Comments on Proposed Rule:
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99
Author: Deborah Bartley at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:47 PM
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
Gentlemen:
The traditional brokerage of many years ago made huge amounts of money
by having a virtual monopoly on the trading of stocks. This industry
had for many decades become ingrained with the thinking that they
justified their commissions by virtue of their existence. Discount
brokerages made it economical for the smaller investor to take part in
the excellent long term savings potential of the stock market. The
proliferation of mutual funds improved the smaller investors position
further. The widespread availability of the 401K plan has brought long
term investing home to unsophisticated ordinary people seeking nothing
more than a good retirement without government assistance. Widespread
availability of electronic trading has brought the cost of trading down
to incredibly low levels, allowing smaller investors easy access to the
markets.
Full commision, full service brokerages have their place serving
institutions and wealthy investors. Allowing them to make large amounts
of money by dealing in information denied to the remainder of investors
is nothing short of LEGALIZED INSIDER TRADING. The privleged
information allows institutions and wealthy investors the opportunity to
buy or sell at a clear advantage over the remainder of investors. This
is the same kind of advantage that insider trading laws were written to
prevent. The fact that outside brokers and analysts are the people
MAKING MONEY DEALING IN PRIVELGED INFORMATION does not make this
practice substantially different from insider trading. Instead of
having a conflict of interest between their employers interest and their
stock trading, these brokers and analysts use different recommendations
for their large customers than for the small investor. Alas, almost no
one believes any more that these analysts are NOT slanting their public
recommendations in favor of the companies they get good inside
information from. They do this at the same time they are tipping off
the wealthy account holders to the priveleged information.
This is an institution which allows certain corporations to make large
commisions or consulting fees by trading in LEGAL INSIDE INFORMATION.
Large accounts pay these hefty fees in order to use this privileged
information to make money by having a clear advantage over other,
usually smaller, investors. Companies provide this information in
return for good public recommendations from the analysts. The money
lost by smaller investors trading at a disadvantage finances the whole
scheme.
Because a dedicated professional trader in privleged information is not
an employee of the firm which he gets the information from does not make
this practice any less corrupt than insider trading. It is nothing more
than the large players lining their pockets by stacking the deck against
the less influencial investors. It does not make the market more
efficient. It is a diversion of money away from investors into the
coffers of the information peddlers. In this day of amazingly fast and
efficient communication, absolutely no claim can be made that they are
disseminating information. The claim that they are offering
professional advice is the opposite of the truth. They are offering
incorrect or non-existent public advice to the smaller investor in order
to allow the large account holders to fleece the smaller investor and
pay the information broker with a share of the ill-gotten gains.
It is time to stop this diversion of money into the pockets of the
wealthy and influencial. Let them earn their money the way everyone
else does. Let the brokers and analysts EARN a living by offering sound
advice. Let the companies EARN good stock recommendations by providing
sound financial performance. Let all investors have fair and equitable
access to corporate information.
Gary Bartley
Small investor
Author: stephen blatt at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:33 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulation FD:FILE No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
i support making analyst meetings of publicly traded
companies available to individual investors.
stephen blatt
wayynesville, nc
Author: "Larry Box" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir and/or Madam:
I am strongly in favor of passing the Fair Disclosure regulation that would
allow the individual investor access to the same information, at the same time,
as the Wall Street elite.
For far too long it has been thought that the individual investor does not know
enough to invest for their future. Naturally that is the thought of those that
currently have access to this privileged information.
Now, thanks to the Internet, that the individual investor has the ability to
think through and act on volumes of information, let us have it at the same
times as those that are supposedly acting on our behalf.
Again, I strongly recommend the passage of this regulation.
Sincerely,
Larry Box
1954 Brigance Cove
Germantown, TN 38139
larrybox@bigfoot.com
Author: "Kirk Bredenberg" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:07 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Greetings,
I am in favor of (Proposed Regulation FD) that would 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. It is my opinion that this
practice can not be defended in any logical way. The Securities Industry
Association argues that individual investors are not intelligent enough to
make their own decisions about the value of securities and need Wall
Street's analysts to hear and interpret important information first. This
fact is not only untrue but is irrelevant. Without ALL of the companies
information the individual investor can not make a completely informed
decision on a security.
Thank you for considering my opinion.
Just an individual investor,
Kirk W. Bredenberg
6718 Amhurst Drive SW
Cedar Rapids, IA 52404
TCOCR@mcleodusa.net
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:37 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: DBrown1041@aol.com at Internet
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
David H. Brown
Author: "pscaseys" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:34 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I hope I am not too late, but I wanted you to know I am in favor of the above
mentioned PR.
