OSTK ceo

Thanks. Yes, that's why I stay away from small biotechs for the most part, its virtually impossible to know what is going on, and who is pushing the stock around as this one has been. VPHM was another one that was obviously manipulated before it sought new financing.
 
Quote from Mvic:

Thanks. Yes, that's why I stay away from small biotechs for the most part, its virtually impossible to know what is going on, and who is pushing the stock around as this one has been. VPHM was another one that was obviously manipulated before it sought new financing.
More...

That's another point. As citizens, do you want the future of medicine contingent on the whims of the psychopaths pulling this crap?

You'll be laying in a Onocology ward someday, and the head of Delcath will tell you, "we had a procedure to shunt the liver, so you could receive more chemo. But we were manipultated to the point we couldn't raise the money, and you'll be dead soon".

San Quentin Handcuffs on the way. Maybe these guys will believe it then when they're heros are wearin' makeup, and lookin ' at the floor with some three striker hunched over him.
 
Subject: File No. S7-12-06
From: James O Carnes
Affiliation: Retired NYSE Corporate Executive
April 16, 2007

"The current definition of a threshold security is based, in part, on a security having a threshold level of fails that is equal to at least one-half of one percent of an issuers total shares outstanding. Is the current threshold level (one-half of one percent) too low or too high? If so, how should the current threshold level be changed?"

Too high. Before stocks can be shorted, they should be borrowed and marked as borrowed, so as to not be eligible for borrow again. If this procedure is followed, there would not be any fails, so consequently, the question is academic. Continued fails constitute serious harm to investors and to me as an investor.

"The current definition of a threshold security is based, in part, on a security having a threshold level of fails that is equal to at least one-half of one percent of an issuers total shares outstanding. Is the current threshold level (one-half of one percent) too low or too high? If so, how should the current threshold level be changed?"

See answer to question 1. Any and all threshold levels would be eliminated if all shorting without a legitimate preborrow is prohibited. If not harm will continued to be experienced by investors, such as myself.

"Should we consider other amendments to the locate requirement?"

The word "locate" in the rules should be eliminated and replaced with "borrowed" and all borrowed shares should be identified and properly segregated and marked in a manner easily tracked, so the same shares may not be re-borrowed. Investors will continue to be harmed otherwise.

"Some people have asked for disclosure of aggregate fail to deliver positions to provide greater transparency. Should we require the amount or level of fails to deliver in threshold securities to be publicly disclosed?"

If you are going to continue the charade of FTD's, yes absolutely. Fails should not be permitted under a specific rule requiring actually borrowing, but if any FTD's occur, the guilty party should be identified to the entire investing public. Anything less is a travesty and constitute continuing harm to investors. Those guilty of violating the intent and spirit of the securities acts should be available for all to see and any attempt by the SEC to make it legal or legitimate should not be permitted.

"Should we eliminate the options market maker exception altogether? Would this impede liquidity, or otherwise reduce the willingness of options market makers to make markets in threshold securities? Please provide specific reasons and information to support an alternative recommendation."

An unequivocal yes. The options market maker should secure a bone-fided borrow if he is going to short. Otherwise, any attempt to curb the FTD problem, is going to fail. The problem with the current persistent fails has already been identified at least in part to the exception granted to the options market maker and to the grandfathering provisions. There should be absolutely no exceptions for anyone. Settle the trades at T+3. Anything less eliminates any protection and harms the average investor, who the law was designed to protect. Those same laws charge the SEC with it's enforcement. Unfortunately, no recognizable enforcement actions in recent times has been forthcoming much to the detriment of a lot of investors.
 
Quote from nutmeg:

"As citizens, do you want the future of medicine contingent on the whims of the psychopaths..."

You talking about the FDA? :D
More...

......point well taken.
 
Naked shorting coming to Eurpoe

**************************************



By Gordon Smith
FT.com
Updated: 23 minutes ago

A group of leading investment banks intent on setting up a pan-European trading platform to rival the likes of the London Stock Exchange and NYSE-Euronext on Wednesday appointed a company to provide settlement services for the new venture.

The initiative, which is known as "Turquoise" and is backed by seven banks including Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse, has selected a European subsidiary of the US-based Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation.
The appointment of EuroCCP to provide the clearance and settlement services for the new venture is the first indication that the banks are serious about carrying out their threat to establish a rival to traditional European exchanges.

Consolidation has been sweeping the global exchanges sector in the face of competition from new start-ups like BATS and Instinet in the US and Virt-X in Europe. Exchanges are also facing pressure from their users for cheaper dealing costs.

The New York Stock Exchange bought Euronext at the end of last year in the first transatlantic exchange deal and the Intercontinental Exchange is currently attempting to break up a planned merger between the Chicago Board of Trade and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. The LSE successfully fought off Nasdaq to retain its independence but has been forced to cut costs for users to keep their business.

The seven investment banks, which also include Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, UBS and Citigroup, currently account for about half of all equity trading volumes in Europe.

Total trading costs on Turqoise are expected to be less than half the cost on the traditional exchanges when the new platform launches at the end of this year or beginning of next year. The new platform is designed to take advantage of a European Union directive, known as MiFID, which comes into force in November and is seeking to slash the cost of trading in Europe which has traditionally been more much higher than in the US.

