U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission
SEC Seal
Home | Previous Page
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Comments on Proposed Rule:
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading

Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99


Author: susan ammann at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:00 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed rgulation FD: File No. s7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I would like to state my support for Regulation FD, barring companies from selectively disclosing material information. Susan Ammann Taos, NM


Author: Rich Appis at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 4:31 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposedegulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents As a serious independent investor I am in favor of the proposed SEC rule giving investors equal access to information provided to Wall Street Analysts. As an investor or potential investor in a given company I should have at least an equal right to any information concerning such investments. Sincerely, Richard Appis


Author: "Arnold; Robert H" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 4:54 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Sirs: I believe the proposed regulation FD (File No. S7-31-99) is an excellent way of giving the individual investor like my wife and I the information we need to make informed decisions about our investments. Bob and Judy Arnold Genoa, Nevada


Author: "Bruce M. Berberich" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:31 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Good Morning, I understand that you are currently considering amending the current process of allowing selective information to be given to Wall Street analysts without simultaneously giving the news to the public at large. I would like to strongly recomend that you change the current rules. I would ask that you make it the rule to only allow full disclosure to all parties at the same time. The practivce of selective information sharing is tantamount to allowing critical information to be knowingly withheld. I can only see long term benefit for greater availability of key information. Please support me in this request. Sincerely, Bruce M. Berberich 1 Durrschmidt Rd Stormville, New York 12582


Author: "Garry B." at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:40 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents To whom it may concern, Please, Please, Please, help us as individual investors to have the same information as "The Big Guys". It is our money all the way regardless of who invests it. We all want and need the information on the companies we invest in. Thank you, Garry Biggers


Author: "John Bono" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:12 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I support the proposed regulation change. The general investing public has a right to full disclosure. Thank You, John Bono


Author: "Brian Bradford" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:14 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I am writing in support of the new regulation referred to above. I am a 23 year old investor who has a limited number of holdings yet chooses very carefully where he puts his money. I fully support the proposed regulation that will take away the exclusive and unwarranted rights of analysts to be privy to information all of us should be able to view. Even if the average investor never takes the time to view this information, which will probably be the case, the RIGHT to view it should not be denied to us if we ever wanted to. "PUBLICLY Traded Company" should not be a misnomer.


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:49 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents 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 FD. --Mike Buckley


Author: "Michael Christopher" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:45 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I think that selective disclosure is improper. Michael Christopher 1433 Constance Ave. Kettering Ohio savvyside@aol.com


Author: "Steven Cochran" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:03 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I am writing to support the proposed regulation that would stop certain individuals (big-time analysts) from getting company information ahead of the general public. With so many Americans having invested for their retirement in equities, it is vital that no one clique have an advantage over the public. I feel that the proposed regulations keep with the spirit of the SEC's stance against insider trading and urge that it be enacted. Thank you, -Steven Cochran


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:07 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 Megadot Communicat ------------------------------- Message Contents Securities and Exchange Commission April 25, 2000 Gentlemen: My organization and I thoroughly support your efforts to provide a level playing field for small investors by abolishing the selective disclosure of information to Wall Street analysts and instead making such information available broadscale to all of the so-called "little people" who constitute the backbone, the guts, the muscle and the brains of the investing community of this nation. We applaud your commitment to fair play and hope you will keep us apprised of your success, and also will feel free to call on us for assistance if at any point you feel we can lend a hand. Thank you. James C. G. Conniff, President Megadot Communications jcgc@aol.com P.O. Box 43716 Upper Montclair NJ 07043-0716 TEL/FAX 973/746-2317


Author: David Darnall at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 4:30 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I would like to stop selective disclosures, so I am in FAVOR of this proposed regulation. Thank you. David Darnall Private Investor 15531 Whiteoak Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92647


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:51 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents Please don't let Wall Street insiders be above the law when it comes to this proposed regulation. The free flow of information in all media is the most important issue. David O


