Comments on Proposed Rule:
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:57 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: RULE COMMENTS
------------------------------- Message Contents
proposed reg. no. 57-31-99
i am against analysts getting info before the rest of us.
riki andreoli
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:13 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Propsed Regulation FD:File No.57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please vote for the individual citizen and consumer. Do not pass this
legislation! This is not a vote for your constituents, its a vote for an
industry that preys on uninformed consumers.
Humberto Avila
Author: "Dale Beardsley" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:17 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support regulation FD.
D. Pearson Beardsley
432 Lime Kiln Road
Lexington, VA 24450
(540)464-3107
Author: "earl bland" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:36 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: limited disclosure rule
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please stop this unfair withholding of vital information from the public at
large and stock owners in particular. This practice only encourages and
facilitates those with special connections to make buy and sell decisions
based upon priviliged knowledge. The only way this can be honestly viewed
is to recognize that it is an illegal use of inside information by selected
persons acting as extensions of corporate officers for the profit of insider
surrogates. It should be eliminated and banned as if it were
surreptitiously performed by friends, relatives or other associates of
corporate insiders.
Thank you for your interest in my opinion.
Earl G. Bland
President
Micro Works, Inc.
14175 Clarksville Pike
Highland, MD 20777
301-854-0540
Author: "Lee R. Bradford" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:31 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: I support public disclosure of corporate financial informati
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support public disclosure of all corporate financial information and urge
you to pass rules prohibiting companies from selectively releasing
information to favored analysts.
Thanks,
Lee R. Bradford
___________________________
Raymond James Financial Services
309 E. Mountain Ave., Ste. 200
Fort Collins, CO 80524
970.224.2193 888.869.0400 Fax: 970.224.2194
mailto:lbradford@rjfs.com
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:15 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Level the playing field and require that individual investors have access to
information just like the street. thank you, Henrietta Brown
Author: "Kimberly Burger" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:18 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentleman and Ladies:
I am a small investor in stocks and mutual funds. It has come to my
attention that select financial professionals are privy to information before
individual investors and others. One of the devices through which this is done
is conference calls and even, I am told, preferred access to financial
statements.
These practices should be prohibited. It skews the market and gives select
people and entities an unfair advantage.
/s/ Chris Capozzi
Author: "Marilyn Chattin" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-33-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support your proposed regulations concerning making full disclosure. I am
opposed to the current system of selective disclosure. As an individual
investor, I believe I should have the same right to information as private
brokerages. Thank you for correcting this unjust system.
Marilyn Chattin
Touchstone Pottery
2418 Old County Road
W. Halifax, Vermont 05358
touchstn@sover.net
Author: Mark Coker at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:03 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Regulation FD Comments from Mark Coker, Founder, BestCalls.c
------------------------------- Message Contents
On behalf of BestCalls.com and our 65,000 registered members, I applaud
Chairman Arthur Levitt and the dozens of other individuals at the S.E.C.
who have taken bold action to stamp out the insidious practice of
selective disclosure.
I support Regulation FD. Regulation FD will provide the S.E.C. the
authority it needs to investigate and prosecute selective disclosure
offenders. The mere threat of S.E.C. scrutiny will cause every public
company to adopt fair disclosure practices.
Regulation FD is necessary to maintain confidence in our public
markets. It establishes a framework for best practices by providing
companies clear guidelines on how to manage fair disclosure.
Opponents to Regulation FD have raised two primary concerns, neither of
which I agree with, and both of which I will address here.
1. Opponents to Regulation FD claim it will have a "chilling effect" by
reducing the quality and quantity of information disclosure.
BestCalls.com response:
In March of 1999, we launched a public directory of earnings conference
call schedules. At the time, nearly 80% of public companies had a
policy of excluding individual investors from their calls. Today,
nearly 70% of public companies provide individual investor access to
their calls. While this reversal in shareholder communications
practices is dramatic, it didn't happen overnight.
Most of these companies were initially reluctant to change their
shareholder communications practices. This was not a surprise,
considering that investor relations is, by necessity, a conservative and
risk averse profession. In fact, a primary reason many companies opened
their conference calls for the first time was to reduce their risk of
selective disclosure liability.
