ziploc_1 .. Giving a favored few a heads up on an opinion which is about to be published before the opinion is actually disseminated to the public is akin to letting preferred investors read the galleys of the W.S journal or Business Week before the public is allowed to see them. Information should be either be public or private.
Not even close to an accurate comparison IMO. The "favored few" are clients of the brokerage firm for whom the analyst works and as such they pay (in many cases millions in commissions) for the investment research content as well as any timing advantage they receive before it is made public. It is only since the advent of the Internet that research reports have been made public free of charge. Much of the investment research work product is NEVER made public .. it is instead communicated privately through e-mails, phone calls and face-to face meetings between research analysts and their most important institutional clients. Not even all institutional clients of a given brokerage firm receive the same service .. it varies based on how much the institution generates in revenues to the brokerage firm .. just like all business the biggest customers get the best service. As such, we who pay nothing for the published reports get the least in content and timing. That seems only fair to me.
The WSJ and Business Week have chosen to operate a subscription business made possible by ad revenues. Everyone gets the same thing at the same time for the same very small fee. As such all who pay the fee receive the same product at the same time.
Regards,
Danny
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
