posted
thanks bond...we did see that 1. legel as it wired into his beepers so that any time of day he gets the news...lol just not real sure he would post anything negitive even if its from frizzy.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
If the company issues shares then who ever was issued shares are on the shareholders list. Also the CEO or any officer must have there shares registered because of insiders rules. As far as relatives and friends unless they bought them on a online or broker account which I don't think they would then UC gave them the shares and they would be part of the share holders list. You people can dream al you want but none of these people own shares that weren't given to them. Also everyone of these longs that got there cert. were on the list as well as the paid pumpers shares. By the way you can't vote unless your name is on the shareholders list.
"Street name" refers to shares held in a person's/entity's brokerage or other trading account. The majority of these shares are typically shown on stockholder lists as being held in CEDE & CO. The Company is not aware of how many stockholders have shares held in "street name", but the Company's stockholder list as of March 4, 2005 had 407,321,106,308 shares held in CEDE & CO."
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
quote: I am convinced there are certain people dedicated to seeing this company fail. Some are members of your boards and pose as friends.
Upside, Will, Bill, Wallace, Ed, Ric, Doc, and probably Dwman too. He's a crafty one!
Hey Up, I really don't think you are dedicated to seeing this stock fail, and I know Don isn't. But here is the situation as I see it. No one knows the float, and that is one key to whether this company is a scam or not. The other major key is valuation. That's another thing that no one outside of the company knows for sure. Without those two pieces of evidence, neither you, nor I can say one way or the other whether this company is a scam or one of the next big blue chips. So in lieu of proper evidence, many of the longs fail to see why anyone would attack a company without any proof. Without that evidence, I have seen Urban criminally libeled, over and over, right here on this board. It is a senseless, and criminal thing to do. Yet it is poured out here incessantly, and all without the final proofs to make an informed decision, one way or the other.
If I fault Urban and Co. for anything, it is their failure to make those proofs public, but at the same time I can see a need for corporate secrecy until the time is right. So we all know those proofs will be coming out soon, due to the investigation and hearing, so what is the hurry to string up this guy. If the SEC thought he was as dangerous as some are saying, they would have shut him down during the UCAD/USCA investigation. Or if their evidence was strong of any serious improprieties, you wouldn't be able to buy any more, now.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ric: Impossible, All UC's USCA and JV's have to be registered by law because they own more then 5% so according to the release from CMKX those numbers can't be true. Beside since it was never told what UC owns and whether USCA or other JV's sold there share on the market no one knows. Your post are getting more and more full of it. Other peoples posts with no facts to back them up with. Matter of fact one of the allegations was that UC was giving shares to others to sell on the market so he wasn't caught selling so many shares.
IF WE WANTED TO READ OTHER BOARD KOOLAID DRINKERS WE WOULD GO THERE.
Ric, I am really glad you brought up that last sentence. Yes, I bring posts here from other boards that contain items of interest. It saves a lot of time rewriting the information to copy and paste. And since you were rude enough to post something like that in the first place, let me be very frank and say that I really don't care what you WANT.
Now for part two. Please let me challenge you to find anything negative from any other board about CMKX, if you can, and bring it here as well. Or are the only people who are negative on this stock, the six or seven that have gathered here?
IP: Logged |
posted
I can tell you one thing for a fact Legal, either item 1 or item 2 isn't a true statement and since CMKX filed item 1 with the SEC then I would guess item 2 is false and it was too easy to prove. Thats my point about posting those posts that are not fact. Why repost lies?
Secondly, Either USCA and JV's sold there share or UC doesn't own a majority. There filing proved that from item 1.
item 1
"Street name" refers to shares held in a person's/entity's brokerage or other trading account. The majority of these shares are typically shown on stockholder lists as being held in CEDE & CO. The Company is not aware of how many stockholders have shares held in "street name", but the Company's stockholder list as of March 4, 2005 had 407,321,106,308 shares held in CEDE & CO."
item 2
from another board!
UC/insiders 51%+USCA 16.9%+JV's 20% = 87.9%
703,000,000,000 o/s -358,530,000,000 Urban and family -118,807,000,000 USCA -140,600,000,000 JVs ___________________
85,063,000,000
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
Yes I do, but still doesn't matter when looking at the numbers that were given. Just saying that 703 billion isn't what the insiders and UC can eat up since the 407 billion number was given by them. All those shares can only be part of that number (UC, USCA, JV's). Plus all the cert holders, Green Baron shares and any other of our shares that UC gave away. What I can tell you for a 99% guess is float is over 397 billion since certs holders and pumpers are still part of float. Because there is no way you can tell me that UC has street shares he doesn't know he owns. The 407 billion was from stockholders list (known stockholders). And I think UC knows what he owns, cert or otherwise.
Usually a company has a lot of the shareholders names. Looking at the number I think its proven impossible that UC owns a majority of shares in the company. You may say he has a lot by way of other companies, USCA and family, but personally it looks impossible.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
To me the stockholders group would have to prove over 397 billion non cert holders to absolutely prove NSS. But remember even if there is 50,000 shareholders if 40,000 only average 2 million shares each thats only 80 billion shares. I still think the shareholders with the most shares signed up first for the agreement, maybe a few small holders, but mainly the larger ones. So thats knocks out tons of that 50,000 right there and barely moves the share count.
40,000 avg 2 mil = 80 billion 10,000 avg 5 mil = 50 billion total from group guess 2000 are non cert holders = 180 billion
total 320 billion which leaves 78 billion for some high rollers that still hasn't signed up.
No NSS proof there. It actually adds up pretty good.
[ May 02, 2005, 01:17: Message edited by: Ric ]
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
quote: I am convinced there are certain people dedicated to seeing this company fail. Some are members of your boards and pose as friends.
Upside, Will, Bill, Wallace, Ed, Ric, Doc, and probably Dwman too. He's a crafty one!
IMO, it is quite different wanting to see a company fail, versus receiving information needed to make decisions regarding the company. I, for one, would love to see the company succeed, as my fortune would increase dramatically. That being said, I would still like to see CMKX file something in their defense that would make me feel better about the company. If my remarks here are interpreted as bashing, I apologize. I consider myself to be bashing not the company itself, but it's methods of disseminating information that was promised long ago. Even if CMKX is on the up and up, their tactics make it APPEAR to be a scam. All they have to do to make me happy is quit beating around the bush and release the numbers that every investor has the right to receive in return for investing money in any company.
IP: Logged |
posted
SGGM -- St. George Metals, Inc. Com (1 Cent)
COMPANY NEWS AND PRESS RELEASES FROM OTHER SOURCES:
St. George Metals, Inc., Announces Signing of Letter of Intent to Merge Nevada Vermiculite Into SGGM, Bringing Over $30 Million of Assets Into the Company
LAS VEGAS, May 2, 2005 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- St. George Metals (Pink Sheets: SGGM), announces Letter of Intent to merge with Nevada Vermiculite, LLC, a vermiculite mining company based out of Montana. William Haseltine, President of SGGM, stated, "This Letter of Intent with Nevada Vermiculite potentially adds tremendous value for our shareholders. We are pleased to begin a mutual due diligence period with Nevada Vermiculite, and we intend to finalize this transaction within 30 days. This transaction will bring in over $30M in recoverable assets through the Hamilton mining operations in Montana. These assets and production capabilities have the ability to produce the highly sought after Vermiculite mineral. Within the U.S., there are currently only two mines in South Carolina and one in Virginia that produce this highly useful mineral, and the demand is increasing due to the limited amount that currently can be imported into the U.S."