Yet after opening their calls, many of these companies learned that
broader disclosure of information could actually help them retake
control of their shareholder communications message. After years of
feeling like they were held hostage by the opinions of a few Wall Street
insiders, companies welcomed the opportunity to reach out and
communicate with a broader investor audience.
Many companies who were initially reluctant to open their conference
calls have since increased their level of communications via webcast
conference calls, management interviews, shareholder meetings and
investor conferences. And contrary to the arguments of Regulation FD
opponents (or opponents of the open conference call movement for that
matter), the quality of the communications has not suffered.
Many enlightened public companies now view disclosure as a shareholder
communications opportunity and not as a burden. As companies embrace
the principals behind fair disclosure, the frequency and quality of
shareholder communications increases. By communicating more openly with
their investors, companies cultivate shareholder trust and confidence,
reduce surprises, and do a better job of attracting and retaining long
term investors.
2. Opponents to Regulation FD claim that the regulation is no longer
needed now that companies are voluntarily opening up their conference
calls.
BestCalls.com response:
While many companies have indeed opened their calls to the public,
Regulation FD is still required to protect the confidence and integrity
of our markets.
When it comes to selective disclosure, conference calls are only the tip
of the iceberg. Although the open conference call movement has helped
shine a bright light on the problem of selective disclosure, selective
disclosure remains an endemic practice. Selective disclosure remains
pervasive at private analyst conferences, one-on-one meetings, phone
briefings, and invitation-only management presentations.
I strongly encourage the S.E.C. to adopt Regulation FD. Selective
disclosure must stop now. All investors deserve equal access to market
moving information. It shouldn't matter if a investor owns one share or
one million shares. Every investor is an owner and deserves fair
disclosure.
Sincerely,
Mark Coker
Founder and President
BestCalls.com
mark@bestcalls.com
http://www.bestcalls.com
Author: "wmc" at Internet
Date: 04/29/2000 4:36 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Need Good Info to Make Informed Decisions
------------------------------- Message Contents
I'm keeping this short and brief.. Although I know your department has heard
much on
this from many individual investors I feel it is important to express my
view....
As a current long term individual investor you must know it is extremely
important for
me to recieve as much accurate and timely information as possible. Serious
individual investors
are very capable of tolerating risk, given the necessary information to make
good descisons.
Witholding timely information from the individual investor is not fair. I will
not be as
inclinded to digest information delievered by a 3rd pary source, broker or who
ever,
as i would straight from the horses mouth.
Sincerely,
Greg Crysler
Author: "Michael E. Dexter Sr." at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Level Playing Field
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern,
If a company is a PUBLICLY traded company, that would mean shares of
said company are available to the PUBLIC. Therefore, any information
about the PUBLICLY traded company, should be made available, to the
PUBLIC, at the same time the information is made available to anybody
else, reguardless of their occupation.
Respectfully,
Michael E. Dexter Sr
Author: elaine drage at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:38 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: disclosure rules
------------------------------- Message Contents
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Please give us full disclosure
rules. sincerely, david j. drage
Elaine Drage
Author: "JIM ELLIOTT" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:32 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: open information
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs:
I respectfully ask the SEC to allow the individual investor to receive the
same information at the same time as the analyst. I need this information to
make rational investment decisions.
Sincerely
Jim Elliott
Author: "TERRY Flakus" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:24 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed REg FD:No 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Let's have a level field for a change. The future of the stock market is the
individual investor. We need information that we can rely on. Businesses
should tell us the truth and all of the truth!We own these companies! Why
should they, our employees, be allowed to lie and conceal information. Do
what is right!
Terry Flakus, Investor
Author: djhunt at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:39 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. 27-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am in favor of an end to selective disclosure.
Desiree Hunt Floyd
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:40 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: S7 Full & Open disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
To promote trade and commerce fairly and equitably, full and open disclosure
is welcomed. Good job SEC.
A M Fonda
Author: Robert G Freiburger at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:41 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
RE: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.S7-31-99
It is my understanding that there is some conflict over this proposal. I
don't see that there should be any problem or hesitation putting this in
force.
Any information made available to any portion of the investing public
should be made available to all members of the investing public. Period.
End of Story. There should be no favorites.