Sincerely,
Mike Casey
Author: Elan at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:40 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am writing to express my support for this regulation. As an
independent minded investor, selective disclosure of financial
information is against my best interests. The only way to ensure a fair
market and promote investor confidence is to ensure equal information to
all. Professional analysts serve no interest but their own.
Sincerely,
Elan Caspi
an employee of The Motley Fool
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:00 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
Karen Darr
10520 South Kostner Avenue
Oak Lawn, IL 60453
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:01 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It Concerns,
This is to let you know that I am not in favor of proposed regulation No
S7-31-99
Sincerly,
Hubert Denny
Author: Bill Fray at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:21 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Thank You,
William J Fray
Author: "Pam Gade" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:06 PM
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, giving equal disclosure to the public,
not just to the Wall Street insiders. The public is better off with the choice
of making their own decisions based on the facts. To do any less is to sell out
our welfare, making us dependent upon those who have their own biased views,
which may include lining their own pockets. Give us equality of information.
We can handle it.
Pam Gade
Author: Colin Gordon at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:45 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Keep the palying field level !
--
Colin Gordon cgordon@cisco.com ERP Systems
Administrator Cisco Systems, Inc. San Jose.
Author: "Grant; Mick" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 2:39 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I just wanted to chime in that I am against disclosure of company
information only to wall street analysts, et. al, without disclosing to the
public at large. For obvious reasons, this allows institutional investors
access to inside information, and since it's illegal for the public to do
that, so should it likewise be for the institutional types.
Warmest regards,
Mick Grant
Author: Jonathan Hecht at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:04 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
Jonathan Hecht M.D., Ph.D.
University of California, San Francisco
Author: "Kastanek; Mike D" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:18 PM
Normal
Receipt Requested
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Regarding the proposed regulation to bar companies from selectively
disclosing material information. I feel this is long overdue. There is no
reason to limit information to a select few "analysts" and keep the
information from the investing public until after all of the investment
houses have made their moves on corporate news. Allowing that type of
insider trading should be considered unethical and makes a mockery of the
concept of a fair market. With the advent of the Internet, the investment
community is considerably more informed and has access to a wide variety of
outlets of information.
Regarding the Use/Possession Issue, I would be 100% in favor of this if this
rule applied to ALL market participants (large and small). Typically
regulations of this nature fall hardest on the small individuals while the
large investments seem to get away with grand larceny. In reference to the
above paragraph, if the SEC allows the big investment houses to execute
trades on closely held information, then allows these same investment houses
to manipulate the markets by utterance of a few choice words by influential
individuals to national network outlets (such as CNBC) this equates to
corruption at the highest levels. If the Use/Possession rule goes in effect,
this must apply to all levels and be strictly enforced at all levels! If the
SEC is looking on focusing on only the small investors, I am totally opposed
to this rule. Once again, placing a focus on the small investor while
ignoring the large investors, makes a mockery of the market.
Another suggestion, if the large investment houses are allowed to move
markets by commenting on trends as well as sector rotations, I strongly urge
their trading activity (as well as the networks' trading activity they are
using to broadcast the message) be made public in real time reporting on a
daily basis.
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Reg. FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Complete and open disclosure is the fundamental premise of our American Stock
Market and it is imperative that you maintain open disclosure.
Daniel R. Kory 419.868.9763
Author: "Jo Ann Kremers" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:00 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Jo Ann Kremers
2107 Palma Sola Blvd. #84
Bradenton, FL 34209
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:46 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective Disclosure to "analysts" is unfair & should be stopped!
Louis F. Linden
1468 William St.
Baltimore MD 21230
Author: Daniel Lyons at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:33 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: daniel.lyons@fema.gov at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am writing to voice my opinion on Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is proposing to change the
rules that currently allow companies
to give important information to Wall Street analysts without
simultaneously giving the news to the public at
large. Wall Street is spending big and lobbying hard to keep the current
system of selective disclosure in
place but the current practice is not fair.
I am asking that the SEC take action to STOP SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE and
that the Proposed Regulation FD be implemented. Thank you.
Daniel Lyons
(individual investor)
23 Logan Circle
Washington, DC 20005
Author: jerry majdic at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern:
Please pass Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
Jerry Majdic
16111 SE 17th St.
Vancouver, Wa 98684
Author: "Margoluis; Richard" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:15 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I'm for it.
Richard Margoluis
Author: John Maupin at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:33 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
John Maupin
Meridian Idaho.
