Author: "James Adamosky" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:13 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulations
------------------------------- Message Contents
ref:
proposed regulation FD: file # S7-31-99
I want fair disclosure!!!
James Adamosky
jadm@flash.net
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:41 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Please DO NOT ALLOW SELECTIVE DISCLOSURES
------------------------------- Message Contents
With responsible on-line trading, I think the disclosures should be done on a
level playing field. The individual informed investor should BE PRIVVY to as
much of company information as the commercial analyst. The responsible
individual investor does his own research and should have access to as much
information as the professional analysts. I support PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. Emilie
Allen
E526@aol.com
Author: "Vincent Amari" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 7:32 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: fair disclosure rules
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed Regulation FD: File NO. S7-31-99.
Vincent Amari
Author: "Roger Albert" at Internet
Date: 04/24/2000 11:35 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
TO: Roger RR at Internet
Subject: fair disclosure of information by publicly traded companies
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Rules Commissioners.
I am writing to express my support for an SEC rule requiring
that
individual investors, i.e. the security buying public at
large,
be provided the same information and disclosure as is
currently
provided to select groups of analysts. Such a rule would
seem to
be in line with other current general protections and
disclosures.
The lack of such a rule would seem to allow at least as many
abuses
as protections.
Furthermore, I explicity reject several of the the SIA's
positions, including:
"it hardly needs saying that analysts perform a necessary
and valuable function in the U.S. capital markets"?
"alternative model of millions of individual investors and
potential investors poring over prospectuses and periodic
reports is highly theoretical and out of sync with the
real
world"?
The fact that not all consumers perform adquate research is
hardly license to grant favortism to select analysts and
protect
we informed consumers from ourselves.
I further reject that analysts make markets less volatile.
If as the SIA implies, millions of individual investors are
not doing their homework, then the volatility must arise
from
reaction to analyst pieces. The SIA's argumements are self-
inconsistent.
"Leveling the playing field for analysts, as among
themselves
and vis-a-vis the general public, will undermine the
great advantages of the current system"
I utterly reject, and hope your institution will too, that
"Leveling the playing field" can be a bad thing.
I thank you in advance for any consideration given to this
citizen, and security holder's concerns.
Sincerely yours
Roger Albert
Author: "Dave" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:28 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: SEC Ruling
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs, April 25, 2000
The following quotation was brought to my attention at the Fools.com site,
today. I am voicing my concern at it implications and oppose such a move on Wall
Street's part. All informations should be open to the public as your institution
is founded upon the public.
Therefore, I am voicing my opposition to your plans, and wish to be noted as
such.
"The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is proposing to change the
rules that currently allow companies to give important information to Wall
Street analysts without simultaneously giving the news to the public at large."
Sincerely,
Dave Auld
mailto:high2000@hotmail.com
188 Hale St. #1C
Hilo, HI 96720
Author: "Sue and Steve Baird" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:55 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: "Tom Sprunger" at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am very much in favor of eliminating the practice of companies disclosing
information to analysts before the individual investor is able to gain access. I
believe that I can complete with the analysts and portfolio managers - if the
playing field is level, I suspect I can beat most of them because I'm operating
with a rather large IRA and I do my research. I have no quarterly or periodic
pressures to make my financial results look as good as possible by churning
unnecessarily. I don't have sudden inflows of cash during good times that I
throw at stocks because I have to show a minimal cash position. I can sell at
any time without concern for the tax consequences.
Now about that playing field that is not level. There have been many times that
I am certain that someone out there has information that I don't have. I've
watched stocks drift down and looked everywhere for a clue. The information is
there but I don't have it. Legato is one very good example where I'm very
convinced that the analysts had information early before I could get it.
I hope that something is done about this to allow the individual investor to
have access to the same information as the analysts - at the same time. We'll
kick some butt. As far as analysts information helping the average investor,
this is somewhat of a joke. Just look at the lack of sell recommendations in the
Zack's information and you can see how the analysts humor the companies they
cover. There are a lot of sorry companies out there that have no sell
recommendations. For my part, I have my own approaches that work very well - I
look at sales growth, net profit margin, return on equity, revenue and income
per employee, PEG, etc. I also can look at the income statements and see how the
data is presented. You can often spot weaknesses by noting the way the data is
presented.
