Securities Act of 1933
Rel. No. 7680 / May 11, 1999

Administrative Proc.
File No. 3-9896


The Commission today announced the institution of an administrative proceeding against three individuals alleged to have offered, during the spring and summer of 1998, prime bank investments to an Arizona Corporation Commission undercover investigator. The individuals, Robert J. Stahl of Chandler, Arizona, Elizabeth A. Boyd of Canada and Ft. Myers, Florida, and Bobby L. Rodgers of Germantown, Tennessee, are alleged to have offered to the investigator interests in various "high-yield" investment programs involving the use of so-called "prime bank guarantees" or the trading of putative bank instruments on overseas markets. In the order instituting proceedings, the Division of Enforcement alleges that none of these investment vehicles, in fact, existed, and that the respondents solicited investments in these programs using materially false and misleading statements.

The order alleges that Stahl gave the investigator information on a series of putative investments described on a website he created called "Inve$tit Opportunities." It further alleges that Stahl put the investigator in contact with a friend who had the investigator contact Boyd for additional information about the investment programs. The order further alleges that Stahl and, later, Boyd, solicited the investigator to make an investment in a non-existent high-yield investment program that would purportedly engage in offshore trading of prime bank debt instruments. Subsequently, Boyd and another individual, David V. Francis, II, of Bowling Green, Kentucky, allegedly attempted to sell the investigator an interest in a second fictitious investment program, which they claimed could return the investor 80% every ten banking days, through the trading of "medium term bank debentures" in London, England. According to the order's allegations, all information and documents relating to this second program given to the investigator by Boyd and Francis originated with Rodgers, who was to receive half of all gross returns generated from the purported trading of the bank instruments. No investor funds were lost as a result of the conduct described in the order. As a result of the actions described in the order, the Division of Enforcement alleges that each of the respondents violated Sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, and that Rodgers also caused violations of those provisions.

A hearing will be held to determine whether the Division's allegations are true, to afford each of the respondents an opportunity to establish any defenses, and to determine whether the Commission should issue a cease-and-desist order against the respondents.