Author: "James C. Anderson" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 7:17 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
I am worried that this rule in favor of the individual investor will not be
promulgated due to the views of those professionals who seem to have greater
access to company information because of vested relationships. They would
preserve these relationships based on the biased view that the individual
investor is inept, incompetent and totally incapable of self determination
regarding investment decisions. This view is incorrect. I urge the Commissioners
to accept Fair Disclosure. It is the right thing to do.
Respectfully submitted,
James C. Anderson
Tucson, AZ.
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 4:45 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern:
Please record my desire for a vote FOR Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99. All investors should have equal access
to information. By this I mean individual investors should have access AT THE
SAME TIME as instituational investors, etc.
Robert K. Bayha
Author: "Derek Bohn" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:36 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Hello SEC,
I am in favor of this rule to level the playing field between professional
money managers and small investors. This rule makes so much sense that were it
to be defeated, I would then have serious doubts wether the SEC is oversees Wall
Street, or Wall Street oversees the SEC.
Sincerely,
Derek Bohn
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:56 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. s7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am for stopping selected disclosure of financial information.
John
Claughton
Author: Roy Coles at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 8:14 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: file no. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
The proposed regulation will correct a basic defect in disseminating
important financial information. No one group of people should be
favored in this regard, and the average investor should be entitled to
equal treatment. From personal experience, financial advisors are not
necessarily more competent than investors when it comes to managing
investor's money. Please pass Regulation FD S7-31-99.
Sincerely, Roy D. Coles
Author: "George Collins" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 12:00 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Rule comment
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please vote to allow all documents and reports that are released to analysts
to also be released to the public at the same time. There are two reasons
you would not want to release this information. One is reason is that you
feel the public should not be trusted with it. The other is that you want
to preserve the power of traditional analysts. I won't comment on the
latter issue, as I hope you will rise above it.
Although volitility de to mob mentality is certainly a concern, the amount
of accurate information can do nothing to increase that volitility. If you
choose to restrict information there will be inevitable pressure to release
it, and probably rumors about it. The easiest way to weaken the power of
rumors is to create transparency wherever possible. Release documents to
the public and there will be fewer secrets to whisper about.
George Collins
Author: chrcook at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:29 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As a retiree and online investor I would like to have access to Co.
information
at the same time brokerage firms receive it. Please level the playing
field.
Gene H. Cook
24824 CR 20
Elkhart, IN 46517
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:02 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair Disclosure Ruling
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am an investor, 57, who supports the importance of the SEC approval for
companies permitting real-time press releases to the public as well as the
Wall Street firms. The skill of the private investor to interpret the
information will certainly vary, with some able to responsibly gauging the
value of the new information, while others will continue to rely on
assessments secondarily released by Wall Street firms. Freedom to interpret
information simultaneously is a positive step when more and more people take
advantages of real-time Internet communication.
Bob Crowell, private citizen
Hudson, Ohio
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:29 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
The preferential treatment for wall street must end.
I recently attended an earnings conference call (via the Internet). The
information that I was able to hear from company officials was very
interesting. I learned the breakdown of sales by different products and by
major customers. From this information, I can assess FOR MYSELF the risks
involved with owning this stock.
I looked for this information in the past, but not all analysts think these
details are important.
I want a level playing field. I can manage my own money. My returns are
better than investment advisors, without the huge fees. Fees are what the
big boys are trying to protect by arguing against this proposal.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment,
Brian Dallmann
Author: Brian Dawson at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 7:01 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: bd@sec.gov at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
The current system of selective disclosure where companies give important
information to their analysts without simultaneously sharing this information
with the investing public should be illegal!! If I were to do something
similar, it would be called "inside information"! There seems to be a double
standard. Wall Street's brokerages often take positions in a stock that are
opposite their share holding clients... how does this protect my interests??
