Where are the criminal charges? This certainly makes a case for them to have been captured wouldn't you agree? Just a matter of time for justice to be served. Just this week there has been coverage bu the mainstream media of filings that were made and subsequently removed. After the Madoff fiasco I think everyone realizes the system is broken and needs to be shut down and lots and lots of folks need to go to jail. Go BCIT!!!
GoldmanSachs manipulating the metals market claims CocaCola:
http://gata.org/node/10014
Lots and lots of results when one searches desked orders by brokerage firms on the SEC website: http://search.sec.gov/secgov/index.jsp#queryResultsTop
My brokerage firm sold me my non existant BCIT shares and placed the counterfeit markers in my account on 3 different occasions.
Where did you get yours directly from Mario?
Go BCIT!!!