Author: "Mauricio J. del Barrio" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:26 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents To the Securities and Exchange Commission: I would like to express my opinion regarding the proposed regulation listed on the above subject heading. I believe that our Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech to everyone, not a choice few such as the "investment bankers" who oppose this regulation. Publicly owned companies should also comply with these principles on which our great country was founded. I implore you to pass this regulation and allow "public" knowledge from "public" corporations be heard by the public at large. Mauricio J. del Barrio mbarrio@iamerica.net


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:40 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I am an individual investor and do not want public corporations to give important information to Wall Street analysts before that information is available to the public. Please make these private meetings illegal. And while your at it, stop the creative accounting that is getting worse each year. Thank you, Frank Drahuse 32241 Old Forge Lane Farmington Hills, MI 48334


Author: TJD at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 3:30 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents Sirs: In this era of the Internet and Internet investing, I believe that all investors should have instant access to all of the information that is now selectively disclosed. Even the usual 15-20 minute delay in quotes should be rescinded. By allowing only certain individuals and companies access to information, you are furthering an elitist institution that wants to perpetuate an insider-ruled Wall Street. Enough is enough. Thank you, Theodore J. Dziuk, Jr. 15607 N. 61st Drive Glendale, AZ 85306 602-843-6755


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:26 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC CC: SNesie@aol.com at Internet Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents As Secretary/Treasurer of a new and small investment club (10 person - $50 a month each), I believe full and equal disclosure between all investors is paramount to maintaining fairness and confidence in the markets. Analysts and the like will still have their role to play - interpreting the information provided by companies. However, the small investor should have the opportunity to analyze the data for himself, if he so chooses, in a timely fashion. Just as an investor can use a full service broker versus an online service to place trades, investors should have the choice to analyze data themselves or pay a professional to do so. If everyone had perfect information, trading would come to a standstill. It is the differences of opinion as to what a stock or the market will do that creates the trading environment. Eliminating selective disclosure will not eliminate imperfect information, it will help create a level playing field. Thank you for your attention. Steven W. Eisen Secretary/Treasurer Wall Street Wizards of Las Vegas Investment Club


Author: Rob Eisenhuth at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:26 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents This is to let you know that I SUPPORT the proposed changes to the SEC regulations, as such changes will prohibit selective disclosure of information by public companies. Robert Eisenhuth


Author: Peter Francz at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:23 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: file# : s7-31-99 proposal ------------------------------- Message Contents DEAR SEC: We are with EASTMAN KODAK CO. We would like to back the regulation to disclose market info to the public at large simultaneously, as with the market brokers.


Author: "Michael W. Glacken" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:20 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC CC: at Internet Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents 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. I am an individual investor, and to be frank, I am amazed that such selective disclosures were not already illegal. In a democracy and truly free market, how can anyone justify the selective dissemination of vital information. Why should some analyst have access to information that I can not? Why should they be able to buy or sell their shares based on that information when I can not? Why should they have an advantage over me? Are they somehow better than I am, more privileged than I? I think not! I vigorously support this rule change. Michael W. Glacken


Author: Grant Gurley at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:19 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I am insulted to learn of the existence of the current preferential treatment of market "analysts" to shareholders. As a shareholder, I am an owner of the company and should be given preferential treatment over someone on the sidelines. Please adopt the proposed rule and shut down this shameful practice. Thank you. Sincerely, Grant Gurley 3901 Mapelwood Av Austin, Texas 78722 e-mail at: grantgurley@1nol.com


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:08 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File # S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Hello. Allowing public companies to disclose pertinent information to individual analysts, or groups, only, excluding the public at large, gives the appearance of those entities conspiring to manipulate my actions. The outcome of my investment decisions, based on the limited information they decide to release to the public, may be to their benefit and not necessarily mine. I feel that any information shared by a public company should be available to all, not just to a select few. Thank you, Jarrod Hall Individual investor


Author: "Michael Hannon" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:10 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents SEC, I strongly urge you to adopt your proposed rule and do away with selective disclosure. Every investor should have access to the same information. Take a look at the comments from the institutional investors and ask yourself what they are trying to protect. Why are they afraid of every investor getting the same information? I quote from the opening sentence of your proposed rule: "Information is the lifeblood of our securities markets." Are the biggest institutional investors more in need of the "lifeblood" of the market than the rest of us? Sincerely, Michael Hannon, Esq. Lecturing Fellow Duke University School of Law