The Wall Street analysts that cover the companies I have invested in never fail
to put a "spin" on the data that they present.... they barely demonstrate they
understand what they are talking about themselves.... take CDMA and 3G for
example! I have lost track of the times a Wall Street analyst has completely
distorted information or at least misstated critical details when presenting
information to the public.
The playing field should be level. I should have access to the same information
the brokerages have and have access to this data within the same time frame. If
I decide that the news is too complex for my tiny mind to process the data (this
seems to be Commissioner Laura S. Unger's position -what an insult) then I will
wait until the brokerage "dumbs it down" a notch or two so I can grasp the
information.
However, that should be my choice as an investor. Under the current system of
selective disclosure, I have no choice. I am forced to wait for information
second hand. I am forced to wait for the "spin" to be applied and then to get
the information "spoon fed" to me by brokerage houses that have already applied
the information to their advantage.
Thank you for reading this far,
Brian Dawson
Author: "Laurence W. France" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 8:21 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: File# S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs:
Please level the playing field! We, the investor, are the markets.
Thanks
L. France
Lancaster, PA
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 11:44 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As a citizen of the U.S., taxpayer and investor, I urge the SEC to pass the
above-named regulation and to stop the endless flow of "insider information"
to the "big guys". It is time the individual investor is considered and
becomes privy to the same information as the Wall Street insiders.
Thank you for your consideration.
Carol Furlong
Author: Daniel Gantenbein at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
I firmly support a ruling in the interest and to the benefit of the
educated individual,
ultimately the public at large. It is difficult to separate facts and
interpretation; selective
disclosure is as undesirable in the free market as it is in education.
For Fair Disclosure and the SEC's support
Daniel Gantenbein
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 8:27 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Propose Reg3 S7 31 99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Pls be advised, as a Sr citizen investor, I 'm opposed to the current policy
of Selected Discosure to Analyst and other insiders that give an inherent
advantage to the preferred investor who return the favor in kind. Pls be
aware that public policy should require a level playing field without
preferential treatment to certain insiders who can trade thier market power
for a first look before the public is made aware. In effect if we allow
Selected Disclosure to remain permissible we are given certain individuals a
preferential status. Pls correct this inequity. James Gordon
Author: "Dorothy" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:11 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am an individual investor and think I should have access to the same
information and at the same time as the Wall Street Analysts. Why would you
penalize individuals in favor of the big money people?
Dorothy Hannan
Author: "Bill Henning" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 8:39 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please vote to make disclosure to everyone the law. It is absurd that such
information be kept secret, or only privy to a few. We all pay taxes, and it
is our taxes that pay your salaries. Please vote for our benefit.
Maike Henning
13811 Halpren Falls Circle
Cypress, TX 77429
Author: Richard Hildebrand at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
------------------------------- Message Contents
There should absolutely be a rule prohibiting companies from passing
material market moving information on to favored Wall Street analysts without
simultaneously making the information available to the public at large.
It is unconscionable to NOT have such a rule in effect.
For John Adams to write that most individuals are not capable
of managing their own money is a bit ingenious. How can individuals hope
to compete with and manage their money successfully when the big guys are
playing with INSIDE INFORMATION?
Commissioner Laura S. Unger, while acknowledging in a recent speech
investor enthusiasm for the rule, fears that investors might soon suffer
from "information overload." Commissioner Unger, THE ONLY THING WE
SUFFER FROM IS "iNFORMATION underLOAD", WE GET IT ALL TOO
LATE.
Promulgate the rule, please!
Richard Hildebrand
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:23 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Results
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sir:
I believe that the common investor should have the same information as
the analysts and at the same time. Postponing the information flow puts us
at a disadvantage in the market place. Some comment that the average investor
does not have the ability to wisely invest without the assistance of an
Analyst may be true but it still sounds self-serving on their part.
If the investor is losing money now by buying when the market is up and
selling when the market is down how can additional information do him any
more harm??
It the above statement is true, then perhaps the average investor would be
better off without an analysts opinion.
