OSTK ceo

the WSJ has published two letters from the SEC whistle blower. They are some of the most damning indictments of the brokers and system I have ever seen. He throws Mack under the bus big time. The second letter alone is 18 pages. Sorry I"m a novice and can't attach it, but it basically is the end for the SEC as we know it, IMHO.
 
Quote from flytiger:

http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000230033533/

I think someone hears footsteps. This shocked me. But, I expected them to be men and ride this to the end. However, the rats are jumping ship.

Mark Cuban quotes in the preceding article

...."Which leads to one of the things I look for when I short a stock.

The louder a company complains about the shorts, the worse the company. Companies bitching and moaning about shorts trying to hit their stocks are companies that are far too worried about their short term stock price and are looking for an excuse to give their shareholders.

A smart CEO is out there telling shareholders that the numbers will speak for themselves, that the company is doing what we set out to do, and if you believe in what we are doing, buy the stock. If you don’t, you probably shouldn’t.

A company with problems finds a reason to talk about anything but the company as a reason for the stock not doing well. It reminds me of the music industry. They didn’t want to address what really was causing sales to fall, so they blamed it all on the internet and piracy. Piraphobia in their case, Shortophobia in the case of public companies. Rule of thumb, IT’S NEVER THE SHORT SELLERS, IT’S ALWAYS THE COMPANY.
"........

-Mark Cuban

Pay attention there slick, you dont seem to be smart enough to find articles which don't trash your prescious POS OSTK.
 
Watch Wednesday, Sonny, the landscape is about to change. Cuban is a punk that thinks money buys respect. I think Blumenthal et. al. may change that.

NOTICE OF FULL COMMITTEE HEARING

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1972
June 21, 2006




NOTICE OF FULL COMMITTEE HEARING


The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing on "Hedge Funds and Independent Analysts: How Independent are Their Relationships?" for Wednesday, June 28, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226.

By order of the Chairman

-----

Tentative Witness List
Hearing before the
Senate Judiciary Committee
on

"Hedge Funds and Independent Analysts:
How Independent are Their Relationships?"

Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226
9:30 a.m.

PANEL I

The Honorable Matt Friedrich
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
Crime Division
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, DC

The Honorable Richard Blumenthal
Attorney General
State of Connecticut
Hartford, CT

PANEL II

Gary Aguirre
Former Investigator
Securities Exchange Commission
Washington, DC

Marc Kasowitz
Senior Partner
Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP
Alliance for Investment Transparency
New York, NY

Joseph McLaughlin
Partner
Sidley & Austin LLP
Managed Fund Association
New York, NY

Kim Blickenstaff
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Biosite, Inc.
San Diego, CA

Owen Lamont
Professor of Finance
Yale School of Management
New Haven, CT

Demetrios Anifantis
Former Employee
Camelback Research Alliance, Inc.
Scottsdale, AZ

Howard Schillit
Chief Executive Officer and Founder
Center for Financial Research and Analysis [CFRA, LLC]
Rockville, MD

Jonathan Boersma
Director
Standards of Practice
CFA Centre for Financial Market Integrity
Charlottesville, VA


TESTIMONY

MEMBER STATEMENTS

Shorts had a tough day today. Seems the Prime Brokers are a little reticent to play their games lately.
 
Quote from flytiger:

...... Cuban is a punk that thinks money buys respect.........

Well for once we agree on something, we are making progress here :p


Why did you post the article if you think cuban is a punk??

Sorry for cutting the quote wanted to get the point across.
 
Everybody needs to be heard. I wonder how long guys like Cuban, Gasparino, etc. , will spend their capital apologizing for this mess?

Couple things. The PEIX and LBIX, big Neg Rebate stocks working out. Interesting.

I am hearing from VERY reliable sources, the neg rebate "for real shares" of OSTK is 100%. So these shorts "maintaining" this position are being extorted by the Primes. Why would the qualifier be "real shares"??? Anybody? They've been kiting shares for years. Why now would the qualifier be "real"..