Author: Joe Harrington at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:23 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC CC: jh@oobleck.tn.cornell.edu at Internet Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents To whom it may concern: I am strongly IN FAVOR of the proposed regulation FD. As an individual investor, I make my own decisions about when, what, and where to invest. The quality of my decisions is based solely on the quality and timeliness of the information I receive. If an analyst receives information before I do, he or she may tell a large institutional customer to sell, and the share price may drop precipitously before the news reaches the individual investor. As the investor is an owner of the company (and the analyst may not be), this privileged situation is patently unfair. We believe in level playing fields in America, and I am glad that the SEC is taking steps to level this one. --jh-- Joe Harrington 122 Park Lane Ithaca, NY 14850-6369 jh@oobleck.tn.cornell.edu


Author: "Brent Hege" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:26 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regualation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I favor a level playing field for all investors. Therefore, I am in favor of the proposed rule requiring full disclosure of corporate information. I am embarrassed that this type of information has been withheld from individual investors like myself. The comments and analysis of the SIA are insulting. How is a "buyer to beware" when crucial and fundamental information is withheld? Brent D. Hege Attorney at Law


Author: Brian Hilliard at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:04 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed regulation FD: File Number S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents I'm all for it. Please see that this is pushed through. Brian Hilliard


Author: jorn at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:23 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Please explain why I have to compete against SEC-approved insiders. Thank you Joern Hinrichsen LHS Group employee


Author: "Chris Kirby" <5cedars@thomson.net> at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:02 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents Definately FOR this one! Chris Kirby McCorkle Nurseries, Inc. Dearing, GA


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:44 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Hi, I recently heard about the recent proposed regulation that will removed the practice of selective disclosure. I am a private investor and I would like to have the same opportunity in receiving information that are material in nature without time delay. I would like to express my full support of the following proposed regulation that support removal of selective disclosure. Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 P. Magaoay 8070 La Jolla Shores Dr. #433 La Jolla, CA 92037


Author: "Frederick J. Martin" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:49 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Dear Sir or Madam, I strongly support your proposal to require equal disclosure of financial data to brokers and to the public. A broker is an active agent whose full-time activity is in the market, serving his or her firm's interests and those of its clients. Brokers have the advantage of having staff who can watch events as they happen and give information to them in near-real-time. The rest of us, including investment partners like me, are usually not active full time in the stock market and have no such support. Making the information available to the public concurrently with making it available to stock brokers gives us a chance to make reasonable market decisions also. It does put the onus on us to get the information, but at least there would be a decent chance and a perception of fairness and equality of opportunity. Frederick J. Martin General Partner Drew-Martin Traders


Author: "John Meinking" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:37 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Dear SEC, Let's get this approved now. Thanks, John Meinking 513-683-0278 Office 513-683-2013 Fax john_meinking@hotmail.com Internet e-mail. jmeinking@cinci.rr.com Office e-mail


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:28 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I am against adoption of this proposal. William N Mundy willmundy@AOL.com


Author: "Ervin Nelson" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:36 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: proposed Reg. FD:File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Information for all.


Author: "Steve and Sandy Niss" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:26 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Please open up the information to the rest of us...I don't use analyst... Thanks, Steve Niss


Author: Gordon Oehler at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:46 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Dear Sir, Please add my e-mail, if not my voice, to support your proposal to eliminate selective disclosures by publicly traded companies. Thank you. Sharon Oehler 2311 Pimmit Dr. #616 Falls Church VA 22043


Author: "techno_masai" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:28 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: S7-31-99, potential class action liabilities ------------------------------- Message Contents Dear Ms/Sir: RE: S7-31-99 The cat's outta the bag, everyone knows about legal-illegal insider trading, its unjust, unfair, and goes against all American ideals. Stop legalized insider trading! Further, SEC can be held liable for treble damages in any class action litigation. Y's Mark Plunkett