As an indivdual investor with a long term orientation, and as a volunteer
with the National Association of Investors Corporation, better known as the
NAIC, I think that we the investing public, should have a fair and even
chance.
Robert G Freiburger
PO Box 204
New London, WI 54961
freirob@athenet.net
Author: "Kent Gregory" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:21 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sirs;
It seems to me that this is a timely and important move. It has long seemed
unfair to me, as a small private investor, that large money managers are
privy to information that I am not able to acquire. It smacks of Insider
Trading to the small investor, such as myself. Why should the weight of
one's investment portfolio entitle one to information that is not yet
Public Domain? Doesn't this seem to, at least, infringe upon the rules
concerning Insider Trading?
Over the years we have been witness to a number of prosecutions related to
the disbursement of Inside Information to private investors, and the
profits yielded therefrom. It seems little different to me that a
Professional Investor acquire this information for a select few with the
funds large enough to invest at the minimum level required by many of the
Funds that are gaining value through this type of information gathering.
I may be ill informed concerning just how some of these mechanisms actually
work, but it still seems to be unfair to me.
Thank you for your time.
--
Kent Gregory
V.P. - Strategic Account Development
Herco Technology Corp.
Pho:(858)679-2800 ext.155
Fax:(858)679-7565
Author: "Paolo Angelo" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:03 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: stop selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
please stop selective disclosure. thank you.
wash hamilton
Author: "Charmen Hummel" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:57 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Right-on SEC
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed legislation FD - full marks and it is about time that all investors
have a level playing field. Stop the old school tie network and let the market
become truly fair to all.
C Hummel
Author: "Jimenez; Rick" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:36 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7 - 31 - 99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I oppose the passage of this regulation.
Richard Jimenez
Chubb Computer Services
651 Route 1 s.
North Brunswick, NJ 08902
Author: "Mohammad Khan" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:09 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: PROPOSED RGULATION FD:
------------------------------- Message Contents
I AM IN FAVOR OF "RULE NO. S7-31-99"
MOHAMMAD KHAN
04/28/99
Author: David Klausmeyer at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:39 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Comments on 34-42259
------------------------------- Message Contents
Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, DC
Dear Commissioners:
It is quite unfair that 100 or so analysts and large investors are given
inside information during these conferance calls when 10,000 other
shareholders have no clue what is going on.
The only fair system would be to stop trading during these conferance
calls with the Company issuing a press release highlighting all the good
and bad news diseminated during the call before trading can resume.
Secondly place the entire conferance call on a web site and record it for
play back on a certain phone number, and schedule the conferance calls
monthly on a certain day i.e. first Tuesday, etc. so that all investors
could participate should they so choose.
Sincerely,
David M. Klausmeyer
288 Litchfield Lane
Houston, Texas 77024
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:35 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Would rather have accurate information then
have to deal with unsubstantiated rumors being
floated.
Please pass this rule. wolfgang mann
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:03 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: RULE CHANGE
------------------------------- Message Contents
I WANT THE RULE ENDED
JOHN MASTERSON
Author: Lee McCrumb at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:43 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: New SEC disclosure rules
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please let it be known that I am in favor of new fair disclosure rules to
individual
investors.
J. L. McCrumb, President
Laser Analytical Systems, Inc.
3333 Bowers Ave.
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:34 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Open Information for Investors!
------------------------------- Message Contents
Once again, the SEC is limiting information to the investor by allowing
investment analysts the most open and timely corporate information instead of
simultaneous and full disclosure for all. Thanks for offering to protect us
poor, ignorant, emotional investors by keeping us in the dark "for our own
good."
To me it's just another version of the IPO stance the SEC takes. "Golly, the
little ol' SEC can't do nothin' bout it if that big ol' underwriter wants to
reserve IPO shares for their favorite investors! Guess you little guys are
just too poor to be allowed to play! Your're just lucky we let you buy
shares later, after the big profits are made, of course!"
Come on, guys. Everybody's whatching this one. Make equal & simultaneous
information available to all. Investors will continue to lose faith in the
SEC, and so the stock market, when they are treated as second class players
and purposely kept uninformed.
Linda McDaniel
Eugene, OR
Author: Ben Miller at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:29 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Equal access to information
------------------------------- Message Contents
Members of the Securities Exchange Commission:
I write in strong support of regulations requiring that companies make
their financial information available to the public at the same time as they
make that information available to members of Wall Street institutions.
