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