Bill Blomgren, Manager of Nevada Vermiculite, added, "We have been looking for the right partner for our company and shareholders for several years and are pleased that we have a working partner that can help us mine this very lucrative opportunity. We have many assets that we can bring to the table, and offer this partnership the ability to mine an up-and-coming mineral that has numerous uses."
Nevada Vermiculite Information:
Nevada Vermiculite's business focuses upon a niche in the industrial mineral industry. Nevada Vermiculite's management has defined this niche as those industrial minerals with an annual worldwide production or consumption of less than 2.5 million tons. This level of activity fails to attract major industrial mining companies, and, partly as a consequence, enjoys very high margins of profitability between the sales price of the product and the cost of producing the product.
Nevada Vermiculite's assets are located on 96 unpatented lode and mill site mining claims. The claims cover some 1,750 acres and are 10 air miles due east of Hamilton, Montana on the western flank of Skalkaho Mountain. Access to the property and shipment of processed vermiculite is via an all-weather road, 26 miles to Victor Crossing, Montana, where an office and loading area is located next to a line of the Montana Rail Link Railroad. The claims are situated at elevations around 7,000 feet above sea level within the Bitterroot National Forest near the crest of the south end of the Sapphire Mountains. Necessary environmental and operating permits will be secured through appropriate State and Federal government agencies.
Forward-Looking Statements:
Certain statements in this news release may contain "forward-looking" information within the meaning of Rule 175 under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 3b-6 under the Securities Act of 1934 and are subject to the safe harbor created by those rules. All statements, other than statements of fact, included in this release may include forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.
SOURCE St. George Metals, Inc.
CONTACT: William Haseltine of St. George Metals, +1-703-276-1919
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Looks like Ed's resigning from the Fellowship of the Merry Men.
I was never a member that I know of. I have been harping on getting info for two years now, but I still hold a substantial amount of shares. Just getting tired of IMO, I think, similar quotes, long posts about JV companies that dont mean squat without word from CMKX. Hell, half of us dont really know what we hold, what with the restrictions, investing in other companies, etc. We have needed a filing for so long now, that our initial objective is getting buried in mountains of Bull****. Lawyers, SEC, DTC, everything but what we need. This is NOT what I bought when I invested in CMKI years ago.
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
May 2, 2005 (FinancialWire) Companies on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation SHO Threshold list can cry and scream all they want, but in terms of downside volatility, they ain’t seen nothing yet according to General Electric’s (NYSE: GE) CNBC commentator and TheStreet.com (NASDAQ: TSCM) founder Jim Cramer, as the Uptick Rule comes to a crashing end today.
Among companies at the head of the class have been Novastar Financial (NYSE: NFI) and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (NYSE: MSO).
In a RealMoney.com column, Cramer called the suspension of the Uptick Rule the “Hedge Fund Relief Act.”
One of the key hedge funds reputedly shorting upwards of one-third of the Threshold firms on the New York Stock Exchange as well as one-fifth of the NASDAQ list is Rocker Partners, LLC, and Helmsman Holdings, both reputedly headed by David Rocker. Companies alleged to be short by Rocker are posted at http://www.webspawner.com/users/rockerscam/index.html
“Because they won't have to wait for an uptick in order to short, hedge funds will do so with reckless abandon. Expect to see companies that mess up taken down harder and faster and more short squeezes. Get ready to see more volatility, i.e., downside action,” warned Cramer.
“You probably aren't even aware of it. Most people don't even seem to think it is important. It's a two inch story at the bottom of page C-4 of The Wall Street Journal,” Cramer noted. “How fitting, though; just like a two-inch block of C4, the plastic explosive, this little note could take the market to kingdom come if used incorrectly. And it will be.
“Here's the deal. Right now, when a company reports a bad quarter and you aren't long it, you have to wait to short until you get an uptick, or you can go into the put market and get a dealer to make a market in puts for you. He has to lay off his short himself, so it really doesn't matter; you can't get a good price and it is cumbersome.
“So, often you just give up. Oh, Molson (NYSE: TAP) reported a bad quarter, eh? Well, I can't get an uptick, no one will pay me a higher price for it and the put market's too illiquid, so on to the next.
“Not anymore,” said Cramer. Starting today, “hedge funds can sell shares short just like they sell them long: with reckless abandon. You could see some real nasty things happen to companies that mess up. You will see them banged down harder and faster than you would ever believe.
“The corollary is true, too, though. You will see some real squeezes upward because people will be much more reckless in what they short and when.
“This rule change, of course, couldn't come at a worse time. The market's terrible. Longs are beleaguered, shorts are emboldened. I think it is fair to say that things are about to get a lot worse, a lot faster for the stocks of bad companies without the slowdown circuit breaker of the uptick rule. But the SEC, in its non-infinite wisdom, dreamed this little doozy up and all I can tell you is that you ain't seen nothing yet.”
Cramer said this rule is “enough to make me want to get back into the hedge fund game. This new rule would have been a license for me to print money on the short side. Not that the SEC would know that kind of stuff, though. It's too busy worrying about the small stuff.
“Get ready for some real volatility, which, of course, is just a code word for downside action!”
Adding to the “Hedge Fund Relief Act” is the fact that those using illegal naked short selling in the past have been granted a kind of amnesty for acts before the first of 2005. The SEC just “grandfathered” those illegally-begotten gains and resultant counterfeit shares into the system, so these windfall gains are now available to downtick with reckless abandon on downticks.
In the same document, the SEC has inexplicably stated that not all forms of illegal naked short selling, the equivalent of counterfeiting shares in public companies, are actually “illegal.”
The DTCC actions in the StockGate mire are the most serious, if not notorious since the agent of two SROs, the New York Stock Exchange and NASD is also peopled by some 21 directors whose companies, such as Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER), State Street Corporation (NYSE: STT) and Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS), are unlikely to support the DTCC in what attorney Marshal Shichtman, Esq., has termed “strong-arm” tactics.
The DTCC has admitted it has engaged in an act of censorship of this newsletter in squelching its redistribution by Investors Business Daily, and via Investors Business Daily, to Yahoo Finance, a portal owned by Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO), and it is a suspect in the sudden and so far unexplained “postponement” of a widely anticipated expose by Dateline NBC.
In a wide-ranging letter to the DTCC, Robert J. Shapiro has charged statements made by Larry Thompson, DTCC Deputy General Counsel, were “inaccurate or misleading,” and asked the DTCC to correct the record and respond to his comments and questions.
Shapiro is chair of Sonecon LLC, a private economic advisory firm in Washington, D.C., who served as U.S. Under Secretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs from 1998 to 2001, Vice President and co-founder of the Progressive Policy Institute from 1989 to 1998, and principal economic advisor to Governor William J. Clinton in the 1991-1992 presidential campaign.
He holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University and has been a Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research, Harvard University, and the Brookings Institution.
Shapiro currently provides economic analysis to the law firms of O’Quinn, Laminack and Pirtle, Christian, Smith and Jewell, and Heard, Robins, Cloud, Lubel and Greenwood, on issues associated with naked short sales, which he noted includes “matters raised in an interview published by @DTCC with DTCC deputy general counsel Larry Thompson.”
He asserts the following in his letter:
Thompson begins by asserting that “the extent to which [naked short selling] occurs is in dispute.” While this statement may be narrowly correct, objective academic analysis has established that naked short selling has been a widespread practice and one which, when allowed to persist, can pose a threat to the integrity of equity markets. A recent study by Dr. Leslie Boni, then a visiting financial economist at the SEC, analyzed NSCC data and found that on three random days, an average of more than 700 listed stocks had failures-to-deliver of 60 million-to-120 million shares sold short – naked shorts – that had persisted for at least two months. In addition, over 800 unlisted stocks on any day had fails of 120 million-to-180 million shares sold short that also had persisted for at least two months. The total number of naked shorts, including those that had persisted for less than two months, was presumably considerably greater.
Regarding the extent of naked shorts, Thompson has provided closely-related additional information: “fails to deliver and receive amount to about $6 billion daily…including both new fails and aged fails.” Thompson minimizes this total by comparing it to “just under $400 billion in trades (emphasis added) processed daily by NSCC, or about 1.5% of the dollar volume.” By most people’s standards, a problem involving hundreds of millions of shares valued at $6 billion every day is a very large problem. Moreover, the $6 billion total substantially underestimates the actual value of all failed-to-deliver trades measured when the trades actually occurred. Most of the $6 billion total represents uncovered or naked short sales, many of which have gone undelivered for weeks or months with their market price being marked-to-market every day. As a stock’s price falls, the market price of naked shorts in that stock also declines, reducing the total value of the outstanding failures-to-deliver cited by Thompson.
In other respects, Thompson’s comparison to the “$400 billion in trades processed daily by NSCC” seems disingenuous and misleading, because that $400 billion total covers not only U.S. equity trades which can involve most of the failures-to-deliver at issue, but many other transactions also processed by the NSCC. The value of all equity transactions on U.S. markets in 2004, for example, averaged $82.3 billion/day. If Thompson is correct that the daily value of fails-to-deliver averages $6 billion, that total is equivalent to 7.2 percent of average daily equity trades or nearly five times the 1.5 percent level suggested by Thompson. Furthermore, the DTCC reports on its website that on a peak day, “through its Continuous Net Settlement (CNS) system, NSCC eliminated the need to settle 96 percent of total obligations.” Assuming that CNS nets out the same proportion of trades on other days, $384 billion of the $400 billion in daily trades cited by Thompson are netted out, leaving only $16 billion in daily trades that require the actual delivery of securities. The $6 billion of fails-to-deliver securities existing on any day are equivalent to 37.5 percent of the average daily trades that require the delivery of securities, or 25 times the 1.5 percent level cited by Thompson.
Thompson tries to explain the large numbers of shares that go undelivered – in most cases arising from naked short sales -- by citing problems with paper certificates, inevitable human error, and the legitimate operations of market makers. This also seems misleading or disingenuous. Regarding problems with paper certificates, the DTCC estimates that 97 percent of all stock certificates are now kept in electronic form. Nor can human error or legitimate market-making operations explain the high levels of failures-to-deliver that persist for months – on any day, an average of 180 million-to-300 million shares have gone undelivered for two months or longer – as documented by Dr. Boni’s analysis of NSCC data.
Thompson also disparages the attorneys who represent companies that have been damaged or destroyed by massive naked short sales, and their shareholders, by claiming falsely that the cases in this matter have almost all been dismissed or withdrawn. The legal firms that I advise -- O’Quinn, Petrie and Laminack; Christian, Smith and Jewell; and Heard, Robins, Cloud, Lubel and Greenwood – have not lost any motions against the DTCC or its affiliates and currently have one case against the DTCC pending in Nevada and another case against the DTCC pending in Arkansas. In addition, on February 24, 2005, these attorneys were granted an order by the New York Supreme Court ordering the DTCC to produce trading records involving two companies they represent, including records from the Stock Borrow program, which may establish whether large-scale naked short sales were used to manipulate and drive down the stock price of those two companies.
Thompson also asserts that the plaintiffs suing the DTCC for damages associated with the handling of naked short sales rely on “theories [that] are not an accurate reflection of how the capital market system actually works.” This assertion is inaccurate. There is no dispute about how the capital markets work -- nor any doubt that naked short sales have been used to manipulate and drive down the price of stocks, as seen in numerous death-spiral financing cases. The issue here is the DTCC’s role in allowing or facilitating such stock manipulation through its treatment of extended naked short sales.
In explaining the DTCC’s role in these matters, Thompson rejects the claim that the NSCC’s Stock Borrow program allows the same shares to be lent over and over again, potentially creating more shares than actually exist or “phantom” shares. By Thompson’s own account, shares borrowed by the NSCC to settle naked short sales are deducted from the lending member’s DTC account and credited to the DTC account of the member to whom the shares have been sold. Therefore, those same shares become available to be re-borrowed to settle another naked short sale and, if that happens, to be re-borrowed again and again to settle a succession of naked short sales. Throughout this process, the actual short sellers may continue to fail-to-deliver the shares to cover their shorts and, as Dr. Boni’s analysis of NSCC data found, the underlying failure can age for months or even years. The process which Thompson describes is one in which shares can be borrowed and lent over and over again, introducing more shares into the market than are legally registered and issued. If any ambiguity remains, Thompson can clarify it by responding to the following query: Once a share that has been borrowed through the NSCC Stock Borrow program is delivered to the purchaser, is that share restricted in any way so it cannot be lent again?
It is important to note that the Stock Borrow program is used when continuous net settlement cannot locate the shares to settle. As a consequence, Stock Borrow is usually called into play when there are relatively few shares available for borrowing. These are propitious conditions for market manipulation: Unscrupulous short sellers undertake large-scale naked short sales involving stocks for which few shares are available for trading and lending, relying on the Stock Borrow program to borrow the limited available shares, again and again, at sufficient levels to drive down the market price of the shares.
Thompson notes that of approximately $6 billion in outstanding failures-to-deliver existing on any day, “the Stock Borrow program is able to resolve about $1.1 billion … or about 20% [18 percent] of the total fail obligation.” In this statement, Thompson raises very serious questions about the integrity and operations of the NSCC and DTCC, which he can clarify by responding to the following queries: If the Stock Borrow program “resolves” only 18 percent of total fails, what is the disposition of the remaining 82 percent of outstanding fails? When failures-to-deliver occur that are not resolved through Stock Borrow, does the NSCC credit the undelivered shares to the member representing the buyer, creating genuine “phantom shares”? Finally, how many shares do the borrowing brokers, clearing firms and other participants in the Stock Borrow program owe the NSCC on a typical day, and what is their total value?