However, just in the last week both Citrix and Polycom dropped after issuing
what, on the surface, appeared to be strong reports. I read everything I could
find. What was going on? The analysts knew something that I didn't and couldn't
find out. Of course, they overreacted as they often do and churned those stocks.
It is not the individual investors that are currently acting like headless
chickens and causing this market volatility- it's the analysts, who have
exclusive early access to company financial results and prospects.
Steve Baird
San Jose, CA
Author: mbalenti@alvant.alva.ok.us (Mike and Sarah Balenti) at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:58 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulation FD file no 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Mr. Katz: I am definitely in favor of the proposed regulation.
Basically, is the way disclosure is made at this time a basic violation of
the "Open Meetings Law".
I have done really well with my portfolio by myself and feel that
I am capable of doing my own research on my computer. The companies I have
chosen to invest in have done very well, whereas the companies my brokers
have suggested have done much worse.
Please know that I am a woman, 58 years of age and need every
opportunity that levels the playing field for all investors. The world of
the internet have given small investors at least a chance. FD 57-31-99
will be the answer to equality for everyone.
Thank you,
Sarah Balenti
Alva, Oklahoma.
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:50 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: corruption at its best
------------------------------- Message Contents
level the playing field......who? wall street......and sec?give me a freekin
break
the most corrupt industry ever formed will never be on a level playing
field....
who are you kidding.......what a joke you pathetic hipocrits.....get a
life.....
p.s. what does i.p.o. stand for..........thats right.....why dont you give
j.q.puplic an initial shot......
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:57 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair Disclosure Rule
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an independent investor, I support a change to require businesses to
disclose all information to the public that currently is only disclosed to
analysts. Their jobs will not go away as they seem to fear. However, as a
group, I hardly think they present a balanced and objective reporting of
information. Thank you.
William H. Barker
Annapolis, Maryland
Author: barry at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:11 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-3-31-99
Regulation FD:
------------------------------- Message Contents
Individual investors have a right to the information the big Investment
Firms are trying to keep to themselves. This is just another form of
insider trading unless all have acsess to this info.
Author: "Garrett T. Biehle" at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 6:54 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC:
Thank you for your efforts to promote fairness in the market system and
move us to a better market system. I oppose selective disclosure of
information by publicly held companies to individual Wall Street firms.
I am an individual investor. I do my own research, investigating companies'
balance sheets and reading diverse opinions about the technologies and
business. How is it in my best interest for large brokerage firms to gain
information which they can use for their own purchase decisions and then
"digest" for me three days later? How is this different from insider
trading? If there is a difference, it is one without distinction.
If Wall Street analysts are good at what they do, they will be able to
make money performing good analysis on information available to everyone.
Only bad analysts need the crutch of prior information.
I will take issue directly with one of the claims of the Wall Street
lobby: According to their statement, they are in a position to ask hard
questions and find out negative information, and this is not as likely to
happen at a press conference. But does this really happen? If firms to
find out unpleasant information about a company, they are loathe to make
it known, fearing that this will jeopardize their position as an insider.
The result is that I, as an individual investor, do not get this information,
but large firms certainly act on it.
The current system benefits the rich and the well positioned. I would
prefer fairness.
Garrett Biehle
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 1:46 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Re; Selective Disclosure Rule
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sirs:
It is of utmost importance that the small investor receive the same public
companies' information given to Broker Analysts and in the same timely manner.
Respectfully yours,
William L. Blackwell
Author: "Chris L. Bolen" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:34 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
TO: Arthur@hawaii.edu at Internet
TO: Leavitt@hawaii.edu at Internet
Subject: Proposed rule FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please add my name to those millions of independent investors who want
to gain access to conference calls. There's no such thing as too much
transparency. Christopher Bolen, independent investor, Honolulu, HI.