Author: "fatcat48" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 3:41 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: proposed regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I approve of full disclosure of information to the public and the press, and oppose any exclusive distribution of information to stock analysts. Those of us who choose to make our own decisions, rather than relying on an elite and non-disinterested few deserve to get our information in a timely and equal fashion. I applaud your efforts and support your new regulation. Let's try a level playing field and a free economy. Sincerely Don Potter Cheshire and Pendragon 4966 Vesper Dr. Everett, WA. 98203


Author: "Russ Prystash" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:50 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents To whom ... As a private investor I'd like to know that I have equal access to information from publicly traded companies so as to make an informed decision when buying or selling market shares of such companies. The proposed regulation would go a long way to ensuring such a level playing field among instituitional and private investors. I support the adoption of this regulation and others which would eliminate additional discriminatory impediments towards equal information access. Thank you for your time. Russell Prystash rprystash@email.msn.com


Author: Eric Rall at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 4:18 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 To Whom It May Concern: I would like to comment in favor of the proposed changes to allow companies to provide simultaneous information to individual investors and analysts. As a small investor, I feel this is a positive step in leveling the playing field for private investors. I work for a privately held company and have NO affiliation with any publicly traded company or brokerage. Eric Rall 19431 Ranch Lane #110 Huntington Beach, CA 92648


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:36 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Gentlemen; I am an individual investor. I invest for my own account and for several other accounts as a Trustee. I oppose your above referenced regulation. I can think of millions of reasons why the industry would want it. I can think of only one reason why the voting/investing private citizen would not: it will deprive us, in the new "information age" of information. There can not be any harm to the industry as they are able to post it to the world at large via the Internet without cost. There will be incalculable harm to the small individual investor if financial information is not immediately introduced into the marketplace of ideas. No harm/no foul. I can not believe that you would adopt this harmful propsed rule. Thank you for considering my comments. Yours truly; Arthur M. Read, II, Esq 34 Lincoln Avenue Barrington, RI 02806-2109


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:50 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: proposed regulationFD;File no.S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I strongly urge the SEC to pass this regulation.This is indeed in the best publisc interest.Easy to see why Wall Street opposes it.George Reichel M.D.


Author: Gene Ricci at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:06 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Please make full disclosure to everyone (simultaneously) a law. Thank you, Gene Ricci Dallas, TX 75248


Author: "Larry Rosemeyer" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 4:37 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Dear SEC, Please change the rules that allow selective disclosure of company information to Wall Street analysts without releasing this information to the public. Thank You. individual investor, Larry Rosemeyer 2304 192nd PL SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 425-775-6993


Author: "Sally Rothfus" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 4:01 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Re Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 It would be inexcusable to pass a law which would allow certain special people to have more inside knowledge than I have. I am an internet investor and I do not use a real life broker. I suppose that is what it is all about. I am sure that the analysts see the internet investor as a threat to their incomes. However, it has long been my opinion than analysts do NOT have MY interests at heart. Instead, they push the stocks they want to push for their own reasons. They don't want me to know what they know because that would mean I could reach my own conclusions. And they are right. Knowledge is freedom. Would you really deprive me of that? Sally Rothfus


Author: mscott@naxs.com (Melvin Scott) at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 8:22 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Selective disclosure gives the "full service brokers" the inside information to profit from the many individual investors. They already receive a commission from trades and the "spread" in the buy/sell scenario. I am very much against "insider information" in a market that includes all who want to participate. Thank you, Melvin Scott


Author: "Andy Sear" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:35 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: proposed reg. FD: File#S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents stop letting analysts or anyone else have prior information of a company before the general public. what you have allowed is tantamount to insider trading. Stop it at once. Thank You. Andy Sear


Author: Mark Sengel at Internet Date: 04/26/2000 6:01 AM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I have spent several hours reading about this regulation proposal. I disagree strongly with most of the assertions put forth by the Securities Industry Association. Please act to increase disclosure to the general public. Mark Sengel


Author: Robert E Shahan at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:44 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation: FD File #S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Gentlemen: I'm for it! Bob Shahan