Gasparino was on CNBC this morning trying, in a bullshit story, to discredit Aguirre. It really didn't work. He said an SEC source told him they couldn't enforce their muzzle on him. Well, Aguirre is a 66 year old attorney. Wouldn't he know that? He spent a year investigating this. Wouldn't there be evidence, or is out to just blow his life up?

Spector is very motivated. Sources tell me his illness has focused him on a problem he has ignored in the past.
 
DJ SEC Looks To Close Gaps In 2004 Short-Sale Rules



By Judith Burns

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES





WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The Securities and Exchange Commission is looking to

close some of the gaps left open by a package of short-sale reforms adopted in

2004.



At an open meeting Wednesday, the SEC will consider three modifications to its

Regulation SHO, which loosened some short-selling rules while cracking down on

abuses such as "naked" short selling. The changes being considered would tighten

the 2004 rule by eliminating a "grandfather" exception for some hard-to-borrow

stocks, according to individuals familiar with the matter.



Short sellers sell borrowed stocks, profiting when stock prices decline and

shares can be replaced at a lower price. In "naked" short sales, the seller

doesn't borrow or replace shares sold short, a practice Regulation SHO sought to

curb by requiring brokers to locate shares to borrow before executing customer

short sales. The SEC imposed stricter requirements for hard-to-borrow

"threshold" securities, but exempted previously existing short positions, which

the SEC said would avoid potentially volatile trading that might disrupt

markets.



Market data suggest that a big chunk of delivery failures in borrowed stocks

are in positions shielded by the SEC's "grandfather" provision, prompting the

SEC to rethink its stance. Since the volume of shares covered by the

"grandfather" clause is tiny compared with the overall market, "we're

comfortable that this can be done without causing dislocations," said SEC

Commissioner Annette Nazareth.



At Wednesday's meeting, the SEC will vote to seek comment on a plan to

eliminate the "grandfather" protections and bring previously existing short

positions under the stock-locate requirements of Regulation SHO. The SEC will

propose that pre-existing delivery failures be closed out within 35 days after

the rule change takes effect, which will require a second vote by the

commission, likely later this year. Individuals familiar with the plan said it

should put brokers and other market participants on notice now to borrow shares

or close out naked short positions in "grandfathered" stocks.



At the same meeting, the SEC will consider two other changes to Regulation

SHO. One would tighten an exception from the rule for market makers in stock

options, requiring them to close out short sales that hedge an options position

with 13 days after the option expiration date - the same deadline imposed by

Regulation SHO for hard-to-borrow "threshold" stocks. Individuals familiar with

the proposal said the exception for options market makers has been another

source of stock-delivery failures and that tightening it should help reduce such

failures.



A third change the SEC will propose is a minor one that targets an exception

from short-selling restrictions for unwinding net short index-arbitrage

positions, which is available provided the market hasn't declined by 2% or more

from the prior day's close. Individuals familiar with the plan said the SEC will

consider whether to change the market-decline index used to limit the exception

from the Dow Jones Industrial Average to the New York Composite Index.





- By Judith Burns, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-6692;

Judith.Burns@dowjones.com





(END) Dow Jones Newswires



07-11-06 1612ET



Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.









Judith Burns

Reporter

Dow Jones Newswires

(202) 862-6692



fax (202) 862-6644
 
Well, I'm shocked. I don't know what changed, but look here.

Commentary
Covering Up Naked Shorts
Harvey Pitt 07.11.06, 3:00 PM ET

Harvey Pitt


Washington, D.C. - As crisis after crisis afflicts the business community
and our capital markets, all too often the response is a form of reverse
laissez faire. Business waits for government to tell it three things: if it
has done something wrong, why it's wrong and how to fix it. The ineluctable
result is that, like Rick's crooked police pal, Captain Renault, in the
movie Casablanca, we're "shocked, shocked to discover" we don't like the
government's responses.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending upon one's perspective), the
business community's repeated crises has given it an opportunity to modify
its laissez faire attitude. But so far, it hasn't shown the resolve.