Author: "Stacey Zeazeas" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 6:43 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Propose Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
Propose Regulation FD is just another way a keeping the "Middle Man" in the
loop. I feel that I am intelligent enough to research companies and invest
my money as I see fit. I do not need some analyst with a marginal track
record at best holding my hand trying to explain to me what this or that
means. The basic issue here is choice. What you do with the information and
the repercussion that occur is all part of the investment game. The key is
having the information accessible if you look at it or not.
E. Bolton
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 8:27 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
A level playing field is when everyone knows information at the same time.Is
it fair for a brokerage firm to go out and build up inventory based on
information that only they know and then plug it to their retail or the
overall market at times for a huge profit?That doesn't sound like fair
competition to me.This sounds almost impossible to cure.Again,is it fair for
an analyst to tell his/her trading department that they are going to
recommend an equity based on privelidged information and the house trader
goes out and builds a small/ large position or notifies insiders so they can
profit on the general public?Important news stories on equities should be
released by the press only,immediatelywhen information is disclosed.To their
credit many large corporation operate that way.Analysis is a different animal.
Author: "Kevin Borowski" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: tech analysis vs what the SEC can do
------------------------------- Message Contents
the little guy will always get screwed when it comes to getting information no
court decision will change that and if you think a court ruling will make it
better you are naive. Use your technical analysis that is our only clue to
being able to follow the big money
Author: "Katie Bretsch" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 8:34 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Strongly Support End to Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Friends,
Thank you for taking this challenging initiative in the interest of all
individual investors. I can't support your position strongly enough.
High tech trading schemes have democratized trading, however a
democratization of information has not come with it. That makes the
"little folk" such as myself at significant disadvantage to those with
preferential access to information.
The worst of it is that the analysts and institutional investors use the
information they get to their own advantage, but in order to avoid losing
access, they temper their remarks to the public considerably. That
leaves us merely standing by and watching as the value of our investments
jumps around inexplicably.
Today, one of the stocks I own jumped over 28% on no apparent news. Maybe
in a couple of days, whatever is driving this move will become apparent.
In the meantime, I can only guess. I certainly am not complaining about
this upward move. However, when it is a drastic down that analysts new
about but we didn't. That certainly makes the unfairness of the current
system obvious.
Many thanks. Don't let them slow you down.
Katie Bretsch
3336 SE Yamhill Street
Portland, OR 97214-4277
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 3:35 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Information Flow
------------------------------- Message Contents
Once the door is opened a crack, you might as well open it all the way.
Selective distribution is simply the unequal dissemination of valuable data.
There will be those with 'inside' information and those without. The
unfortunate result will be people with some information can and will mislead
us small investor. All important information must be distributed
simultaneously to allow all investors a chance to make enlightened decisions.
Tom Brady
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:09 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective disclosure is wrong, pure and simple. All investors should have
available the data needed to make rational and intelligent investment
decisions.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Richard Brown
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:24 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File #57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
In oder to promote the concept of open and fair markets for all investors, I
feel that the private meetings with analsyts in which analysts are given
information that is not available to the investing public, and the concept of
resulting "whisper numbers", violates the idea of the level playing field
that the SEC has promulgated over the years.
John H. Burd
Author: Joni Bush at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 7:29 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed file No 97-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I have recently read the SIA response to the proposed
regulation. I find the response insulting and disturbing. I do not
need Wall Street Analysts telling me what I should think about a
company. I am fully capable of reading and writing and can make up my
own mind without some "analyst". I do think that those who do not
take the time to understand the market may wish an analyst's
assistance but I do not believe that the analyst community should
have access to privileged information. I own stock in a company just
as much as their clients (I don't know how many of the analysts even
own the stocks individually). I also question analysts' motives most
of the time. Don't you think it is a bit suspicious that very very
few stocks have sell ratings on them? Could it be because the
analysts represent large brokerage houses that want to do more
business with these large companies so they try not to offend. How
can analysts give accurate insightful analysis while tiptoeing around
the feelings of the companies they are covering?
In conclusion, I feel that Wall Street analysts should not have
privileged access to information over the concerns of the individual
investor. I feel that the analysts can still perform their jobs while
giving us a fair chance to obtain the information we need to evaluate
the market.
