Comments on Proposed Rule:
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99
Author: James Bennett at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:28 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulatio FD File S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentlemen,
I am writing to recommend the passage of this change to current
regulation. I am a retiree and small investor who has gone to an
enormous amount of effort to learn the investing game. I have been
investing since the the 1960s and could hardly be described as naive.
Therefore I am disappointed to see that according to the investment
"poobahs" I can't be trusted with timely and accurate financial
information.
Lets be honest, selective disclosure combined with after hours trading
gives large institutional investors a huge edge over everyone else.
Because they have the news first, they can and do trade to the
disadvantage of others. What after all is "insider trading" if not
profiting from information not available to the public? Selective
disclosure is in reality a form of insider trading. Naturally, the
financial services industry opposes this change because it would make it
more difficult for them to get away with things. If insider trading
breaks the law, how can selective disclosure be legal? There is no
justification for it, and I call upon you to end selective disclosure.
Sincerely,
James G. Bennett Jr.
2771 Enterprise Road East, Unit 66
Clearwater Fl 33759
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:53 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No.S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
I oppose selective disclosure and hope the SEC will correct this practise.
STOP SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE.
RANDALL L BLOODWORTH
(BELL SOUTH)
Author: Sylvia Bray at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:53 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulation FD:File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Allow disclosure to all at same time.
Sylvia Bray
202 Wembley Ct.
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
Author: "Darrell Bultman" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:13 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am in favor of the Proposed Regulation FD. Please implement it.
Darrell H. Bultman
Author: Robert Camden-Britton at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:45 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support full disclosure so there is no longer the secret information to
brokers.
As an investor, I want my fair access to information.
Robert Camden-Britton
VP, Operations
Hotrail, Inc.
408-467-4435
rcamden-britton@hotrail.com
cell 408-203-9012
Author: "Andy L. Carter" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:22 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99, Selective Disclos
------------------------------- Message Contents
As a US citizen and private equities investor I support this proposed
regulation.
Companies should NOT be allowed under any circumstances to selectively disclose
information on their financial well-being to selected financial analysts without
simultaneously broadcasting that same information to the general investing
public via the internet and other appropriate means. As you well know, I and
millions of other private investors have been financiall injured on numerous
occasions as a result of this malicious practice.
The following is an exerpt of my Email to the enforcement division of the
Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) last year, which is an excellent example
of this disgusting and malicious practice by BellSouth Corporation.
"Please be advised that BellSouth Corporation apparently notified one or more
securities analysts early this morning on March 23, 1999, that they did not
expect to meet expected earnings during the first and second quarters of this
year. What followed was apparently a very rapid sell off by selected investment
firms and private investors during the first half hour of trading this morning
which resulted in BellSouth stock dropping approximately 2 1/2 dollars per share
and maintaining that new price level throughout the remainder of the day. To my
knowledge the news of lower expected earnings by BellSouth was not made
available to the general investor community until after lunch today! If I am not
terribly mistaken, this type of action by BellSouth is quite illegal and they
should of course be held accountable by your agency."
With today's access to market data and information via the internet and other
means, there is NO justification on the part of the large investment firms and
corporate America to be allowed to continue this malicious and injurous
practice.
Yours truly,
Andy L. Carter
2164 Baringer Avenue
Louisville, KY 40204
Tel. No. 502-451-0356
Internet Address: alcarter511@home.com
Author: Joseph Ciaramitaro at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:55 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I think selective disclosure stinks for the individual investor. It
gives an unfair advantage to big institutions. It also rocks ones faith
in open markets. I am in a stock which has been very stable. Today it
went down 2 1/2 dollars, a very exaggerated move for this company, and
after the bell we find out that they preannounce that they will be
missing analyst projected earnings. It was blatantly obvious that
institutions had advance notice of this information during the trading
day, but isn't it unfair to the retail investor to "selectively
disclose" information in this manner? I think it stinks.