The current system, which keeps the public in the dark, violates the basic
principles of democracy and right to information. A privileged class has
special access to time-urgent information.
Institutional investors wield enough influence over the markets without
granting them the informational leverage to run up prices on privileged
information, leaving individual investors chasing the trends. I hope your
reform of this situation comes to pass.
Benjamin Miller
Author: Sven Nilsson at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:07 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Failure of Chairman Leavitt's Selective Disclosure proposal
would be a failure of "the individual investor's advocate."
--Sven J. Nilsson
A small individual investor
Author: "Russell O'Grady" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:33 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Comments
------------------------------- Message Contents
Are you people out of your minds? What makes you think the general
"investing" public cannot handle the information provided to brokers?
Get with the program folks or the first time someone loses his or her
savings investment due to a ridiculous ruling such as you now propose -
you'll be faced with public outrage, not to mention lawsuits "up the
wazoo". In addition, public confidence will drop and the market will
fall like you wouldn't believe.
Sincerely,
Clyde R. O'Grady III
Author: "Lee St. Peter" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:08 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Comment on proposed Reulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
As a small investor looking to build retirement income since my spouse and
I have no retirement plans through our employers, I think the SEC should
oblige companies to disclose material facts to the public at large rather
than to a select few (chosen) within the professional investment inner circle.
Fair is fair.
L. St. Peter
*************************************
" Real Estate is my Business "
LEE ST.PETER, GRI
Prudential Carolinas Realty
3933 Arrow Drive
Raleigh, NC 27612
Tele: 919-782-5502
VM: 919-645-2521
Fax: 919-782-2940
Web Page: http://stpeter.home.mindspring.com
E-mail: stpeter@REALTOR.com
***********************************************
Author: "Steve Phare" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Regulation FD (Fair Disclosure)
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Chairman Levitt:
I strongly support Regulation FD. In the early 1970's, I invested
considerable time and finances in the stock market. However,
because the brokerage house I was dealing with was not upfront with me; I
made some very bad decisions. It has only been because of the advent of the
internet which enables me to engage in my own research that I dared
investing in the stock market after a 25 year cessation.
I adamantly support full and fair disclosure of all publicly traded
companies over the internet and by public press releases. I would also like
to see a regulation that would require companies to also make their
conference calls open to all interested parties.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to comment.
Steven C. Phare
email:sphare@gjct.net
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:33 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
For an organization which is charged with prosecuting investors for trading
on inside information, to allow selective disclosure of information is a
gross violation of common sense and rationality. It is government protected
sinecure for those organizations which qualify, allowing them to profit from
" inside information". It is, in my mind , inexcusable.
Dave Rawson
1066 Woodland Meadows Dr.
Vandalia, Oh. 45377
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:12 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No.S7-31-00"
------------------------------- Message Contents
I believe that individual investors should get company news at the same time
as the analysts.
Rich Rhodes
Author: "James Rossi" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:03 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: ltiger@prodigy.net at Internet
CC: jim@thewoodhills.com at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File # 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Securities & Exchange Commission:
I am writing to support full disclosure of business information to the
investing public. The dynamics of public ownership have changed.
America's competitive success has always been dependent on enterprise &
ownership. In decades past, this often took the form of small family-owned
businesses. Increasingly, they have been supplanted by large companies.
However, the American public continues to own its businesses. Over 50% of
Americans own shares of these publicly traded companies, retaining &
increasing their stake in the economic & social progress of the country.
Owners & prospective owners require all pertinent information on all public
companies.
The information revolution has empowered all motivated Americans &
accelerated the growth & progress of our society. Full disclosure will
foster that trend, accelerating investment to the best corporations &
upstart young companies, making markets more efficient. In the long run, it
will decrease short-term market volatility. Information is power, & full
disclosure will ultimately favor long-term investing over short-term
speculation.
JIM ROSSI
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY
james_rossi@hotmail.com
Author: "peter sabean" at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 11:34 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Rule on Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am an individual investor and generally support the idea of prohibiting
selective disclosure. I think having information available to individuals
and institutional analysts equally is sensible and will bring more investor
confidence to the markets.