Thank You,
Charles and Joni Bush
Private investors
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 7:38 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regultion FD: File No. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I understand that the (SEC) is proposing to change the rules that currently
allow companies to give important information to Wall Street analysts without
simultaneously giving the news to the public at large.
The public should receive the same information at the same time as Wall
Street analysts.
Thank you.
Thomas E. Chaddock
tchadd@aol.com
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 3:19 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Information disclosure to securities analysts
------------------------------- Message Contents
I think the public should have full and complete disclosure of information
discussed by companies with "Wall Street" analysts when these discussions
occur. The discussions should be open to the news media and if possible
should be made open via conference calls and/or on-line Internet sessions.
Closed discussions only lead to selective information being passed on to
securities dealers' own clients first and to the media next.
Charles R Chalkley
1385 Mtn. Hill Rd.
Fortson, GA 31808
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:17 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulations on selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor, I strongly believe that this system of selective
disclosure is unfair and discriminatory. Theoretically, we are supposed to
have efficient markets. In reality they are not very efficient due to the
ability of some people to not only get information earlier then others, but
also to prevent others from getting information. Obviously, Wall Street
firms have a vested interest in keeping everyone else out of the picture.
How else how are they going to justify their commissions or be able to
protect themselves before anyone else?
Before the internet era, there was a valid argument about the costs involved
in
disseminating such information. Today there is no such reason as technology
provides cost effective alternatives including web cast and mass mailing.
I also looked at the industry response to these proposed regulations and was
frankly amused. They claim that only some investors will benefit (those who
are watching for the information at the time disseminated) and others who
come home from work to get their mail will not. Yes that is true, but today
no one except the analysts get the information instantaneously. So at least
this is an improvement over the old system as some individual investors get
information along with the big boys.
Thanks
Ashok Chandrashekar
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:01 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: I am opposed to this censorship.
------------------------------- Message Contents
Deborah and ERic Coupey
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 6:38 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair playing field
------------------------------- Message Contents
The public should have the same access to information as analysts and
specialists. Please use your powers to see to it that this comes to
pass.
Thank you.
jim
James Cox
120 Pembroke Street
Boston, MA 02118
Author: "peter davies" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:49 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: stop selective disclosures
------------------------------- Message Contents
Ref proposed regulation FD:file no 57--31-99
I wish to object to selective disclosures.
P Davies
devinchies
west bay
bridport
dorset
uk
dt6 4eh
uk
Author: "Jerome DeMarco" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:03 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To whom it may concern,
Please allow all information to flow to all interested parties at the
same time and not just to selected Brokerages/Analyists that, can and do,
have "a conflict of interest" between the company's they represent and
thier own retail clients as well as the general investing public. To often
these Analyists use insider information to color reports in thier clients
favor to the detriment of all other honest private investors. These acts
should be deemed ilegal and STOPPED NOW.
Thank you for helping out the individual investor and in the long term all
concerned.
Sincerely,
Jerome DeMarco, Trustee
Sterling Trust
PO BOX 70081
Eugene, Oregon 97401
Author: "charles dennis" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:07 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
dear SEC,
please do what is fair here. you know the difference between right and
wrong. this is a no brainer. we need a level playing field. selective
disclosure of information to the people with the big bucks is not fair. it
is dirty pool.
sincerely,
Charles R. Dennis
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:22 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am totally in favor of this regulation.
Harry Densel
Author: Darlene Dietz at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:11 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: proposed regulation fd file #57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
thank you Darlene B Dietz, Ferris, Baker Watts, inc
Author: Dave Dobbs at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:55 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs:
Full and open flow of information on Wall Street, what a
radical notion. Seriously, don't you feel it's about time? I
for one certainly do.
Respectfully,
David Dobbs
Author: dojomo@webtv.net (D.J. Miller) at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: WE WANT INFORMATION !!!