I am a small investor and before I buy or sell I try to find the latest
information, add my broker's advice, and then make my own decisions. And I
didn't do much better than average this year. How can more, up-to-date
information hurt me if I know it at the same time as my analyst??
Richard Hogue
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:16 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir(s),
I urge you to adopt this proposal because it will give consumers
the timely and unfiltered information they need to make wise investments.
Sincerely,
Steven Jandreau
Self-employed
Author: "Ronald E. Johnson" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:11 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I urge a vote for passage of Full Disclosure.
My impression from watching the analysts on CNBC is that they do not
accurately convey the information that companies provide. Seems to me
they present things in a way that is designed to promote their company's
interests, not in a way that is clear and unbiased.
It's simple human nature to want the power that they now have to distort
the news to their own benefit. This needs to be stopped. Full
disclosure needs to be made to the general public at the same time
analysts recieve the information.
Ronald E. Johnson
Retired
Author: "D. Scott Kee" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:07 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: dskee@att.net at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To the SEC,
Since you will be voting on Thursday on the Proposed Regulation FD: File
No. S7-31-99, I would like to reiterate my support for this regulation. As
I said in my e-mail of 17 December 1999, I am greatly in favor of this
regulation's attempt at leveling the playing field for all investors.
My father always has been against me playing the market because he believes
that the big boys had all of the inside information and so the game was
cooked in their favor. Kind of like the house odds at a casino!
I hope that each of you will feel compelled to vote in favor of this new
regulation. Give everyone an even shot!
D. Scott Kee
Black Cloud, Inc.
P.O. Box 321499
Cocoa Beach, FL 32932-1499
321-784-9902
321-784-9903, Fax
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please, we individual investors need full and equitable disclosure of
financial details.
Joseph A. Masters
128 Stewart Street
Goose Creek, SC 29445
Author: "M. Muqtadir" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 11:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs,
I know that in these final days leading up to the vote on proposed reglation
FD no S7-31-99, many of you who are members and are on the Board of the
Securites and Exchange Commission are beset with many comments and responses
from us the general public. Let me jsut leave you with this one thought.
Over the past few years we have seen an explosion of individuals investing by
themselves, for themselves and the financial futures of their families. Would
it not seem right then to remove this one barrier that could actually make
the "playing field" fair for all. Please I urge each and every one of you to
vote for the Fair Disclosure regulation and open up the disclosure of private
company information to the investing public. Thank you.
-Sincerely
M. Muqtadir
Author: rpadgett at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:14 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed reg Fd:File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I can't begin to explain how strongly I feel that this Reg should be put
into law. Thomas Padgett
Author: Fred & Denise Reimer at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 5:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please approve this regulation
Let's have a level playing field for stock investing.
Thanks
Fred B. Reimer 310-454-1855
[A concerned small investor]
Author: "Herman Reller" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 7:39 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Reg. FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I recommend that you allow all investors to information from public companies at
the same time. Fairness is important to investors large and small. Thank
you. Herman Reller,
retired. Crystal, MN
Author: "Barbara Armstrong Samuelson" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 9:03 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I believe that open disclosure laws are in the public's best interest.
"Insider trading" is the term for allowing only selected parties to know
privileged financially-relevant information so that they may profit at the
expense of those who don't have that knowledge. As far as I know, this is -- or
should be -- illegal in all cases.
Paternalism has no place in this debate. I have not appointed any broker to be
the guardian of my estate. So why should someone I've never met be allowed to
"parent" my access to marketplace information? (Picture Jack Nicholson
screaming, "You can't HANDLE the truth!") That's not his decision to make!
Thank you,
Barbara Samuelson
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 11:17 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I strongly encourage the SEC to pass proposed regulation FD: file no.
S7-31-99. It is absolutely ridiculous to consider that a level playing field
would harm common investors. The exchange of information in an open
environment can only lead to a more informed citizenry and investor.