Author: "McDonald; Jarl (jarl)" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:46 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99. Information should be
disbursed to all at the same time.
Jarl McDonald
IBM Corporation
(425) 558-9232
Author: "Jerome and Beth McQuie" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: S7-31-99 Comments
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor and a professional within the high technology sector
of our economy, I support the Commission's efforts toward full disclosure.
Many times I have observed situations where comments made about the advisability
of a potential investment were supported by an observation about the person
making the recommendation such as "that person is (or is not) allowed into
investor road shows." The obvious implication is that if you are not in the
inner circle, you are at disadvantage, and you will make less of a return than
the preferred group.
I believe fear of exclusion from the preferred group is prevalent among
investment professionals. As a result, they are reluctant to say anything
negative about any company. I find it impossible to believe that only 1% of all
stocks warrant a "sell" recommendation. I believe another symptom of selective
disclosure are the wide gaps between what a stock's initial public offering
(IPO) price is and its first trading price; there are a lot of bright and
talented people in the investment community and I don't think they have
consistently mis-priced the fundamental value of initial public offerings;
instead I believe the differences are caused by the promotional whispering
campaigns that come out of the pre-IPO road shows and occur during the quiet
periods. Eliminating selective disclosure should minimize these effects.
I support the intent and most of the substance of Regulation FD.
I share the concerns raised by PR Newswire about the means of disclosure. A
Form 8-K filing should not be the sole indication of public disclosure. I get
most of my investor news from major wire services such as PR Newswire,
Associated Press, or Reuters. I believe most individual investors get their
information by the similar means. A publication by one of these services should
be construed as meeting the simultaneous public disclosure requirement.
I also share the concerns raised by Charles Schwab, Inc. I agree that "road
shows" over the Internet need to be carefully defined and watched. The
technology for effective simultaneous broadcast of video and audio information
across the Internet to thousands of people is theoretically available but has
current practical limitations. I have participated in several "web-casts" on
non-financial topics with several hundred other people and frequently have had
problems joining in; if these had been investment discussions involving the
disclosure of material information, I would have been a victim of selective
disclosure. As a result, "Internet road shows" should not be allowed as a means
of public disclosure; in addition, given the ease of allowing of someone's
friends or preferred clients to join an Internet Road Show anonymously, they
should not be allowed as a means of disclosure to investment professionals only.
Perhaps in two to five years, the Internet infrastructure will be fully in
place to allow this as a means of public disclosure, but not now.
Finally, I support rules 10b5-1 and 10b5-2 as proposed.
Jerome McQuie
Glenview, Illinois
Author: jeffmetz at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:43 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please listen to the Fools and bring an end to the egregious practice of
selective disclosure. Otherwise how can the general public trust that
there is a level playing field when investing in the equities markets.
Jeff Metzler
138 Mile Level Road
Bedford PA 15522
814-624-0083
jeffmetz@nb.net
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:46 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Regulation FD: F
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern,
As an individual investor, I support the Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99, as I believe it will result in a fairer distribution of security
information to all investors, whether large or small.
Thank you for your consideration,
Jennifer S. Molnar
Yardley, PA
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:44 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am in favor of Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Steve Morgan
3304 Sandy Beach Road
Grand Island, New York 14072
(716) 773-0967
Author: "Richard H. Rick Norris" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 3:19 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulation FD S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I need the same info as a mkt. analyst as I do not rely on them for information
nor advice
Richard H. "Rick" Norris
Author: Eve Owens at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:19 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
All investors carry the same risk as every other investor; why should
some have access to information not given to all. This action gives big
investors the opportunity to sell out while small investors loss value
in their stocks. It is probably more important to the small investor
because he or she has a greater risk because they have far less money
than the large investors.
Thank you for the opportunity to express my views.
Eve N Owens
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:39 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
Mary Page
Author: Terry Politi at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:48 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Would urge you to pass the proposed regulation to ensure a fair and
level playing field.
Author: Eugene Prandini at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:14 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
"I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99"
Eugene J.Prandini
Author: "mark russo" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:12 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. s7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposal reg. fd: file no. S7-31-99
Mark A. Russo
Author: Uri Sabadosh at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:02 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor the proposed regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
Uri Sabadosh
Author: David at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:08 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
David Shoemaker
Port Neches TX 77651
Author: "Robert Shore" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99. --Robert Shore
Author: "Joana Taba" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 1:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99. It's about time the SEC
leveled the playing field for us common folk investors.