In a related matter, Thompson tries to distance the DTCC from charges that shares held in restricted accounts – for example, cash accounts, retirement accounts and many institutional accounts – are improperly lent through the Stock Borrow program by claiming that responsibility for segregating restricted shares from lendable shares falls to the “broker and bank members” of the DTCC, while responsibility for monitoring or regulating their performance in this matter falls to the stock exchanges and the SEC. As a trust company, the DTCC cannot hold that it has no role, duty or responsibility to ensure the probity of its operations. Thompson could address this issue by responding to the following queries: What procedures does the NSCC have to ensure that shares held in members’ accounts for possible loan through the NSCC Stock Borrow program are unencumbered by regulatory or legal restrictions from being pledged or assigned and eligible to be borrowed? On any given day, how many participants in the Stock Borrow program have lent shares that exceed their lendable shares, in what numbers and of what value?
Thompson also tries to distance the DTCC as far as possible from the naked short selling that generates most of the extended failures-to-deliver: “We don’t have any power or legal authority to regulate or stop short selling, naked or otherwise. We also have no power to force member firms to close out or resolve fails to deliver … we don’t even see whether a sale is short or not.” In fact, the DTCC chooses to not distinguish short sales from long sales, chooses to not regulate or stop extended naked short sales, and chooses to not force member firms to resolve protracted naked short sales.
First, Regulation SHO requires that all transactions be clearly marked short or long. If the DTCC and NSCC do not know whether sales are short or long as Thompson contends, they choose to not know. Second, the NSCC has a clear responsibility and adequate means to stop naked short sales of extended duration, with no legal barrier that would prevent them from so doing. As a trust company with an acknowledged duty to provide investors certainty in the settlement and clearance of equity transactions, the DTCC chose to carry out that duty by assuming the role of counterparty to both sides of every equity transaction, through the operations of the NSCC’s CNS system and the Stock Borrow program. By allowing short sellers to fail-to-deliver shares for months or even years, the NSCC clearly fails to provide certainty in settlement to the buyers, sellers and issuers of securities. Since it is widely known that extended naked short sales have been used to manipulate stock prices in cases of death-spiral financing, and the NSCC created the Stock Borrow program to address failures-to-deliver that prominently include naked short sales, the NSCC and DTCC share a responsibility with the SEC and the stock exchanges to protect investors by resolving extended fails.
Third, the DTCC and NSCC have the clear capacity to force member firms to resolve the extended failures-to-deliver of their customers by purchasing shares on the open market and deducting the cost from the member’s account. A 2003 study by Dr. Richard Evans and others provides evidence that forced buy-ins by any party occur very rarely. They found that a major options market maker who failed to deliver all or a portion of shares sold in 69,063 transactions in 1998-1999 was bought-in only 86 times or barely one-tenth of 1 percent of the fails. Thompson can clarify investors’ understanding of their operations by responding to the following query: What proportion of shares that are persistent fails-to-deliver, of one month or longer, are ever bought in?
Thompson acknowledges that the DTCC and NSCC know precisely how many failures-to-deliver exist for each stock and the precise duration of each of these fails. Yet, the DTCC refuses to disclose this information even to the issuer of the stock in question, which Thompson justifies by citing “NSCC rules” prohibiting such a release of data based on “the obvious reason that the trading data we receive could be used to manipulate the market, as well as reveal trading patterns of individual firms.” This response is both disingenuous and revealing. We know now, for the first time, that the DTCC has full knowledge of the extent of protracted, large-scale naked short sales in all particular cases. We also know now that the DTCC has had this information for at least a decade, since Thompson also notes that “fails, as a percentage of total trading, hasn’t changed in the last 10 years.” Yet, based on the DTCC’s own rules, it allowed these abuses to persist and fester. The DTCC and NSCC can change their rules at any time. Moreover, in this case, those rules are unjustified. Data documenting outstanding short sales in each stock are currently issued publicly, so further data on how many of those short sales are naked would not reveal additional information about the trading patterns of individual firms or in any way empower manipulators. In fact, the DTCC could substantially disarm manipulators by both publicly reporting naked short sales in each issue and pledging to force buy-ins of all naked short sales that persist for more than a limited period.
Surely, if large-scale, extended naked short sales have effectively created “phantom” shares, companies have a responsibility to their shareholders and the right to secure this information from the organization which manages the settlement of short sales. At a minimum, the DTCC should respond to requests by issuers for data on extended failures-to-deliver in their own stocks, both in the past and currently, so they can take steps to resist stock manipulators or bring them to account for past manipulation.
Thompson also claims that the DTCC did not create or manage the Stock Borrow program to serve its own financial interest, insisting that the service generates less than $2 million a year in direct fees to the DTCC and that all DTCC services are priced on a “not for profit” basis that seeks to match revenues with expenses. Without further information, these responses beg the question of whose private financial interest has been served by the Stock Borrow program, especially as the DTCC is owned by the stock markets, clearinghouses, brokerage and banking institutions that use its services. Thompson and the DTCC can clarify this serious matter by responding to the following queries: Do DTCC participant/owners receive interest or other payments through or from the Stock Borrow program for lending the shares of their customers and, if so, how much have they received for these activities over the last 10 years? Further, do DTCC participant/owners receive any dividend, interest or other payments or distributions from the DTCC or its subsidiaries?, Shapiro concluded.
In a recent editorial, Investrend Information head Gayle Essary questioned whether the board and principal shareholders would “be party to shenanigans that lead to the censorship or disabling of any media” that he says is “un-American activity.”
Essary said that the arrogance the DTCC expressed in its censorship efforts shows that the entity has “become too large, too encompassing, too powerful, too unresponsive to those it serves, primarily the investing public, and too unresponsive to the Congress under whose auspices it should be operating.
“First, it is time to unconflict it, with real public representations on its board,” he said, and second, “it is time to break it up, with its various duties provided by smaller agencies under separate unconflicted boards.”
DTCC board members include Michael C. Bodson, Managing Director, Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MWD); Gary Bullock, Global Head of Logistics, Infrastructure, UBS Investment Bank (NYSE: UBS); Stephen P. Casper, Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer, Fischer Francis Trees & Watts, Inc.; Jill M. Considine,Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC);
Also, Paul F. Costello, President, Business Services Group, Wachovia Securities (NYSE: WB); John W. Cummings, Senior Vice President & Head of Global Technology & Services, Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER); Donald F. Donahue, Chief Operating Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC); Norman Eaker, General Partner, Edward Jones; George Hrabovsky, President, Alliance Global Investors Service; Catherine R. Kinney, President and Co-Chief Operating Officer, New York Stock Exchange; Thomas J. McCrossan, Executive Vice President, State Street Corporation (NYSE: STT); Bradley Abelow, Managing Director, Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS); Jonathan E. Beyman, Chief Information Officer, Lehman Brothers (NYSE: LEH); and Frank J. Bisignano, Chief Administrative Officer and Senior Executive Vice President, Citigroup / Solomon Smith Barney's Corporate Investment Bank (NYSE: C), Eileen K. Murray, Managing Director, Credit Suisse First Boston (NYSE: CSR); James P. Palermo, Vice Chairman, Mellon Financial Corporation (NYSE: MEL); Thomas J. Perna, Senior Executive Vice President, Financial Companies Services Sector of The Bank of New York (NYSE: BNY); Ronald Purpora, Chief Executive Officer, Garban LLC; Douglas Shulman, President, Regulatory Services and Operations, NASD; and Thompson M. Swayne, Executive Vice President, JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM).