I think care should be taken though, not to over-regulate businesses in the
process. I would worry about government micromanagement, oversight and
potential corporate liability regarding what information is or is not
considered "material". I see in the news reports an ongoing dialogue about
this aspect which I believe is important and could be resolved.
Peter Sabean
Sabean Design
Author: "Charles" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:17 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
This should be a no brainer. The investing public should not be discriminated
against.
Investors should have full and timely disclosure. They, investors, are not
being paid to be analysts.
The arguement that investors are capable of understanding all items on financial
statements
is not just reason for discriminatory dissemination of information. If
investors suffer from
improper investment decisions than it should be there decision as to continuing
in the
investment arena.
Charles Schmidt
email: charles@bshinc.com
Author: "Jeffrey Schwartz" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:37 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I have been an individual investors as well as a buy-side analyst on Wall Street
and the bias of the SEC in this matter concerns me. I do not believe that the
general public should be allowed the same access to companies that professionals
have. The reasoning is quite simple: The general public is not in a position to
understand the information. If we include the general public in all information
releases from companies, the information will by necessity be "dumbed down" and
the most important information will be unexplored.
As an example, when I called on a company to ask specific questions to flesh out
my earnings model, I asked questions the general public would never think to
ask. I spent hours of work on models after being trained for years on their
construction. I would tend to doubt that the average investor has spent the
smallest fraction of that time in financial analysis. Does this person deserve
to have immediate access to my conversations with a CFO? Would the CFO even be
allowed to take my call? If I cannot have the conversation, how can I fulfill
my fiduciary responsibility to my funds clients? How could I make investment
recommendations without that specific knowledge?
I believe we have all seen how little the general public knows about finance and
investing. They certainly do not understand the nuances of GAAP nor the
econometric models used in researching equities. Mr. Greenspan commented
recently that he did not believe most "investors" could distinguish what they
were doing in the stock market with a trip to Las Vegas. I agree. This is
precisely why allowing them into the analyst conference calls would be a
mistake.
As far as I understand the role of the SEC, it was created to protect the
individual, uninformed investor. I took several examinations concerning, and
placed my signature on papers attesting to my belief in the, SEC's regulations.
I promised to abide by these rules, which restrict my investing activity. I am
not allowed to invest in certain securities without clearing my trades through
my compliance department. This is a huge disadvantage to me but I accept it
because I believe in this rule's importance. I believe the vast majority of
analysts hold the same view. Of course there will be people who take unfair
advantage of inside information but these people are few and far between. I do
not believe most of the inside information is even passed through professional
channels. Most would come on the golf course or at a dinner party. Should
analysts be allowed to intrude on the conversations held by a CEO and his golf
foursome? Should all directors of publicly traded companies be required to wear
microphones at all times so that everything they say is broadcast to the public
immediately?
In summary, I believe the information flow can be improves to make markets more
efficient but this idea is ill-conceived. The SEC should be vigilant and
prosecute insider trading harshly. This is the deterrent. Allowing equal
access to financial information will not cure the problem at all. It will only
serve to make markets less efficient by reducing and delaying the pertinent
information flow from public companies. This is precisely the opposite of what
the financial markets require to be stable and trustworthy.
Jeff Schwartz
Author: "Ronald Slaughter" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:22 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please let us all know the same information. How can we be informed
investors if we are kept in the dark?
What happened to the insider trading rules, sounds like they are getting
squished to me.
Ellen Slaughter
Author: "Smith; Carol Ann" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:25 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regualtion FD: File No. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please end selective disclosure!!! The general public deserves to
have the information that is sent to analysts. They haven't done anything to
merit this special treatment. End it NOW!!
C.A>Smith
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:35 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: More Disclosure!
------------------------------- Message Contents
To the SEC:
I think it is time to democratize the decision-making for all investors. It
feel that it is undemocratic to allow corporations to disclose certain
information only to those that can use it to increase the profitability of
their own large investments.
Us small investors are not uneducated or stupid. We can and need to have all
the information that anyone else has.
The professional investment community has had it their way long enough.
Sincerely,
Holger R. Stub
Author: "Ronmar" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: info
------------------------------- Message Contents
Wall street already has enough advantage. Please don't give them anymore. Let
the little guy have some level playing field.. This is already an admistration
for the elite. I am an average citizen. I would like a fair chance.