A case in point is the current crisis in short-selling. Short-selling is a
useful and critically important capital market phenomenon, but only if done
appropriately. Among other things, it provides essential liquidity in thinly
traded stocks, enables thoughtful traders to limit the degree of risk to
which their portfolio holdings are subject and serves as an effective
counterbalance to the herd mentality too many analysts and investors
exhibit.

In a real sense, short-sellers are marketplace lone wolves (or, more
precisely, lone bears), ignoring the herd, trading against conventional
wisdom and sometimes uncovering real corporate frauds far ahead of
self-regulators, regulators, prosecutors or even plaintiffs' attorneys. On
the other hand, companies have been victimized by professional
short-sellers, some of whom, on occasion, resort to dubious tactics--and
even market manipulation--to ensure the success of their bearish gambles.

The problem with our current short-selling paradigm isn't short-selling
itself, as many CEOs might prefer to believe. It's the ability of
short-sellers to sell stocks they haven't actually borrowed in advance of
their short sale. It's a phenomenon described, somewhat lasciviously, as
"naked" short-selling. Naked shorts expose sellers and those "linked" to the
sales to the risk that, when settlement day arrives and shares must be
delivered, the short-seller won't have the necessary shares available.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission recognizes this is a problem,
but its efforts thus far haven't generated much success. In 2004, the agency
adopted Regulation SHO, which, among other things, requires short-sellers
and their brokers to have reasonable grounds to believe securities being
sold short can be "borrowed so that [they] can be delivered at settlement."

What constitutes "reasonable grounds?" That depends on whom you ask. Many
prime brokers, for example, satisfy the requirement of reasonable grounds by
assuming that, if large long positions reside somewhere in-house, they can
borrow from those long positions without bothering to check if the shares
are actually available for borrowing and without ascertaining if those same
shares have already provided reasonable grounds to permit another short sale
of the same security.

This can lead to "over-shorting" of securities, a phenomenon in which the
number of shares shorted can even exceed the number of shares physically
available for trading. To combat naked shorting of heavily shorted
securities, technically known as "threshold" securities, the SEC's rule
requires brokers planning to effect a short sale in a threshold security to
have in place, prior to shorting, a definitive arrangement to borrow those
shares.

In addition, in May 2006, self-regulatory organizations adopted SEC guidance
that any shares bought-in by a broker to satisfy undelivered shorted shares
must be applied to the earliest undelivered shorts. This essentially
requires brokers to buy-in all shares they've failed to deliver once any
shares must be bought-in. In January 2005, there were 520 threshold
securities. Today, even with the SEC's efforts, there are still 235,
including some that were on the list of threshold securities back when the
concept was first created. On Wednesday, July 12, the SEC takes its third
stab at trying to solve the problem.

Because of the legitimate concerns this situation engenders, state
governments are roiling the waters. Utah has adopted its own law to dictate
how short transactions should be effected, and Connecticut has threatened to
enter the fray as well. We're in danger of facing a quilted patchwork of
state regulations to govern an important facet of what are uniquely national
(and global) markets.

At the same time, plaintiffs' lawyers are pressing lawsuits accusing brokers
of collecting fees for lending shares to short-sellers without actually
having borrowed the shares. If these allegations are proved, the result
could be a black eye for the brokerage community, large payments to
aggrieved parties and much tighter regulation.

The securities industry and clearing agencies don't seem to recognize that
it's only a matter of time before these problems catch up with them and kill
off the goose that is, at present, laying very golden eggs. The securities
industry needs to seize control and propose effective remedies to increase
transparency in stock lending and borrowing.

Securities and clearing firms need to act quickly. Or else they, to
paraphrase Will Rogers, will have to be content to live with even more
government than they're already paying for.

Harvey L. Pitt is the CEO of Kalorama Partners. He was chairman of the SEC
from 2001 to 2003, currently serves on the audit committees of Approva and
the National Cathedral School, and writes a monthly column for
ComplianceWeek.

The World's Best Big Companies
 
Back
Top