To: Jonathan A. Katz, Secretary
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Dear Mr. Katz,

I am writing you with reference to false and malicious statements made about Investrend Communications, Inc., and its divisions on Thursday, November 27, 2003 at 12:33 AM, from an individual purported to be named "Nick Tracy," representing "Nick Tracy Enterprises Ltd." and a questionable website known as ""

We are not commenting on your rules due to a neutrality imposed by our Investrend Information's news coverage of Regulation SHO and the accompanying issues in its FinancialWire, with the exception that in keeping with our company's mission statement, we must note that we have seen widespread commentary that the SEC's proposals to date have been skewed towards market regulation rather than the protection of and restitution to individual investors at risk from market manipulation and abuses.

As an information resource, it is the policy of our company and its officers not to trade in equities of companies associated with our Shareholder Empowerment platforms nor those covered by our news wire. This is by way of noting that we have no unstated agenda in providing this commentary.

The misrepresentations by and the purported "Nick Tracy" are part of a pattern of deception that resulted in our news wire's refusal to cover that entity's posts and releases, and which we believe are further characterized by malicious intent.

The refusal to cover's activities was based on a number of considerations, including but not limited to:

  1. The entity initially acknowledged that it was "shorting" stocks of companies that were the subject of its "complaints." After stating to FinancialWire that it would "end" the practice to achieve distribution of its releases and activities, the proprietor refused to disclose his or her trading records as part of our diligence.

  2. The individual known as "Nick Tracy" was asked to provide proof of identity since FinancialWire does not publish commentary by anonymous sources, and although claiming that "Nick Tracy" is his or her true name, refused to provide such proof.

  3. The individual represented to FinancialWire that he/she is domiciled "just outside London," but subsequently sent an email from his personal account, which had an "nz" extension, indicating his/her service was a South African internet service provider.

  4. represented to FinancialWire that its services "help individual investors" file complaints about public companies to the SEC, but upon request, produced no proof that any of its complaints have been submitted by or filed by anyone else except the proprietor, whose identity, representations, agenda and veracity had become and remains entirely suspect.

  5. The entity failed to inform investors that complaints may be filed directly with the SEC. In its Investor Resource, alternatively provides that data and a link.

  6. In a complaint the proprietor initially induced FinancialWire to cover , after it was rejected by various commercial newswires, claimed the company had virtually no revenues or earnings and few prospects for either, an allegation that subsequently turned out to have been false and misleading.

  7. The website has not produced any proof that its complaints have been received by the SEC or acted upon, or that it is providing any public service.

  8. Mr./Ms. Tracy's comments about Investrend are acutely suspect inasmuch as he begged our newswire to cover his activities and became vindictive only after it ceased to do so for these and other enumerated reasons.

  9. FinancialWire was the recipient of numerous accusations and loosely-derived conclusions about a number of topics which demonstrated a lack of diligence, documentation or factual base.

This is self-evident in further allegations contained in the letter which is the subject of this response, to wit:

Tracy: "Investrend launched an aggressive PR campaign utilizing an abusive technique called "ticker spam" adding as many as 119 company symbols in a single press release in order to promote its site while campaigning on the side of stock promoters and pump and dump stock manipulators against naked short selling."

  1. Investrend provides no public relations or investor relations for any entity. The statement fails to note the continuously-stated separation of Investrend Information and its FinancialWire news service from the other divisions and products. News articles by FinancialWire do not necessarily reflect the views of Investrend Communications, Inc., or its other divisions, its officers or staff, and it is maliciously false and misleading for "Mr. Tracy" to describe news coverage as a "PR campaign." Mr./Ms. Tracy is thus engaging in a practice that discredits him, his letter and his site's purposes.

  2. FinancialWire does not participate in "ticker spam." "Mr. Tracy" has made these untrue statements on other occasions, and we believe, even anonymously in public "message boards," and Investrend has not responded. However, he/she has now made his/her malicious defamation part of an official public record. News distributors have a policy of providing tickerized references to only those ticker symbols contained in the first two paragraphs. In keeping with the policies of its news distributors, FinancialWire does not list more than four ticker symbols in the first two paragraphs of its news stories. It is regular and routine practice to list ticker symbols with names of companies directly a part of a story, as were those 119 companies, as a point of information and reference for discerning and inquiring readers; however, these are referenced in the "body" of any such story, far below the point where the automated ticker searches of our newswire's distributors pick up the tickers. This is another example of a practice which brings to question the veracity of Mr./Ms. Tracy's arguments and complaints.

  3. For Mr./Ms. Tracy to suggest that Investrend is "campaiging on the side of stock promoters and pump and dump stock manipulators against naked short selling" is not only prima facie false, it is slanderously misleading. A "Site Search" at will reveal that FinancialWire's coverage has been balanced, and that many of the "abuses" and "abusers" described by Mr./Ms. Tracy in his unfortunate ramblings was in fact derived from exposes of those individuals, entities and practices by FinancialWire itself. It is a patented example of Mr./Ms. Tracy's disregard for truth, honesty and diligence that exemplifies the reasons that FinancialWire declined to futher distribute "news" of his activities. We simply had no confidence in his findings.

Tracy: "Since no legitimate PR distribution service allows abusive ticker spamming, investrend used its own service to effect the campaign. Their efforts have done more to keep this situation in the public's eye than any other single activity we are aware of."

  1. The fact is that any commercial presswire will allow the use of as many symbols as a legitimate provider wishes to include, as long as those ticker symbols are in the third paragraph or below. "Ticker spam" is the practice of including unrelated ticker symbols in the first two paragraphs of press releases about companies that have no relation to the subject. The 119 companies were previously documented, one-by-one, with respect to their direct relationship to short-selling abuses. Despite this, they are not listed in the first two qualifying paragraphs and thus would not in any instance meet the definition of "ticker spam." These allegations are further representative examples of the lack of research, diligence and factual documentation related to, which falsely represents itself as performing under those minimal standards.

  2. While the Tracy statement that "their efforts have done more to keep this situation in the public's eye than any other single activity we are aware of" certainly meets the definition of a "dubious compliment," this issue has been covered by Dow Jones, Reuters, Financial Times and numerous news organizations around the world. It is an important issue, and FinancialWire is pleased to have provided some service to the community and to the SEC by providing a small part of our daily coverage to this issue, as new events developed, but we believe that to say FinancialWire has "done more" than "any other single activity" to "keep this situation in the public's eye" is a stretch, and one more example of how takes a shred of information and promotes it into a mountain of condemnation, relegating what otherwise should be an immense public service into no public benefit whatsoever.

We believe that the SEC has an obligation to the public and to the Commission to determine the true identity of this responder and his/her agenda, before further providing publication to his/her statements or using those as part of the Commission's consideration. It is one thing to provide an "anonymous" response; but it is entirely another to deliberately seek to deceive a public agency.

Thank you.

Gayle Essary
Investrend Communications, Inc.
P.O. 750471
Forest Hills, NY 11375-0471