IP: Logged |
posted
COMPANY NEWS AND PRESS RELEASES FROM OTHER SOURCES:
Zoomingstocks.com: CORRECTING AND REPLACING End-of-Week Stock Update: (OTCBB: CMKX) CMKX Requests Subpoena of DTCC for upcoming Administrative Hearing
Carlsbad, Ca, May 02, 2005 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- Zoomingstocks.com mid-week stock update is focused on, NMC, Inc. and CMKM Diamonds, Inc. Late Breaking News: CMKM Diamonds has submitted a request to the court to subpoena the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, "as they may have evidence relative to the hearing in this matter", states the subpoena. This turn of events is unprecedented and unheard of. The subpoena was issued at the request of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. by Donald Stoecklin and the Stoecklin Law Group. The purpose of the subpoena is unknown at this time; however, CMKM Attorneys have requested all manner of documentation both paper and electronic and any records pertaining to transactions dealing with CMKM Diamonds, Inc. to be made available for inspection at this hearing.
About the DTCC - The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), through its subsidiaries, provides clearance, settlement and information services for equities, corporate and municipal bonds, government and mortgage-backed securities, over-the-counter credit derivatives and emerging market debt trades. DTCC's depository also provides custody and asset servicing for more than two million securities issues from the United States and 100 other countries and territories. In addition, DTCC is a leading processor of mutual funds and insurance transactions, linking funds and carriers with their distribution networks. DTCC has operating facilities in multiple locations in the United States and overseas.
CMKM Diamonds, Inc. was recently featured in the Zoom Generation Newsletter, a weekly subscription publication from Zoomingstocks.com as being the subject of the "trading rebate program" which creates incentives for traders to engage in transactions with no economic purpose other than to receive market data fees. The SEC believes that such trading may distort the actual volume of trading in these securities. Moreover, the Commission is concerned that the structure and size of market data revenue rebates may be distorting the reporting of trades, and that these rebate programs may reduce the regulatory resources of the markets and reallocate the funding of regulation among participants.
Ever wonder why CMKX and other sub-penny stocks have such a high volume of trades per day? This trade rebate program accounts for a majority of those trades. The SEC is implementing reforms under Regulation NMS to curtail some of this activity and allow only relevant trades to be counted in the day's volume.
CMKM Diamonds, Inc. will in less than two weeks appear at a hearing in Los Angeles to answer allegations by the SEC concerning its claims and corporate governance. Tremendous support and outpouring by shareholders loyal to CMKX is expected to draw attention to some of the ills of the current abuse of sub-penny stocks through many of the systems and sub-systems intended to facilitate the management and clearing of the stock market. This technology has only made it easier for traders to tilt the scale towards them at the loss of billions of shareholder dollars. Towards this end, CMKX is finally going to have their day in court and attempt to address and expose some of these issues.
Recently a CMKX shareholder, Mr. John Martin, of Tyler, Texas began a solidarity effort aimed at unifying the CMKX shareholders. The CMKX Owner's Group will look after their interests in the upcoming hearing of allegations made by the SEC against CMKM Diamonds, Inc. These allegations are being made under the pretense of shareholder protection. Knowing that his investment was at no time under the protection of the SEC, Mr. Martin elicited the legal services of the Frizzell Law Firm to represent himself and has since invited other CMKX shareholders to participate making the Group more credible in its intention. Mr. Martin has successfully inducted over 2320 members to date.
The actions proposed by the SEC are viewed by the shareholders as not being in their best interest, nor protecting their CMKX investment. These shareholders are among the most dedicated and loyal group of investors that have ever supported a Pink Sheet Company. The CMKX Owner's Group will probably be the first of many such efforts begun by shareholders to say that they "have had enough". Visit the CMKX Owner's Group at http://www.cmkxownersgroup.com , take a stance, and protect your investment.
Have questions or interested in CMKM Diamonds, Inc? Call Mr. Andy Hill, Investor Relations at 1-877-752-3755 or 1-306-752-375 between the hours of 7:00 AM and 1:00PM Pacific Standard Time.
About Zooming$tocks.com: Zooming$tocks.com is your premier market analysis company whose goal is to provide you with rapid and timely information, well suited to your investment needs.
Zooming$tocks.com is not a licensed investment advisor. Nor do we give out buy, sell or hold advice to anyone. Zooming$tocks.com has full disclaimer/disclosure information available to the general public on our website at: www.zoomingstocks.com/main_disclaimer.htm
M2 Communications Ltd disclaims all liability for information provided within M2 PressWIRE. Data supplied by named party/parties. Further information on M2 PressWIRE can be obtained at http://www.presswire.net on the world wide web. Inquiries to info@m2.com.
posted
Believe the following and they will tell you another just as ridiculous:
"About Zooming$tocks.com: Zooming$tocks.com is your premier market analysis company whose goal is to provide you with rapid and timely information, well suited to your investment needs."
IP: Logged |
Member Rated: posted May 03, 2005 09:26 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- StockGate: Pink Sheets Seeks Publication of Short Positions For OTCBB, OTC Companies (financialwire.net via COMTEX) -- May 3, 2005 (FinancialWire) Companies on the Pink Sheets and the OTCBB may soon have their short positions published by the NASD as a result of a request by Cromwell Coulson, CEO of the Pink Sheets and some timely footwork by Investrend's Director of Corporate Development Drew Connolly, who is serving in an advisory capacity to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair William Donaldson.
The Pink Sheets quote request leaders for Monday included Global Triad (OTC: GTRD), Prime Rate Investors (OTC: PRRM), and CMKM Diamonds (OTC: CMKX) and it traded as much as $34 million for such listed companies as LUKoil Holding (OTC: LUKOY).
The request for rulemaking, which Coulson has told companies traded on the Pink Sheets, is needed "to make regulators turn on the lights and protect investors from the menance of hidden short selling in the OTC market," is at http://sec.gov/rules/petitions.shtml
Coulson had put in the request for comments at the SEC several weeks ago, and Connolly interceded to move the request to a front burner, leading to the rulemaking.
In an email to Donaldson, Coulson had said "I believe that it is very important to require the disclosure of short positions because the lack of transparency is allowing promoters to defraud investors by blaming all selling on naked market maker short selling. Disclosure and transparency can easily remedy the issue."
Comments are being urgently solicited by both Coulson and Connolly, who also serves as executive director of the CEO Council.