Sincerely,
Ron Taylor
Author: "Terwey" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:27 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File no. S-7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I agree with the proposed change. Selective disclosure is grossly unfair.
Everyone should have access the SEC files at the same time. Thank you.
Edith Terwey
Route 4 Box 122
Long Prairie, MN 56347
Author: Earleen Thomas at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:52 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
------------------------------- Message Contents
The point is freedom of information! I vote YES on new rules to combat
selective disclosure of information by public companiesAs a part owner
of a company, I have a right to know what is happening even before
analysts do. I am an insider and have a right to make decisions about
my investments without the filters of others' interests!
Please don't let the big money firms and lobbyists rule this area, too.
Earleen R. Thomas
Author: "Scott Turner" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:09 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Dear Big Brother, Please stop selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Big Brother -
I am a big boy and can be trusted to interpret information. Why you think
that analysts and mutual fund managers (90% of whom under perform the
market) are entitled to full financial disclosure, but I, an individual
investor, citizen and voter cannot be trusted - is simply beyond
comprehension. My freedom is more important than your protection.
Scott Turner
Author: "Joe Ball" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:41 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Lets Stop Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir,
Its 11:40 PM in Honolulu, where i live. I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99.
Please apply it.
sincerely,
Joseph A. Ball
Customer Retention Manager
Servco Pacific Inc.
Honolulu, Hawaii
Author: Gary Bottemer at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Rules Change
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor proposed regulation FD: File NO S7-31-99
Let everyone have the same information at the same time
Gary D. Bottemer
Author: "Kimberly Burger" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:18 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentleman and Ladies:
I am a small investor in stocks and mutual funds. It has come to my
attention that select financial professionals are privy to information before
individual investors and others. One of the devices through which this is done
is conference calls and even, I am told, preferred access to financial
statements.
These practices should be prohibited. It skews the market and gives select
people and entities an unfair advantage.
/s/ Chris Capozzi
Author: "J. Derting" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:27 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern:
As individual investors, we are very much opposed to the unfair practice of
"selective disclosure".
Sincerely,
Joe and Jan Derting
Abingdon, Virginia
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:15 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Anita Gard
3154 Laurel Grove South
Jacksonville, FL 32223
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:22 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Reg FD:File No. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I'M OPPOSED!
Edith C. Nelson
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentlemen,
I fully oppose the selective disclosure bill-lets think twice!
Keith T. Helmer
Author: "Robert Proctor" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 2:02 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-
------------------------------- Message Contents
Wall Street should not condone Machiavellian obstacles to free markets.
Brokerage firms, pundits in the ear of government (cp., lobbyists, cp.,
SIA), and over-regulation are dangerous servants and fearful masters.
Perfect markets need perfect and equal information. Adam Smith's "invisible
hand" applies: Human progress is empowerment of the individual. A measure
of wealth is the number of quality choices available.
Please endorse the Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 to allow
investors the information to make quality choices.
Sincerely,
Robert Proctor
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:33 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: level playing field
------------------------------- Message Contents
I would like to see that retail investor like me will be given the same
opportunities and previliges accorded to the big guys, the institutional
Investor.
Edita G. Sanderson
P.O. Box 43-167
Port Hueneme, CA 93044
Author: "jSchumac@earthlink.net" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:19 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" is probably sufficient.
John Schumacher
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:01 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation File No. 7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
The public really is intelligent enough to handle the same news as people
within the investment industry Please allow us the same opportunity. Carol
Simone
Author: jack/martha sisko at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed
Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
jack sisko
Author: csylva@webtv.net (Christine Sylva) at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:11 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: New regulaton
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support the new reg. to make any information available to ALL
interested parties, rather than the "insider" system now in effect,
concerning company and institution fiscal status.
Thank you! Christine Sylva
Author: "John Turner" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:02 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
It seems intuitive to me that companies should make equal disclosures of
information to individual investors and investing institutions. I can't
conceive of a rational argument as to why an institution should be privy to
vital information which would be kept (or delayed) from an individual investor.
Thanks! -John Turner MD, johnturner@pdq.net
http://www.sec.gov/rules/0428b01.htm