------------------------------- Message Contents
We deserve full disclosure of all the information available to
selected few on
Wall Street....I am shcked this is even an issue..little alone a
vote....DJ
Author: "Mike Duetting" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 3:07 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I believe that the government should require corporations to disclose any and
all information regarding their company in a public manner (ie: a press release
or some other kind of open forum) rather than disclosing select information to
brokers and analysts exclusively. This will help level the playing field and
provide individuals with the same identical timely information as that provided
to the institutions.
Thank You.
Michael S. Duetting
Author: "Eggleston" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 5:31 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Disclosure of financial information should go to everyone at once. No group
should get it first. Please get rid of selective disclosure. Thank you.
Patrick M. Eggleston
69 Timberland Drive
Keene, NH 03431
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 5:02 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Provide a level field
------------------------------- Message Contents
I hope the the SEC will rule on the right for the public to have the news
currently being given to Wall Street analysts in private at t6he same time it
is being given to the WS analysts. Ben Ela
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 5:48 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Reg. FD: File No. S-7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please allow for a level playing field and pass a regulation that will permit
full discloser of information to ALL and not a select few. They will still
have other means to find out information but a small investor like me can not
afford to do so.
Please in the name of all that is FAIR pass a new freer regulation.
Thank You,
Gerald Fitzpatrick
48 Grove Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Author: "Jerry Fochtmann" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:35 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Information to Analysts
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please be advised that I support a change where the general public receives
the same information that analysts receive and at the same time.
Gerald H. Fochtmann, CPA 11876 Shallowbrook Drive St. Louis Mo 63146
Author: George Foster at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:38 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: SEC Rule Changes
------------------------------- Message Contents
I believe the stock market has been historically stacked against the
small investor and only within the last two years with the advent of the
internet has more information become available to the small investor.
I believe the rules should be changed to demand that all investors
receive information about company news at the same time the wall street
insiders know. I hope that Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
will demand that happen.
I also think it is time to require all analysts to state why upgrades
and downgrades are made. Most of the time no reason is given. Many
analysts can alter the market with such ratings changes. They
,therefore, have the opportunity to make large amounts of money by
assigning a downgrade to a stock then later raise the rating. I believe
this happens and it should be corrected. Please let us small investors
play with a full deck of cards.
It is also time to require a universal rating system that is used by all
analysts.
George Foster
Libertyville, IL
Author: Jim Frajola at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 7:14 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: re:selective disclosure vote
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sirs, Please stop the selective disclosure practice! Not all investors
are of a third grade education, particularly those of us investing
online. Those who still require advise from a broker still have that
option, but let the rest of us, who prefer to make our own choices,
access the critical information we thirst for. After all, wasn't this
great nation founded on freedom of choice?!
Thank you, jimfrajola@yahoo.com
Author: "Green; Billi K." at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:52 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I applaude the SEC for proposing to end the totally unfair practice of
companies disclosing information to select groups before making that
information public.
I manage the retirement funds for my employees and myself. I do my own
research and I feel that I should have any information that public companies
are required to divulge as soon as anyone. "There aughta be a law!" Please
make one.
Thank You;
Thomas Friedland MD, Bellingham WA
Author: Cicero Gainer at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:03 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I commend the SEC for it's proposed regulation FD. I think that it will
be beneficial to to every facet of American society.
Cicero Gainer
Author: Skate Dancer at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 1:50 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Disclosure Information
------------------------------- Message Contents
To the SEC:
I believe that the general public should have the same equal access to
disclosure information from companies as the Wall Street analysts. That is not
to say that there is no role for the Street analysts or that their roles are to
dramatically change. They can still render their opinions based on the facts
that are presented to them. I feel that the general public should be given the
option of deciding whether or not they want to buy securities based on full
disclosure and their own logical conclusions or that of someone else.
Aisha Garner
Shareholder
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:56 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: (no subject)
------------------------------- Message Contents
Subj: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Date: 4/25/00 8:49:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: B. GLENN
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
I have read the ideas expressed by the Securities Industry Association
lobbying on behalf of its full-service broker members. I completely disagree
with their contention that analysts provide a better service for the owners
of America's public companies by operating in an environment with access to
information denied to the very people who own or are considering owning those
companies. Their contentions betray all common sense.