Joseph Ciaramitaro
95 East Main St
Gloucester, Ma
01930
Author: "M. COLLINS" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:48 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed Regulation FD, File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
TO: Federal Securites Board DATE: April 28, 2000
I am strongly in favor of the proposed regualtion to eliminate selective
disclosure of companies' financial & 'condition' information to various analysts
and dealers.
The present selective disclosure as practiced has created a new class of
insiders. The SEC Board has done an excellent job of regulating and enforcing
insider trading -- with the net result of creating integrity and equal
opportunity in the markets. The proposed regulation will extend that integrity
further by eliminating the last group of 'insiders' with privileged information.
The analysts and securities dealers will, to be sure, object strongly -- as much
of their 'product value' will evaporate in the eyes of the individual investor.
However, with the passage of this regulation, analysts/ dealers will need to
concentrate on providing true value to their customers -- improved insight &
analysis of the information available to all. This can only spark significant
improvement in the industry.
As to companies providing less, or more narrow informatiion should this
regulation be passed; I find that hard to believe. Since the only change for
companies would be broader channels of disemination, the effort to provide
content remains unchanged.
I am pleased that the Board is considering this measure, and heartily endorse
the passage of it. In so doing, you will effect many improvements in the market
& its industries.
Sincerely, Marcia F. Collins,
President
Strategic Business
Resources
Author: cconger1 at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:53 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I don't understand why the current system of disclosure was ever allowed
in the first place. When a publically owned company shares information
anyone outside the company, that information should be available to
anyone. I encourage change to open disclosure.
Carl E. Conger
4711 Spicewood Springs Rd, #262
Austin, TX 78759
cconger@tivoli.com
Author: "David E. Cullen-Vidal" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:39 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Strongly in favor
David E. Cullen
Author: "Katedurand" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:28 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No.S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC:I believe wholeheartedly with Chairman Levitt's statement that
selective disclosure is detrimental to public confidence in our equity
markets.With increasing pressure on the social security system and on the
individual to take responsibility for their own financial future,it is paramount
that the individual investor have totally accurate and honest information
available.I totally support the rules change. Sincerely Yours,David
Dandurand
Author: "Stephen Doty (WTMI Atlanta)" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:42 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an independent investor who is willing to take credit for my wins and
responsibility for my losses, I strongly support the new rule requiring
full, complete, disclosure to the public of corporate information. I can
only make informed decisions when trading securities IF I HAVE ALL OF THE
INFORMATION. To deny any investor full access to information is
fundamentally unfair. Independent investors should have access to the same
information at the same time, as the "professionals".
There is no valid justification for denying access to some or all of the
information to investors. The opposition to this new proposed rule by the
professional traders is only a thinly veiled attempt to protect their
quickly eroding profession. For them to suggest that I and other
independent investors must be protected from ourselves because we can't
possibly understand all the implications of the information, is demeaning
and just plain silly. Let's have the professional traders compete with the
independents on a level playing field for a change. The outcome could be
very, very interesting.
Sincerely,
Stephen P Doty
Independent Investor
Author: "MadWatch" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:56 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Full Disclosure is VITAL to the individual investor. Let's keep it fair out
there, people.
Have a nice day.
Best Regards,
Brendan D. Drage
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:13 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support the proposal to ban selective disclosure of material information
and to clarify insider trading rules.
Loree Elton
13412 Lois Lane
Austin, TX 78750
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:02 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I applaud the SEC's proposal that the public at large be given access to the
same information at the same time as the Wall Street firms. Empowering the
U.S. investor and encouraging more enlightened participation in the growth of
U.S. companies through the stock market would be highly beneficial to the
U.S. economy as well as the American public.
Kay Garkusha
58 Thunder Mountain Road
Greenwich, CT 06831
203-618-9043
KayJoh@aol.com
Author: Ed & Nancy Goodnight at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:20 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am opposed to the proposed change that would allow companies to give
information to analysts without giving it to the general public at
large. This is a self-serving, unfair tactic of Wall Street analysts
who clearly demonstrate arrogance by thinking the public can't handle
the truth.
Do not approve this change.