In other news on the naked short-selling front known as "StockGate," adding to what TheStreet.com founder James Cramer calls the "Hedge Fund Relief Act," the termination of the Uptick Rule, is the fact that those using illegal naked short selling in the past have been granted a kind of amnesty for acts before the first of 2005. The SEC just "grandfathered" those illegally-begotten gains and resultant counterfeit shares into the system, so these windfall gains are now available to downtick with reckless abandon on downticks.
In the same document, the SEC has inexplicably stated that not all forms of illegal naked short selling, the equivalent of counterfeiting shares in public companies, are actually "illegal."
The DTCC actions in the StockGate mire are the most serious, if not notorious since the agent of two SROs, the New York Stock Exchange and NASD is also peopled by some 21 directors whose companies, such as Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER), State Street Corporation (NYSE: STT) and Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS), are unlikely to support the DTCC in what attorney Marshal Shichtman, Esq., has termed "strong-arm" tactics.
The DTCC has admitted it has engaged in an act of censorship of this newsletter in squelching its redistribution by Investors Business Daily, and via Investors Business Daily, to Yahoo Finance, a portal owned by Yahoo! (NASDAQ: YHOO), and it is a suspect in the sudden and so far unexplained "postponement" of a widely anticipated expose by Dateline NBC.
In a wide-ranging letter to the DTCC, Robert J. Shapiro has charged statements made by Larry Thompson, DTCC Deputy General Counsel, were "inaccurate or misleading," and asked the DTCC to correct the record and respond to his comments and questions.
Shapiro is chair of Sonecon LLC, a private economic advisory firm in Washington, D.C., who served as U.S. Under Secretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs from 1998 to 2001, Vice President and co-founder of the Progressive Policy Institute from 1989 to 1998, and principal economic advisor to Governor William J. Clinton in the 1991-1992 presidential campaign.
He holds a Ph.D. from Harvard University and has been a Fellow of the National Bureau of Economic Research, Harvard University, and the Brookings Institution.
Shapiro currently provides economic analysis to the law firms of O'Quinn, Laminack and Pirtle, Christian, Smith and Jewell, and Heard, Robins, Cloud, Lubel and Greenwood, on issues associated with naked short sales, which he noted includes "matters raised in an interview published by @DTCC with DTCC deputy general counsel Larry Thompson."
He asserts the following in his letter:
Thompson begins by asserting that "the extent to which [naked short selling] occurs is in dispute." While this statement may be narrowly correct, objective academic analysis has established that naked short selling has been a widespread practice and one which, when allowed to persist, can pose a threat to the integrity of equity markets. A recent study by Dr. Leslie Boni, then a visiting financial economist at the SEC, analyzed NSCC data and found that on three random days, an average of more than 700 listed stocks had failures-to-deliver of 60 million-to-120 million shares sold short ' naked shorts ' that had persisted for at least two months. In addition, over 800 unlisted stocks on any day had fails of 120 million-to-180 million shares sold short that also had persisted for at least two months. The total number of naked shorts, including those that had persisted for less than two months, was presumably considerably greater.
Regarding the extent of naked shorts, Thompson has provided closely-related additional information: "fails to deliver and receive amount to about $6 billion daily.including both new fails and aged fails." Thompson minimizes this total by comparing it to "just under $400 billion in trades (emphasis added) processed daily by NSCC, or about 1.5% of the dollar volume." By most people's standards, a problem involving hundreds of millions of shares valued at $6 billion every day is a very large problem. Moreover, the $6 billion total substantially underestimates the actual value of all failed-to-deliver trades measured when the trades actually occurred. Most of the $6 billion total represents uncovered or naked short sales, many of which have gone undelivered for weeks or months with their market price being marked-to-market every day. As a stock's price falls, the market price of naked shorts in that stock also declines, reducing the total value of the outstanding failures-to-deliver cited by Thompson.
In other respects, Thompson's comparison to the "$400 billion in trades processed daily by NSCC" seems disingenuous and misleading, because that $400 billion total covers not only U.S. equity trades which can involve most of the failures-to-deliver at issue, but many other transactions also processed by the NSCC. The value of all equity transactions on U.S. markets in 2004, for example, averaged $82.3 billion/day. If Thompson is correct that the daily value of fails-to-deliver averages $6 billion, that total is equivalent to 7.2 percent of average daily equity trades or nearly five times the 1.5 percent level suggested by Thompson. Furthermore, the DTCC reports on its website that on a peak day, "through its Continuous Net Settlement (CNS) system, NSCC eliminated the need to settle 96 percent of total obligations." Assuming that CNS nets out the same proportion of trades on other days, $384 billion of the $400 billion in daily trades cited by Thompson are netted out, leaving only $16 billion in daily trades that require the actual delivery of securities. The $6 billion of fails-to-deliver securities existing on any day are equivalent to 37.5 percent of the average daily trades that require the delivery of securities, or 25 times the 1.5 percent level cited by Thompson.
Thompson tries to explain the large numbers of shares that go undelivered ' in most cases arising from naked short sales -- by citing problems with paper certificates, inevitable human error, and the legitimate operations of market makers. This also seems misleading or disingenuous. Regarding problems with paper certificates, the DTCC estimates that 97 percent of all stock certificates are now kept in electronic form. Nor can human error or legitimate market-making operations explain the high levels of failures-to-deliver that persist for months ' on any day, an average of 180 million-to-300 million shares have gone undelivered for two months or longer ' as documented by Dr. Boni's analysis of NSCC data.
Thompson also disparages the attorneys who represent companies that have been damaged or destroyed by massive naked short sales, and their shareholders, by claiming falsely that the cases in this matter have almost all been dismissed or withdrawn. The legal firms that I advise -- O'Quinn, Petrie and Laminack; Christian, Smith and Jewell; and Heard, Robins, Cloud, Lubel and Greenwood ' have not lost any motions against the DTCC or its affiliates and currently have one case against the DTCC pending in Nevada and another case against the DTCC pending in Arkansas. In addition, on February 24, 2005, these attorneys were granted an order by the New York Supreme Court ordering the DTCC to produce trading records involving two companies they represent, including records from the Stock Borrow program, which may establish whether large-scale naked short sales were used to manipulate and drive down the stock price of those two companies.
Thompson also asserts that the plaintiffs suing the DTCC for damages associated with the handling of naked short sales rely on "theories [that] are not an accurate reflection of how the capital market system actually works." This assertion is inaccurate. There is no dispute about how the capital markets work -- nor any doubt that naked short sales have been used to manipulate and drive down the price of stocks, as seen in numerous death-spiral financing cases. The issue here is the DTCC's role in allowing or facilitating such stock manipulation through its treatment of extended naked short sales.
In explaining the DTCC's role in these matters, Thompson rejects the claim that the NSCC's Stock Borrow program allows the same shares to be lent over and over again, potentially creating more shares than actually exist or "phantom" shares. By Thompson's own account, shares borrowed by the NSCC to settle naked short sales are deducted from the lending member's DTC account and credited to the DTC account of the member to whom the shares have been sold. Therefore, those same shares become available to be re-borrowed to settle another naked short sale and, if that happens, to be re-borrowed again and again to settle a succession of naked short sales. Throughout this process, the actual short sellers may continue to fail-to-deliver the shares to cover their shorts and, as Dr. Boni's analysis of NSCC data found, the underlying failure can age for months or even years. The process which Thompson describes is one in which shares can be borrowed and lent over and over again, introducing more shares into the market than are legally registered and issued. If any ambiguity remains, Thompson can clarify it by responding to the following query: Once a share that has been borrowed through the NSCC Stock Borrow program is delivered to the purchaser, is that share restricted in any way so it cannot be lent again?