Joana L. Taba
41-525 Flamingo Street
Waimanalo, HI 96795
Phone: 808-259-5050
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:52 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed reg. FD File# S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
We need a free flow of information and ideas; open disclosure is the only
way to go!
R. Tallakson
La Quinta, Ca,92253
Author: "Dwayne & Jennifer" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:17 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99.
J Tatum
dltjdt@home.com
Dublin, Ca. 94568
Author: Siva Thoppe at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I don't think analysts should have 'priority' access to 'insider' type
information..
I oppose 'Selective' Disclosure...
I as an individual investor would like to know what is going on in the company
that I have invested in ASAP.
Siva.
Author: "Donald Toole" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:20 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed regulation FD File no. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Respectfully,
Donald P. Toole
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 8:53 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Thank you
Wayne Van Zandt
3912 Tanglebrook Road
High Point, NC 27265-1265
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 9:24 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:50 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
RE: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
The United States has instituted valid laws to prevent insider trading.
Providing information to the Wall Street analysts prior to making it available
to the public will create insiders out of these analysts. Insider trading
is not fair, and individual investors are an integral part of our economy.
Please allow the common investor to receive the same information that
Wall Street analysts receive. Please give this information to both the
analysts and the individual investor at the same time.
Regards,
A. Vogt
Author: Rich Williams at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 4:09 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs,
I support the proposed SEC regulations to limit the ability of companies to
selectively disclose material information.
Thank you,
Rich Williams
Author: "Steve Wolf" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 7:37 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Re: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am all for the proposals in Release No. 33-7787. The ability of
common investors to research companies on their own (without going
through a broker) is wonderful. I recently took control of my
investments from a broker and have made use of EDGAR searches over the
Internet as part of my "due diligence". The immediacy that the
Internet brings to the investing arena is a freedom that must be
protected and enhanced for all investors, not just for a chosen few.
Regulation FD will protect my interests as a private investor by
ensuring that any disclosures about a company must be public. Selective
disclosure is as contrary to the interests of investors as is insider
trading.
Rules 105b-1 and 105b-2 will also protect my interests by clarifying
insider trading laws. These clarifications will prevent insiders, who
are typically holders of large blocs of stock, from manipulating the
market to the detriment of the "outsiders" like me.
Thank you for considering these changes.
Regards,
Steven D. Wolf
Private Investor
Author: "Wright; Anthony" at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 6:40 PM
Normal
Receipt Requested
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: "'Dudley; Clint W'" at Internet
CC: "Leary; Brenton" at Internet
CC: "Holland; Robert" at Internet
CC: "'WKeithline@timex.com'" at Internet
CC: "'timjsullivan@home.com'" at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom it may concern, (website address below)
IMPORTANT, YET LITTLE KNOWN...
ALSO, FRIDAY (4-28-00) is the last day to respond...
How can the selective disclosure of information by public companies be
tolerated in our "pseudo"-free market system? Is that not the same as
'Insider trading'? If these companies are 'publicly' traded, the shareholder
should have the same access to information about his/her company as analysts
(or anyone else). Anything short of full disclosure to all concerned
individuals is unfair and should not be tolerated or legal.
The SEC is moving in the only rational direction concerning the
dissemination of information. By not 'leveling' the playing field, a
mistrust of the financial institutions begins to grow in the minds of the
investors that Wall Street is trying to court. This lack of trust helps to
fuel the market volatility that 'Wall Street' claims to be trying to
eliminate.
When the level of competency of the individual investor is compared to that
of the full-service brokers/analysts, it seems that the knowledge gap is not
so far as 'Wall Street' would have you believe. If analysts were so good at
predicting stock performance and reacting to market news, why do 80% of them
fail to beat the S&P index? Personal experience has taught me that the
combination of my 'vested' interest and intelligent research will beat 90% of
the professional analysts recommendations. While I still maintain a brokerage
account, but the investment advice is more often than not worth its cost
($0).
Please do not allow this SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE of information continue. It is
not justified, and should not be any more legal than 'insider trading'.
Thank you
Anthony W. Wright
CIA to GPS Migration of CCN
Phone: (281)-518-9979
Email: Anthony.Wright@compaq.com
PS - Friday is the last day to respond, see this website for more info -
http://www.fool.com/specials/2000/sp000424sec.htm
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/28/2000 5:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Corporate disclosers should be made public at same time they are disclosed to
analysts.
Please ratify fair disclosure.
Robert F Yeager
2676 Third St
Cuyahoga Falls, oh 44221-2737
Individual Investor
http://www.sec.gov/rules/0428b06.htm