Nancy S. Goodnight
Author: "Jay A. Heilmann; OD" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:34 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To whom this concerns:
I am an intelligent investor who would like to have public disclosure of
company news
rather than the regurgitation of a stock analyst. Please do not allow
the unfair
advantage that an investment house has over individual investors
continue. Pleas do not require,
among other things, that companies no longer engage in the practice of
discreetly disclosing
important information to Wall Street analysts without also giving that
information to the public at large.
Sincereley,
Jay A. Heilmann
Author: Greg Henricks at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:02 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC,
We want a LEVEL playing field. Please don't allow selective disclosure
of financial information to Wall Street players. We want FAIR and
democratic disclosure of company information to all investors.
Thankyou for your consideration, Greg Henricks, Oakland CA
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:21 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Penelope Hermes, owner
Company: Wild Images
It's about time we stopped getting an unfair deal from you the SEC, who
should represent all American investors.
* I want the same information Wall Street fat cats gets at the same time
they get it. * I also want earnings announcements to occur during market
hours--not after hours
when mainly Instinet members profit.
* I want you to implement decimalization in July which favors us
non-professional investors.
* I want equal access to IPOs. Not only do Brokers big clients get the real
profit frim IPOs but--when UPS opened as an IPO I tried to buy this stock at
above the market price but the NYSE delayed my purchase for some 10 minutes
while the stock price rose.
****Its time for the SEC to stop what are shameful, and really illegal
practices.
Author: Christopher Jacobs at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:47 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC,
I am in favor of the proposed regulations for leveling the playing field of
corporate disclosures. It is only fair and there is no sound reason why the
current selective disclosure practices should continue. Corporations are
liable to their shareholders, not stock brokers.
Christopher B. Jacobs
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Author: "King; Lyanne" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:20 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern at the SEC:
This proposal to level the playing field is important to the market as a
whole. The internet and emerging technology has changed the way we all do
business, and has allowed greater access to information. The proposal to
combat selective disclosure of information by public companies is in line
with our changing, evolving world of business and investing.
Thank you,
Lyanne King,
Accountant
kforce.com
(800) 347-5356 x 3315
(425) 454-6400 x 3315
500 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1780
Bellevue, WA 98004
lking@kforce.com
www.kforce.com
Author: Shaun Koch at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:19 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 Proposed
------------------------------- Message Contents
Kill selective disclosure. Selective disclosure does not an efficient
market make!
Shaun Koch
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:13 AM
Normal
Receipt Requested
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support the proposed regulation of ending the practice of selective disclosure
of important news information
to elite group of people and leaving out the real investors from getting that
information in timely manner.
Why should the company be allowed to disclose the proprietary information to a
selected group of people
and leave the general public out of picture? It makes no sense to keep an
uneven playing field. Only people
who benefit are the customers of those big brokerage companies which have
special interest in limiting this
type of selective disclosure to themselves. For the security markets to be
fair, it is imperative that the companies
disclosing information to the analysts disclose the same information to
everybody at the same time. Selective
disclosure unfairly benefits only those people with inside information and
hurts the overall public . Elimination of
the practice of selective disclosure should improve the overall fairness which
is absolutely needed now since
many people invest in US equities. It is a best way to make the level
investment field for all.
Author: "Kunnmann; Stephen C" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:31 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an investor who is managing my retirement accounts in both my 401K and
IRA Rollover, I think that the proposed rule should be changed to REQUIRE
companies to disclose company information to ALL INVESTORS equally!
Any other approach is a violation of my equal protection rights.
Steve Kunnmann
Author: "Peg S. Larson" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:44 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I want the playing field to be leveled - no advance information to the
select few!
Peg S.Larson
Author: "LeBlanc; Paul N (GEAE)" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:43 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am opposed to this regulation.
Paul N. LeBlanc
1Welcome St.
Peabody, Ma.01960
> g GE Aircraft Engines ( Paul N.
LeBlanc
Dev. Project Leader
(W) 781-594-9657
Email: paul.n.leblanc@ae.ge.com
Author: Steven Ludwig at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:52 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs,
I am writing you to express my support of regulations that stop anyone
from getting information before it is release to the public.