It is important to note that the Stock Borrow program is used when continuous net settlement cannot locate the shares to settle. As a consequence, Stock Borrow is usually called into play when there are relatively few shares available for borrowing. These are propitious conditions for market manipulation: Unscrupulous short sellers undertake large-scale naked short sales involving stocks for which few shares are available for trading and lending, relying on the Stock Borrow program to borrow the limited available shares, again and again, at sufficient levels to drive down the market price of the shares.
Thompson notes that of approximately $6 billion in outstanding failures-to-deliver existing on any day, "the Stock Borrow program is able to resolve about $1.1 billion . or about 20% [18 percent] of the total fail obligation." In this statement, Thompson raises very serious questions about the integrity and operations of the NSCC and DTCC, which he can clarify by responding to the following queries: If the Stock Borrow program "resolves" only 18 percent of total fails, what is the disposition of the remaining 82 percent of outstanding fails? When failures-to-deliver occur that are not resolved through Stock Borrow, does the NSCC credit the undelivered shares to the member representing the buyer, creating genuine "phantom shares"? Finally, how many shares do the borrowing brokers, clearing firms and other participants in the Stock Borrow program owe the NSCC on a typical day, and what is their total value?
In a related matter, Thompson tries to distance the DTCC from charges that shares held in restricted accounts ' for example, cash accounts, retirement accounts and many institutional accounts ' are improperly lent through the Stock Borrow program by claiming that responsibility for segregating restricted shares from lendable shares falls to the "broker and bank members" of the DTCC, while responsibility for monitoring or regulating their performance in this matter falls to the stock exchanges and the SEC. As a trust company, the DTCC cannot hold that it has no role, duty or responsibility to ensure the probity of its operations. Thompson could address this issue by responding to the following queries: What procedures does the NSCC have to ensure that shares held in members' accounts for possible loan through the NSCC Stock Borrow program are unencumbered by regulatory or legal restrictions from being pledged or assigned and eligible to be borrowed? On any given day, how many participants in the Stock Borrow program have lent shares that exceed their lendable shares, in what numbers and of what value?
Thompson also tries to distance the DTCC as far as possible from the naked short selling that generates most of the extended failures-to-deliver: "We don't have any power or legal authority to regulate or stop short selling, naked or otherwise. We also have no power to force member firms to close out or resolve fails to deliver . we don't even see whether a sale is short or not." In fact, the DTCC chooses to not distinguish short sales from long sales, chooses to not regulate or stop extended naked short sales, and chooses to not force member firms to resolve protracted naked short sales.
First, Regulation SHO requires that all transactions be clearly marked short or long. If the DTCC and NSCC do not know whether sales are short or long as Thompson contends, they choose to not know. Second, the NSCC has a clear responsibility and adequate means to stop naked short sales of extended duration, with no legal barrier that would prevent them from so doing. As a trust company with an acknowledged duty to provide investors certainty in the settlement and clearance of equity transactions, the DTCC chose to carry out that duty by assuming the role of counterparty to both sides of every equity transaction, through the operations of the NSCC's CNS system and the Stock Borrow program. By allowing short sellers to fail-to-deliver shares for months or even years, the NSCC clearly fails to provide certainty in settlement to the buyers, sellers and issuers of securities. Since it is widely known that extended naked short sales have been used to manipulate stock prices in cases of death-spiral financing, and the NSCC created the Stock Borrow program to address failures-to-deliver that prominently include naked short sales, the NSCC and DTCC share a responsibility with the SEC and the stock exchanges to protect investors by resolving extended fails.
Third, the DTCC and NSCC have the clear capacity to force member firms to resolve the extended failures-to-deliver of their customers by purchasing shares on the open market and deducting the cost from the member's account. A 2003 study by Dr. Richard Evans and others provides evidence that forced buy-ins by any party occur very rarely. They found that a major options market maker who failed to deliver all or a portion of shares sold in 69,063 transactions in 1998-1999 was bought-in only 86 times or barely one-tenth of 1 percent of the fails. Thompson can clarify investors' understanding of their operations by responding to the following query: What proportion of shares that are persistent fails-to-deliver, of one month or longer, are ever bought in?
Thompson acknowledges that the DTCC and NSCC know precisely how many failures-to-deliver exist for each stock and the precise duration of each of these fails. Yet, the DTCC refuses to disclose this information even to the issuer of the stock in question, which Thompson justifies by citing "NSCC rules" prohibiting such a release of data based on "the obvious reason that the trading data we receive could be used to manipulate the market, as well as reveal trading patterns of individual firms." This response is both disingenuous and revealing. We know now, for the first time, that the DTCC has full knowledge of the extent of protracted, large-scale naked short sales in all particular cases. We also know now that the DTCC has had this information for at least a decade, since Thompson also notes that "fails, as a percentage of total trading, hasn't changed in the last 10 years." Yet, based on the DTCC's own rules, it allowed these abuses to persist and fester. The DTCC and NSCC can change their rules at any time. Moreover, in this case, those rules are unjustified. Data documenting outstanding short sales in each stock are currently issued publicly, so further data on how many of those short sales are naked would not reveal additional information about the trading patterns of individual firms or in any way empower manipulators. In fact, the DTCC could substantially disarm manipulators by both publicly reporting naked short sales in each issue and pledging to force buy-ins of all naked short sales that persist for more than a limited period.
Surely, if large-scale, extended naked short sales have effectively created "phantom" shares, companies have a responsibility to their shareholders and the right to secure this information from the organization which manages the settlement of short sales. At a minimum, the DTCC should respond to requests by issuers for data on extended failures-to-deliver in their own stocks, both in the past and currently, so they can take steps to resist stock manipulators or bring them to account for past manipulation.
Thompson also claims that the DTCC did not create or manage the Stock Borrow program to serve its own financial interest, insisting that the service generates less than $2 million a year in direct fees to the DTCC and that all DTCC services are priced on a "not for profit" basis that seeks to match revenues with expenses. Without further information, these responses beg the question of whose private financial interest has been served by the Stock Borrow program, especially as the DTCC is owned by the stock markets, clearinghouses, brokerage and banking institutions that use its services. Thompson and the DTCC can clarify this serious matter by responding to the following queries: Do DTCC participant/owners receive interest or other payments through or from the Stock Borrow program for lending the shares of their customers and, if so, how much have they received for these activities over the last 10 years? Further, do DTCC participant/owners receive any dividend, interest or other payments or distributions from the DTCC or its subsidiaries?, Shapiro concluded.
In a recent editorial, Investrend Information head Gayle Essary questioned whether the board and principal shareholders would "be party to shenanigans that lead to the censorship or disabling of any media" that he says is "un-American activity."