Give me one good reason that "professional" investors on Wall Street should be
told information before the rest of us. Isn't that truly insider investing in
its simplest form? And doesn't that just mean that in order to take advantage
of this early information one must PAY the analyst? Seems grossly unfair to
me, and should be illegal.
Pass the regulation.
Allen Smith, M.D.
Hartsville, S.C.
Author: "Anne and Jason" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:05 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To whom it may concern:
I would like to encourage Commissioners Unger and Hunt to vote for proposed
regulation FD. A vote against this regulation is a vote for the old-boy system,
and it is unfair to millions of small investors like me.
I am an independant investor. By "investor," I mean that I am someone who buys
shares of companies I like and holds onto them for a while. I spend a fair
amount of time following the news about the companies I own. Since I don't own
many different companies, this doesn't require much time every day, but it does
require constant vigilence.
Selective disclosure puts me at a disadvantage. If I find out terrible news
about a company I own a day later than the institutional investors, I have the
pleasure of watching my stock drop like a rock while they are selling. Then I
find out what happened, and if the news is bad enough, I have to sell at a loss.
If the news is good, I may miss a buying opportunity.
All I am saying is that I'd like to see a level playing field. It does not hurt
the institutional investors one bit if I know what they know when they know it.
They claim to provide a value-added service. All selective disclosure allows
them to do is call up their biggest clients and give them news in advance of
public disclosure. This reeks of "insider information," and in my opinion there
is no difference. It is positively un-American. The value added service that
the analysts provide should be analysis, not 24-hour prescience.
It has been said by the investing professionals that people like me are going to
lose money - that we are not smart enough to be responsible for our own
finances. This is a blatant untruth. Since January, my portfolio is up over
90%. Show me a mutual fund that did that well in the same time period. This is
in a down market, mind you. The mutual funds have fared poorly. Many of them
have lost money during this time period.
Given my recent experience, I would rather manage my own money than let a
professional do it. After all, I have degrees in both engineering and computer
science (graduated at the top of my class), and I work in a small pre-IPO
start-up, so it is easy for me to spot future winners among the pack of
also-rans. I believe, truely, that most of the money managers out there do not
understand the core business of the companies that they are buying. I
understand things about companies that guys on Wall-Street in their suits and
ties cannot seem to fathom, and that is my advantage. I am in the thick of
things, but they see it from the outside. Who better to invest my money than
me?
I don't want to pay an analyst to "filter" the news for me. If that is the
case, I won't get the information until after the bigger investors have their
turn anyway. By then the stock has either been bought or sold and the market
has moved. This is unfair to small investors like me, and again, I believe
there is no difference between selective disclosure and insider information.
Both should be made illegal.
Thank you for your consideration.
Jason Spencer Smith
218 E. Nebraska Ave.
Berthoud, CO 80513
970-532-2615
Software Consultant and Independant Investor
Author: "George & Julie" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 8:54 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please, please, please level the playing field. Stop selective disclosure. It
only benefits a few big players on Wall Street, at the expense of the individual
investor. I would rather have too much information than not enough in deciding
where I am going to invest my hard earned money.
George Tanner
Author: Kevin Twibell at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 12:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir or Madam:
I urge you to level the playing field for the small investor and change
the current selective disclosure law in your vote on Thursday.
Sincerely yours,
Kevin Twibell
17 Sloane Court
Stony Point,N.Y. 10980
Author: "Logan D. Williams" at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 10:47 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Approval of this regulation is, in my opinion, a major step to putting the
professional money managers and the individual investors on an equal
footing. Please, approve.
Logan Williams
Williams Machine Works, Inc.
PO Box 13307
Memphis, TN 38113
Author: at Internet
Date: 08/08/2000 11:48 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please consider the following:
Companies which enjoy the privilege of early, exclusive access to information
are given an unfair advantage. The fact is that these companies play the
markets with their own interests at the forefront. There can be no
justification for giving one market player and advantage over another.
Markets have become more democratic. The rules should follow in accordance,
with fairness, equality and freedom of information as the prime
considerations.
George Wolff