If it betrays common sense, what is the motivation? SIA desires unequal access
to information by its members' analysts because they resell the information to
the American public. There's nothing wrong with reselling the information. But
making that information more valuable by giving them unequal access to it,
denying equal access to individual investors, is wrong.
If there is any doubt in your mind that SIA's motivation is less than
honorable, be reminded of Merrill Lynch's contention expressed over a year
ago by its CEO that online trading was the worst thing for individual
investors. A year later and having reversed its thinking, Merrill Lynch is
now offering online trading to its customers. The contentions of the
community of full-service brokers expressed in SIA's filings show more
concern about the market share they are losing to the discount brokers than
concern for individual investors.
I applaud Proposed Regulation F D
BETTY GLENN
Author: "Mary Goodrich" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:33 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Rules Change
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor, I believe I should have the right to the same
disclosures as Brokerage firms, and analysts. I believe that the
stock markets and investors will all benefit from full disclosure of
financial information from publicly held corporations.
--- Mary Goodrich
--- quingood@earthlink.net
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.
Author: "wjgorman" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:09 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
------------------------------- Message Contents
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
17 CFR Parts 230, 240, 243, and 249
Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99
RIN 3235-AH82
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
Agency: Securities and Exchange Commission
Action: Proposed rule
Summary: The Securities and Exchange Commission is proposing new rules to
address three issues: the selective disclosure by issuers of material nonpublic
information; whether insider trading liability depends on a trader's "use" or
"knowing possession" of material nonpublic information; and when the breach of a
family or other non-business relationship may give rise to liability under the
misappropriation theory of insider trading. The proposals are designed to
promote the full and fair disclosure of information by issuers, and to clarify
and enhance existing prohibitions against insider trading.
Dates: Public comments are due on or before March 29, 2000.
I am a retired US Army officer currently working part time in a Toys- R- Us
store. I have recently begun to invest some small ammounts in the stock market.
I feel that it is most important that every investor or potential investor have
access to all information that is available to any investor or group of
investors. I favor these proposed new rules. Thank you for this opportunity to
comment.
William J Gorman, 241 Lynn Ave, Melbourne, FL 32935
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 8:43 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Coments on "Proposed Regulation FD"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir:
I am writing to voice my opinion in favor of Proposed Regulation FD as it
applies to reduction of selective dissemination of corporate information to a
preselected audience of securities analysts. Given the advances in the
medium for dissemination of information to the general public and considering
the resources readily available for the interested public to interpret the
information releases in a comprehensive manner, Regulation FD can only be
interpreted to contribute to the public good -- with two caveates. I
strongly request the the wording of the regulation be reviewed with an eye
toward :
(1) Preventing new opportunities for frivilous class action law suits based
Regulation FD and,
(2) Guarding against missinterpretation to avoid release of information in a
manner similar to the Freedom of Information Act where the information is
generally available but but only in response to specific requests and subject
to interpretation of the wording of the request. This may be an extreme
example but it illustrates one form of a family of potential complications
that must be considered.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this potentially valuable piece
of information.
Sincerely,
Ronald J. Grill
Private Investor (and Retired Federal Employee)
Author: "Gene & Kathy Gstohl" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:33 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern:
As an American citizen & private investor all I ask is that I have the
same
opportunity to information from PUBLICLY HELD companies as brokers! Its time
we level the playing field! It is time to put a stop to selective disclosure
of information that may impact the individual investor's retirement funds.
Sincerely,
G. Gstohl
Author: "Michael S. Guillory" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 1:24 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. s 7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs:
I am sure that the SEC is aware of the trend for individuals to manage their own
investments via the internet. This is certainly a movement which will continue
to grow so the need for full disclosure is now as necessary for individuals as
it is for Wall Street Analysts. As an individual investor, I feel that full and
fair disclosure must be made mandatory to protect ordinary people like me who
have taken control of their investments. The role of the SEC, as I understand
it, is to protect the consumer and that is what mandating full and fair
disclosure would accomplish.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Michael S. Guillory