Essary said that the arrogance the DTCC expressed in its censorship efforts shows that the entity has "become too large, too encompassing, too powerful, too unresponsive to those it serves, primarily the investing public, and too unresponsive to the Congress under whose auspices it should be operating.
"First, it is time to unconflict it, with real public representations on its board," he said, and second, "it is time to break it up, with its various duties provided by smaller agencies under separate unconflicted boards."
DTCC board members include Michael C. Bodson, Managing Director, Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MWD); Gary Bullock, Global Head of Logistics, Infrastructure, UBS Investment Bank (NYSE: UBS); Stephen P. Casper, Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer, Fischer Francis Trees & Watts, Inc.; Jill M. Considine,Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC);
Also, Paul F. Costello, President, Business Services Group, Wachovia Securities (NYSE: WB); John W. Cummings, Senior Vice President & Head of Global Technology & Services, Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER); Donald F. Donahue, Chief Operating Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC); Norman Eaker, General Partner, Edward Jones; George Hrabovsky, President, Alliance Global Investors Service; Catherine R. Kinney, President and Co-Chief Operating Officer, New York Stock Exchange; Thomas J. McCrossan, Executive Vice President, State Street Corporation (NYSE: STT); Bradley Abelow, Managing Director, Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS); Jonathan E. Beyman, Chief Information Officer, Lehman Brothers (NYSE: LEH); and Frank J. Bisignano, Chief Administrative Officer and Senior Executive Vice President, Citigroup / Solomon Smith Barney's Corporate Investment Bank (NYSE: C), Eileen K. Murray, Managing Director, Credit Suisse First Boston (NYSE: CSR); James P. Palermo, Vice Chairman, Mellon Financial Corporation (NYSE: MEL); Thomas J. Perna, Senior Executive Vice President, Financial Companies Services Sector of The Bank of New York (NYSE: BNY); Ronald Purpora, Chief Executive Officer, Garban LLC; Douglas Shulman, President, Regulatory Services and Operations, NASD; and Thompson M. Swayne, Executive Vice President, JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM).
FinancialWire is an independent, proprietary news service of Investrend Information, a division of Investrend Communications, Inc. It is not a press release service and receives no compensation for its news or opinions. Other divisions of Investrend, however, provide shareholder empowerment platforms such as forums, independent research and webcasting. For more information or to receive the FirstAlert daily summary of news, commentary, research reports, webcasts, events and conference calls, click on http://www.investrend.com/contact.asp
posted
May 3, 2005 (FinancialWire) Companies on the Pink Sheets and the OTCBB may soon have their short positions published by the NASD as a result of a request by Cromwell Coulson, CEO of the Pink Sheets and some timely footwork by Investrend's Director of Corporate Development Drew Connolly, who is serving in an advisory capacity to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair William Donaldson.
The Pink Sheets quote request leaders for Monday included Global Triad (OTC: GTRD), Prime Rate Investors (OTC: PRRM), and
CMKM Diamonds (OTC: CMKX) and it traded as much as $34 million for such listed companies as LUKoil Holding (OTC: LUKOY).
What are they up to now???
-------------------- Be Careful Of The Toes We Step On Today, They Could Be Attached To The Butt We Have To Kiss Tomorrow
IP: Logged |
"In an email to Donaldson, Coulson had said "I believe that it is very important to require the disclosure of short positions because the lack of transparency is allowing promoters to defraud investors by blaming all selling on naked market maker short selling. Disclosure and transparency can easily remedy the issue."
AND: If CMKX/UC had provided "disclosure and transparency", that bummer could have been easily prevented and we wouldn't be hearing all about NSS from the cult members.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wallace#1: OF PARTICULAR NOTE:
"In an email to Donaldson, Coulson had said "I believe that it is very important to require the disclosure of short positions because the lack of transparency is allowing promoters to defraud investors by blaming all selling on naked market maker short selling. Disclosure and transparency can easily remedy the issue."
AND: If CMKX/UC had provided "disclosure and transparency", that bummer could have been easily prevented and we wouldn't be hearing all about NSS from the cult members.
Wallace that is an excellent point, but in the case of Urban he does not want to disclose anything. Keep them in the dark and feed them crap, does anyone feel like a mushroom??
-------------------- Be Careful Of The Toes We Step On Today, They Could Be Attached To The Butt We Have To Kiss Tomorrow
IP: Logged |
posted
It never ceases to amaze me that "investors" can spend so much time beating a dead horse. All that is accomplished is waking the maggots.
We could all make so much more $$$ if we concentrated on stocks that have movement more than once every 2 years.
The 40-50 page threads of cmkx, qbid, and the like is effort that could be devoted to making money.
These stocks are pinks for a reason. I bought my lottery tickets and will let them ride.
These dialogs are entertaining, but are they really helpful?? There are alot of talented people on this board. Lets be friends and move on to making some money!
-------------------- A day without dreams is just a nightmare!
IP: Logged |
posted
Haven't you heard of boredom and having fun. None of the statements you said really applies here because we know its a dead horse and we aren't putting effort into it. I spend most of my time researching for the next run. I come here to blow off steam and chat with friends. Like Bill says were else can you have this much enjoyment in the stock market.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
Good point. It appears to me as though some here actually believe that there is a conspiracy against the company and it's shareholders. Classic case of falling in love with a stock.
Thanks for the entertainment
GLTA
-------------------- A day without dreams is just a nightmare!
IP: Logged |
What's really interesting, is that CMKX didn't ask for information of a naked short, they simply asked for records. Guilty conscience coming out? LOL
IP: Logged |
and the SEC wants all of the DNA evidence thrown out. What a complete joke! It's plain and simple to me; if they had nothing to hide, and NSS did not exist with CMKX, then what are they so scared of? IMO, they completely messed with the wrong Company in CMKM Diamonds, Inc. and the wrong Shareholders in CMKX. I strongly feel that a bear trap has been set by Urban, Glenn, Maheu, et. al. and the opposition has EVERYTHING TO BE SCARED OF!
The fact (IMO) is that the continual manipulation of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. /CMKX affected Urban's ability to file a proper share structure without breaking the law.......and therefore the "NSS issue" has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE HEARING. Just as in a homicide investigation, the blood samples are KEY........so is the NSS issue for Urban/CMKM Diamonds, Inc.. The SEC/DTCC just ran into "The Perfect Storm" with CMKM Diamonds, Inc., and can either turn the boat around and "save face" or crash into the biggest wave they've ever seen.
posted
And the bad part is that the SEC in this instance, is correct. NSS is entirely irrelevant to the charges faced by CMKX/UC. IMO, NSS evidence will NOT be allowed to be introduced, and, lacking that evidence, the judge has no choice but to find CMKX guilty as charged for not filing required reports. It will be interesting how the Koolaid drinkers respond to this. The SEC just kicked the last leg out from under the company. If the court convenes on May 10 as it is supposed to, CMKX is cooked well done and will be served shortly thereafter. IMO serves them right for not filing the reports we have been asking for for years. Hate to lose the money, but if that's what it takes to maintain integrity in the market, so be it.
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
