The SEC is simply screwing te little guy. That's all. If you don't have 25K ultimately you won't be able to trade in this capacity. Little guy gets screwed. So if you are confident the only way you can do it would be if you have the credit to take a cash advance on several credit cards to trade with if you don't happen to have 25k cash lying around.
Tuco not an anomaly
- Thread starter downtickboy
- Start date
The SEC is simply screwing te little guy. That's all. If you don't have 25K ultimately you won't be able to trade in this capacity. Little guy gets screwed. So if you are confident the only way you can do it would be if you have the credit to take a cash advance on several credit cards to trade with if you don't happen to have 25k cash lying around.
As I have posted before, I tend to check things out with a securities lawyer before getting involved. I was advised more than a year ago by an attorney who used to work in Enforcement that companies ( like Tuco--just as an example) were operating as unregistered b/d's and that I should not involve myself in investing in one of these.
I was recently told by the same attorney SEC usually does not take this type of action without a complaint.
I'm not trying to tout my foresight, but good legal counsel is always important. I often go a little "overboard" with the legal bills but they give me a little comfort.
As to Lescor, I am very sorry about your situation; don't make anything worse for yourself by admitting to receiving overrides. Only a registered person is permitted to receive such income, and itshould be paid by a b/d, not an affiliated LLC.
If anyone has missed my previous posts, please google the Birtchtree Letters to get an understanding of just how seriously the SEC takes what we might consider a shortcut.
I was recently told by the same attorney SEC usually does not take this type of action without a complaint.
I'm not trying to tout my foresight, but good legal counsel is always important. I often go a little "overboard" with the legal bills but they give me a little comfort.
As to Lescor, I am very sorry about your situation; don't make anything worse for yourself by admitting to receiving overrides. Only a registered person is permitted to receive such income, and itshould be paid by a b/d, not an affiliated LLC.
If anyone has missed my previous posts, please google the Birtchtree Letters to get an understanding of just how seriously the SEC takes what we might consider a shortcut.
They sec was quite right not to count receivables in their complaint. Unless the receivable was just trades clearing, it would be ridiculous to include them. Back at the start of this thing, it was stated that the one to three million shortfall in the capital account was from a "russian trading group".
I guess it would not bother you to know that getting your money out of tuco was dependent upon tuco collecting millions from some russians, but I think it would bother many traders. It sure would me. If I had placed my money with them, I would want to know if a shortfall of this nature existed, and would be quite uneasy if I found out that the money on my statement was not backed up by money in the accounts, but rather a receivable from some russians. If I was going to loan my money to some russians, it would have to be at a fairly high rate of interest.
three million dollars? don't think so.
Try not thinking then, doesn't suit you. Just look here... all you will need is basic word and number recognition and a couple bucks to register a pacer acct:
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-ilndce/case_no-1:2008cv01685/case_id-218370/
Yea, they were ECN rebate receivables and IMO they should've been counted, but to each his own... in the very least it would have dispelled the whole fraud allegation.
I liked your whole russian shpeel though... funny.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_hnylJ2scVU&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_hnylJ2scVU&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
I didn't even know that Tuco had $3 mil in ECN receivables due (=practically money in the bank), which makes all the SEC 'shortfall' claims completely bogus. So there was a 7-figure <b>surplus</b> of cash, and this crude injustice stinks even worse than before. If the SEC were a privately owned entity, they'd be brought up on extortion charges.
With the billion$ in SEC fees looted from our pockets, the <i>least</i> the SEC could do would be to steal our SEC fee money quietly, and not use it to actively disrupt good firms and steal more money.
With the billion$ in SEC fees looted from our pockets, the <i>least</i> the SEC could do would be to steal our SEC fee money quietly, and not use it to actively disrupt good firms and steal more money.