Sincerely,
Steve
Author: richard mckeon at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:08 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD File #S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective disclosure is happening to the detriment of individual
shareholders. To believe otherwise is to turn a blind eye to the
problem. Does anyone doubt why stock prices go up or down immediately
during or after a conference call which is only available to
institutional investors?
Mr. Hunt and Ms. Unger, I have read that you are concerned with this
proposal because it may be difficult to enforce. This is no reason to be
against the proposal. Selective disclosure laws can be enforced in the
court system when they occur. When that happens and when companies lose
in court for violating a law, a message will be sent. To do nothing is
akin to not passing laws against drunk driving because they are
difficult to enforce. I'm sure the same arguments were made many years
ago when the punishment for drunk driving was much less severe than it
is today.
If you are for selective disclosure, then you are failing to admit the
damage it can do and has done to individual investors. Please support
the elimination of selective disclosure. By eliminating selective
disclosure, you will enable hard working Americans to be on equal
footing with large corporations and wealthy investors. The market
belongs to all investors, not only the select few. Thank you for your
consideration.
Richard F. McKeon
Berkeley Heights, NJ
Author: Frank Mitchell at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:11 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective disclosure is totally unfair to investors .... those in the
public who actually take the risks and are the bread and butter of our economy.
Frank Mitchell
The Railing
Auburn, Al 36830
Author: "Netzel; Thomas CPT" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:52 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective disclosure is bad for the individual investor. It is sanctioned
insider trading. If I would receive information from an inside source and
traded on it I would get in a lot of trouble. But if I am an analysis than
it is perfectly legal. Why???? Please change to rule in this age of fast
information and individuals making there own investment choices. This form
of discrimination against the little person is outdated.
Author: vincent.occhino@us.pwcglobal.com at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:42 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
STOP IT!
VJ Occhino
----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
Author: "Blair Perot" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:57 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective Disclosure is a manifestation of the 'good old boy' network.
It is inappropriate in the modern era, and I strongly support the proposed
regulation eliminating this outdated and unfair practice.
Prof. Blair Perot
University of Massachusetts
Author: "msp4517" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:18 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549
Dear Mr. Katz:
As a fairly new market investor, I believe that selective disclosure is a
substantial threat to the integrity of the US financial markets, and the
Commission is right to oppose this practice. One of the major deterrents
preventing Americans from participating in the securities markets is their
perception that they are not on a level informational playing field with market
insiders. Every time that a security's price moves substantially, and only
afterwards does the information responsible for that move become public,
investors lose confidence in the fundamental fairness of our markets.
I agree with the comment made by the NIRI in 1996. They stated. "Integrity of
the capital markets is based on full and fair disclosure of information.
'Selective disclosure' of information by corporations, whether to institutional
investors or securities analysts or others, raises concerns about the fairness
of the dissemination of information to the securities markets as well as the
specter of liability."
Please oppose this move for selective disclosure.
Sincerely,
Mike S. Pinkston
17360 Caribou Dr. E
Monument, CO 80132
Author: "Lynda H. Polston" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 11:29 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor who has spent considerable time researching and
learning about money and investments I consider it very important to have access
to ALL information available.
This legislation must be passed in order to help individuals like myself make
more informed decisions regarding investments.
Sincerely,
Lynda Polston
Ames, Iowa
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:12 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
"Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 What makes the Wall Street bunch
any better than us little folks who keep them in work? Everyone should get
the same information when it is available. No reason for them to be selected
out from the rest of us. Lyle R. Rolfe, Aurora, Ill.
Author: "Alex Rossmann" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:23 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: file no. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support this regulation.
Alex Rossmann
Health Matters Corporation
xros
Author: Joshua Sayko at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99. We need more
fairness in trading opportunities and a level playing field for all.
Joshua D. Sayko
Author: "Robert J. Schmirler" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:10 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
STOP SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE!