Author: RMSIMM1@webtv.net (Richard Simmons) at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:42 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: PrposedRegulation FD; File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Please vote AGAINST this regulation. Thank you, Richard M. Simmons


Author: Robert Solomon at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:06 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed regualtion FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Anything other than a level playing field is unfair. Any information should be released publically and simultaneously to everyone. No previews for the security industry. Robert Solomon, Independent Investor


Author: "Jeremiah Spence" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:53 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Dear Sirs, It is definitely in the best interests of investors to do away with selective disclosures. I urge you to move forward with this action as quickly as possible. yours, Jeremiah Spence -------------------------- Jeremiah Spence Customer Service Rep Nowdocs.com 2101 Donley Drive, Suite B107 Austin, TX 78758 Phone: (877) NOWDOCS Fax: (512) 531-5701 jspence@nowdocs.com


Author: James Sullivan at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 7:28 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99" ------------------------------- Message Contents This proposal is long past due. Please pass this positive investing rule that will "help" to level the investing field for the common investor(and probably the majority tax payer). James Sullivan


Author: Adam Tijerina at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 5:33 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 I support fair disclosure rules so all investors will have the same information. Thanks, Adam Tijerina Individual Investor mailto:xgad@xgad.com 210.545.7210


Author: "Jim Vesterman" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 3:51 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD, File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents April 25, 2000 Jonathan G. Katz Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20549 Re: Proposed Regulation FD, File No. S7-31-99 Dear Mr. Katz: With respect to the proposed Financial Regulation FD S7-31-99, I wanted to alert you to the changes that are occurring in the press release distribution segment of the industry. Specifically, there are a number of services that offer targeted email distribution of releases to the media as well as individual investors. These services are very rapidly being adopted by publicly-traded clients in an effort to improve the power of their media communications relative to traditional wire services such as PR Newswire and Business Wire. It might be added, that PR Newswire and Business Wire also offer direct email targeting of journalists upon demand. Unlike the traditional wires, Internet distribution companies such as CorporateNEWS, CCBN, and Internet Wire, send releases directly to editors rather than relying on them to access the wires and search for needed information. This ability to economically target journalists in any branch of the media has only truly been available with the rise of Internet use at companies and publications. The clear advantages of direct targeting should serve to continue the growth of this distribution choice going forward. In addition, CorporateNEWS, CCBN and others have the capability to copy any given release to individual investors, thereby informing individuals in a much more direct manner than is capable using wire services or 8-K filings. CorporateNEWS, CCBN, and Internet Wire are recognized by public relations and investor relations professionals as meeting the media communications needs of companies in the Internet Age. This evolution in the industry should be taken into account as new policies are set regarding what constitutes full and fair disclosure today. Sincerely, James J. Vesterman Managing Director CorporateNEWS


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:45 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Rrgulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents There is no reason that companies should be allowed to give information to one set of investors and not all investors at the same time. Selective disclosure is blatently discrimination. Of course, the high priced analysists do not want the common investor to hear this information, because they want to sell it to us. The stockholders of teh company should be entitled to any and all information given to any select set of investors. Make investing a level playing field. James D. Walker 823 Valence St. New Orleans, LA 70115


Author: "Jim Weaver" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:44 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I oppose withholding financial information to the general public while the big financial institutions are not. We will be setup for for a fall. This is the information age. Let the information flow to the benefit of all. Jim Weaver


Author: at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:53 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents individual investors need the same access to disclosure on an immediate basis as do the analysta and brokerage houses. please level the playing field! sincerely, walter wilson


Author: "Judy Witt" at Internet Date: 04/25/2000 6:31 PM Normal TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99 ------------------------------- Message Contents I want equal access to information from companies I place my investment dollars in - the money invested does not belong to the analysts from brokerage houses. It belongs to me and you, the individual investors. My money says I have a right to equal information at the same time any company discloses it to anyone - otherwise there is an unfair advantage given to brokerage houses over the individuals who invest in companies. I will not stand for such inequality, and neither should you. Judy Witt cfwitt@qwestinternet.net

http://www.sec.gov/rules/0425b08.htm


Modified:05/10/2000