Friday, June 08, 2012 6:23:20 PM
Excerpt Quote;
(Note: VERT is widely recognized by investors as a market maker who abuses their market making obligations and manipulates stock prices for profit. They are the firm the less than reputable clients trade through when they want a “job done” and this enforcement case, despite the paltry fine, illustrates their willingness to avoid the rules.)
Here's a link to the complete article from the SEC.
http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-08-09/s70809-3684.pdf
This is the whole paragraph (Not the whole article) I took the above excerpt from regarding VERT.
Quote;
The Vertical Trading Group, LLC ( CRD #104353, NewYork, NewYork) submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent in which the firm was censured, fined $25,000 and required to revise its written supervisory procedures regarding the One Percent Rule; the dissemination of quotations to vendors; monthly order execution information; SEC Regulation SHO’s locate requirements; the acceptance of short sale orders for threshold securities; maintaining identical quotes; market order protection; best execution for block orders, not held orders and orders with special pricing terms or conditions; reporting the capacity in which trades are executed; ensuring the accuracy of trades reported on the member’s behalf; the tick test; and books and records. Without admitting or denying the findings, the firm consented to the described sanctions and to the entry of findings that it failed to properly identify orders as short sale orders and, therefore, failed to report to the NNTRF the correct symbol indicating whether transactions were buy, sell, sell short, sell short exempt or cross for transactions in reportable securities, and to properly mark the orders as short. The findings stated that the firm’s supervisory system did not provide for supervision reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable laws, regulations and FINRA rules concerning the One Percent Rule; the dissemination of quotations to vendors; monthly order execution information; Regulation SHO’s locate requirements; the acceptance of short sale orders for threshold securities; maintaining identical quotes; market order protection; best execution for block orders, not held orders and orders with special pricing terms or conditions; reporting the capacity in which trades are executed; ensuring the accuracy of trades reported on the member’s behalf; the tick test; and books and records. The findings also stated that the firm failed to produce documentation that it enforced its written supervisory procedures concerning the marking of order tickets and locate requirements. The findings also included that the firm failed to report the correct symbol to the NNTRF or OTCRF indicating whether the firm executed transactions in reportable securities in a principal, “riskless” principal or agency capacity. (FINRA Case #2006004088101)
Recent DBMM News
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 01/16/2024 09:32:32 PM
- Form 10-K - Annual report [Section 13 and 15(d), not S-K Item 405] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 11/29/2023 09:31:08 PM
- Form 10-Q - Quarterly report [Sections 13 or 15(d)] • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 07/17/2023 09:15:45 PM
Mass Megawatts Announces $220,500 Debt Cancellation Agreement to Improve Financing and Sales of a New Product to be Announced on July 11 • MMMW • Jun 28, 2024 7:30 AM
VAYK Exited Caribbean Investments for $320,000 Profit • VAYK • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Successful Flotation Cell Test at Bishop Gold Mill, Inyo County, California • NBRI • Jun 27, 2024 9:00 AM
Branded Legacy, Inc. and Hemp Emu Announce Strategic Partnership to Enhance CBD Product Manufacturing • BLEG • Jun 27, 2024 8:30 AM
POET Wins "Best Optical AI Solution" in 2024 AI Breakthrough Awards Program • POET • Jun 26, 2024 10:09 AM
HealthLynked Promotes Bill Crupi to Chief Operating Officer • HLYK • Jun 26, 2024 8:00 AM