Robert J. Schmirler
Individual Investor
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:06 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom it May Concern:
I am an individual investor. I spend a great deal of time researching
industries and companies within those industries before investing in a
company. If the companies I am interested in would give me their information
before anyone else it would be most appreciated. However, they do not. To
give that information to a small group of brokers is both unfair and in my
opinion harmful to the market as a whole, since it creates distrust within the
market. There is plenty of uncertainty and risk in the market place. Passing
regulation FD will level the playing field and foster more trust within the
market since company information will be available to all who seek it.
I encourage you to pass Regulation FD.
Sincerely,
Matthew J. Shivers
Author: "steve" at Internet
Date: 04/28/1999 10:14 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Talk about insider trading! This regulation is unconstitutional and is illegal.
What about us working public whom are trying to make some sort of retirement
cash. Social Security is dead.
Steve Snyder
Author: Joel Sperber at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:50 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: FIle No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
In the strongest terms, I consider full disclusure to the public
essential. To do less is insulting, and clearly leads larger
investor-analyst favorites to gain early and inside information - to the
disadvantage of the average investor.
Dr. Joel Sperber
Seton Hall University
Author: "Jonathan D. Stewart" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:42 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I strongly support the ban of 'selective disclosure'. Please pass the Fair
Disclosure regulation. My belief is that the internet and other financial
innovations are reducing the amount of friction in the market over time.
Fair disclosure contributes to that end. I encourage you to support Fair
Disclosure.
Jonathan D. Stewart
Abilene Christain University
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:34 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I see no reason why I, as an individual investor, am not entitled to the same
information as is made available to analysts. So far as I know, they pay no
fees for this special treatment (which would benefit me as a taxpayer), nor
do they perform any public service as a result of it. I want the same
information that the analysts get.
Sincerely,
Cornelia Suhler
4725 Woodbound Road,
Keswick, VA 22947-3002
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:10 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am very pleased to know that a ban on selective disclosure of material
information is being considered. I am an individual investor and as such I
want "real time" information, not something that has been filtered and
sugarcoated by some analyst. This is America the playing field must be level.
Please pass this regulation. Its the only fair thing to do.
William Tan
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:48 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Count my vote in favor of "Fair Disclosure"!!
I am a registered voter and very much in favor of this Proposal. Wall Street
and her analysts may have their place and purpose, but that place IS NOT IN THE
FRONT OF THE INFORMATION LINE AHEAD OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.
Glenn Taxacher, P.E.
Author: "VanDyke; Kristine K." at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 10:19 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt;
Sir,
My hearty congratulations to you, Mr. Levitt, for recognizing and acting
against the abuse of the individual shareholder for the supposed "good" of
the public, which is really just the good of the privileged few in the
Securities Industry Association.
The practice of selective disclosure currently in place flies in the face of
honor, justice and equality, upon which this fair country was founded. It is
tantamount to promoting insider trading, with the select few "analysts" (and
their employers) who are deemed worthy of company information acting as the
insiders. Something I believe the SEC frowns upon if committed by
individuals, yes?
Since this is the case, I believe that the SEC would be in contempt of it's
own standards to allow the continued selective disclosure of material
company information, regardless of the spurious arguments promoted by the
Securities Industry Association.
It is the individual shareholder's responsibility to review their holdings
and make decisions based on the information provided by the companies they
hold. To do so fairly this information must be made available to them in a
timely and equitable manner, something championed by the proposed regulation
FD. It is then the individual's responsibility to obtain and review it. If
they have not the time, energy, or mind to do so, then analysts can do this
for them. Those who choose to do so for themselves should not be denied
equal access under the law simply because they are not personally in bed
with the corporate good old boys who dole out the data.
Thank you again for standing for Right.
Kris Van Dyke
303-930-6498
"We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark;
the real tragedy of life is when adults are afraid of the light."
-
Plato
Author: Rich Worthington at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 12:29 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am adamantly opposed to any form of "selective disclosure" by public
companies; therefore, I heartily endorse the current proposal to eliminate
this practice.
Sincerely,
Richard J. Worthington
302 Nottingham Drive
Spring City, PA 19475
http://www.sec.gov/rules/0428b02.htm