DTCC, which is the biggest provider of settlement and clearance services in the US, is setting up the EuroCCP to provide clearance and settlement services for Turqoise. The new venture will be based in London and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

A spokesman for Torquoise said the banks are expected to select a trading platform "in the near future" before naming key executives to launch the project. A recruitment firm has been appointed to sound out possible candidates for the key executive positions.

DTCC is owned by its users which include banks and brokers in the US who trade equities, bonds and derivatives on the likes of the New York Stock Exchange, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Nasdaq. It does not offer settlement or clearing for futures or options.

Citigroup has been chosen by DTCC to be the settlement agent for the new trading platform, which will initially only offer trading only in European equities.

Copyright The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.
 
BofA CEO: Derivatives industry needs meltdown preparation (BAC) By Steve Goldstein
BOSTON (MarketWatch) -- Bank of America ( BAC) Chairman and CEO Kenneth Lewis said at a derivatives industry conference that the industry needs to prepare for a "systemic meltdown," as troubles at LTCM and Amaranth weren't enough. "Would the ensuing workout be orderly and disciplined, taking a cue from established banking practices? Or would it become a free-for-all of lawsuits, with market players jockeying for position among a sea of creditors?" Speaking at the International Swaps and Derivatives Association annual conference, he said the industry needs to prepare for worst-case scenarios.

Who was asking me about trashing the system? They haven't settled trades for years.
 
Funny stuff, if it wasn't so serious.

Overstock, the company now longest on the threshold list, believes that by any standard other than geological, 500 days is an "extended period of time."

Press Release
Overstock.com Marks 500th Consecutive Trading Day on the SEC's '13-Day' Regulation SHO Threshold List
Company Submits Second Comment Letter to SEC on Proposed
Amendments to Regulation SHO
SALT LAKE CITY, April 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Overstock.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: OSTK) (www.overstock.com) yesterday appeared on the Regulation SHO threshold list for the 500th consecutive trading day.

The Regulation SHO threshold list, mandated by the SEC in January 2005, was an attempt to curb abuses associated with naked short selling. Published daily by the exchanges (e.g., NYSE and NASDAQ), the list contains the names of companies whose stock broker dealers have failed to deliver stock sold in quantities above a calculated threshold.

In adopting Regulation SHO and in establishing the list, the SEC stated: "Naked short selling can have a number of negative effects on the market, particularly when the fails to deliver persist for an extended period of time and result in a significantly large unfulfilled delivery obligation at the clearing agency where trades are settled."

Overstock, the company now longest on the threshold list, believes that by any standard other than geological, 500 days is an "extended period of time."

"It took seven days to create the cosmos, it takes nine months to make a baby, but after 500 trading days Wall Street and the prime brokers still can't deliver stock they are selling to Main Street America," said Patrick Byrne, Overstock chairman and chief executive officer. "For 500 trading days, brokers have taken investors' money yet refused to deliver what they sold -- in this case, shares of our stock. Anywhere else but Wall Street the perpetrators would be behind bars. Instead, apparently, they are at bars, discussing stuffed shark art collections while scoffing at regulators and Americans who trusted their savings to their brokers."

Over nine months ago, the SEC proposed two reforms to Regulation SHO: elimination of the "grandfather provision," and a tightening of the close-out requirement under the market maker exception. The SEC has yet to take action on this proposal, but instead rather recently re-opened comment period on these proposed amendments at the request of three people who wished to have more time to examine data that has been in the public record for over six months.

Overstock has submitted a second comment letter to the SEC on the proposed amendments to Regulation SHO (see http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-12-06/s71206.shtml for a list of all public comment letters submitted to the SEC on the proposed amendments). In its letter, Overstock continues to support immediate adoption of the SEC's proposed changes and to urge the SEC to adopt quickly two additional measures to close known loopholes: (1) require prompt disclosure of the current volume of failures to deliver, and (2) require a firm pre-borrow prior to all short sales. Both of these additional measures were also supported by members of Congress, state legislators, executives, academics, business organizations, and public companies.

"Perhaps we should have a list of companies that the rule of law does not protect," said Byrne. "Oh wait -- we already do! It's called, 'the SEC's Regulation SHO threshold list'."

About Overstock.com

Overstock.com, Inc. is an online "closeout" retailer offering discount, brand-name merchandise for sale over the Internet. The company offers its customers an opportunity to shop for bargains conveniently, while offering its suppliers an alternative inventory liquidation distribution channel. Overstock.com, headquartered in Salt Lake City, is a publicly traded company listed on the NASDAQ National Market System and can be found online at http://www.overstock.com.

Overstock.com(R) is a registered trademark of Overstock.com, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

SOURCE Overstock.com, Inc.
-0- 04/20/2007
/CONTACT: Media, Jared Matkin, +1-801-947-3880, jmatkin@overstock.com, or
Investors, Kevin Moon, +1-801-947-3282, kmoon@overstock.com, both of
Overstock.com, Inc./
/Web site: http://www.overstock.com /
(OSTK)

CO: Overstock.com, Inc.
ST: Utah
IN: CPR MLM ECM REA FIN
SU:

KA-SF
-- LAF030 --
1267 04/20/2007 13:12 EDT http://www.prnewswire.com



© 2005 Overstock.com. All rights reserved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top