Comments on Proposed Rule:
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 2:22 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: re: proposed regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am in total favor of your abandonment of selective disclosure. As a
stockholder of over twenty years and an active investor, I feel I can safely
discern the quality of this information and I don't feel companies will be
disinclined to release it solely because it would go into wider distribution.
Samuel Adams
5361 Russell Ave. #310
LA, CA 90027
Author: "stephen ahmad" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:55 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am a small investor trying to create savings for my retirement. I need to
>have as much information as the analyst because I plan on living on this
>money
>for many years. Why should I not have the same access to information as
>they
>do? Please level the playing field. I am not asking to have more access
>than
>anyone, just the same.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Pasha Ahmad
Author: Edith Anderson at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:46 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Why do you favor analysts over the individual. I am a retiree
and like to manage my own--am I not entitled to know the
same info about a company that someone who manages others
money is? Edith Anderson
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:42 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation File No S7-31-00
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please make disclosure available to the Public as well as the others. We
have a right to know. Suzi Antonucci
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 6:00 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Regulation 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
My opinion --- for the records I as an individual investor and as President
of the International Gang Investment club ( 23 members ) and Treasurer of the
Go For Broke Investment club ( 23 members ) would like to express my opinion
against selective disclosure of company financial information and other
information that gives a huge break to market makers and market giants that
rule the investment playing field, they have enough advantage with the amount
of research they do, and the access they have directly with company
management. I feel very strongly that any information that a company wants to
give regarding earnings guidance etc should be given to individual investors
at the same time it is given to the market specialists and analysts for the
big brokerage houses.
I am an employee of the International Truck and Engine Corporation ( NAV )
Thanks for listening,
Bob Atkinson
E-mail to: rjajr@aol.com
EFAX to: 1- 520-833-2170
International Gang and Go For Broke Investment Clubs
Author: "Donald Beaton" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 7:31 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor, I add my full support for Proposed Regulation FD.
Todays market climate reflects the greater involvement of the individual
investor who has benefited from the access to current corporate information.
This access has greatly promoted market efficiency. Proposed Regulation FD will
further enhance this.
Sincerely,
Donald Beaton
Author: Charles Bohlman at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 9:49 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Attn Chairman Leveitt:
Dear Mr. Levitt,
I only want to take a moment to congratulate you and the SEC for taking a pro
active approach to eliminating a long standing disadvantage to small, self
directed investors.
I believe the new proposed rule change recognizes a new era in investing brought
about by technology. New technolgies have allowed individual investors efficient
transactional access to the securities markets as well as having allowed rapid
dissemination of information.
I congratulate the SEC also on generally not feeling the need to protect me or
my ilk from ourselves, for not protecting me from the rewards of successful
investing, and for enabling me to own a portion of American enterprise without
interference of undue protection.
Thank you and the SEC for acting in such a commendable manner.
Sincerely,
Charles A. Bohlman
Author: "Mona F. Brown" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:59 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: SureStep a Death Trap
------------------------------- Message Contents
http://www.fcnet.net/members/deathtrap/
propsed regulation FD:file No 57-31-99
Dear chairman
Look what the consumer will get after the sof pac is delivered to the
lobbist, and this is a medicare/medicade farce because you have to buy
the strips and poor people can't afford another device so that means
they are stuck with jnj trash, the same trash they claim in their own
annual report to be their best products- why don't they tell who is
suing them especially something this serious, why is america giving this
idiot the power to kill innocent people with defective products. Is it
the sof pac,should'nt someone protect the sick from this kind of scheme
which on the surface looks like they are helping when the truth is ,jnj
only made the diabetics worse off than they were Anthony Brown was one
of their Victims and there are plenty more, please ask them to come
clean about what they did for so long to deliberately let those sick
people inject with the wrong insulin that is a genecide and Ralph knows
about it to save money they are quietly letting the defective device be
turned in and they replace the device with a surestep device which also
had been recalled what a deal! death by lethal injection thats wrong
sos sos so sos sos sos Children and Sick people in grave danger!
Mona f. Brown
1529 lorelie dr 107
Zion illinio 60099
8477317220 I pray this gets to you chairman please assist don't let this
continue!
E-mail me to at least let me know you go this message , I'd appreciate
that, Don't need money, I'm fine just help those innocent people that
probrably don't have the time or capital to fight for theirselves, that
why I came back for them with the inheritance brown left me Ralph needs
to know everything is not money. Some things you do because it's the
right thing to do Please insist this idiot pick this trash up
INVOLUNTARY RECALL INVOLUNTARY RECALL NOT VOLUNTARY _NOT VOLUNTARY
Author: "Mark Childs" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 7:14 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair Disclosure Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am writing as an individual investor in support of pending SEC regulations
that will require "fair disclosure" of corporate information and restrict the
practice of selective disclosure. Requiring corporations to make announcements
in a fair and public forum will reduce the unfair advantage currently enjoyed by
a select and privileged group of analysts. It will create fairness in the
system. The Securities Industry Association has publicly stated that selective
disclosure allows analysts to pursue greater diligence in evaluating corporate
information and that market pressure creates fairness.
"The marketplace itself provides incentives for such diligence, for it is the
analysts who get to the market "firstest" with the "mostest" that under the
current system reap the reputational and financial rewards."
However, creating fairness in the system will aid individual investors and do no
harm to those analysts that truly add value to information through the diligence
and quality of their analysis. Those analysts that provide the "mostest" will
continue to find an audience. Those who depended on privilege and unfair
advantage to be "firstest" will be required to compete fairly. The marketplace
will decide whom shall ". . .reap the reputational and financial rewards."
Mark Childs
5604 56th Ave SE
Lacey, Wa 98503
mgchilds@home.com
Author: gigsi@webtv.net (no no; not me) at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 12:20 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-gg
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective information only helps the middle man.
Helga B. Daniel
Author: Normand Dionne at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 10:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Opinion
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
I think that the public should have open access to information concerning
publicly traded companies. It is logical since these companies are puclicly
traded on an open global market.
N.Dionne
Quebec, Canada
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 11:43 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: (no subject)
------------------------------- Message Contents
I as a small investor believe that information should be available to all at
the same time big or small. That is the American way. Now with the internet
it is possible not to be left behind when the big boys go behind closed doors.
Please open information to all at the same time.
Thank You
Kitty Doyle
Small investor trying to save for my retirement
Author: "norma dragani" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 12:00 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: SEC ruling
------------------------------- Message Contents
Let's level the playing field and divulge info to public at large at the same
time, change the rule.
Norma Dragani
Author: "Shelly Smith" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 7:58 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: SEC rule change proposal
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support SEC's is proposal 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 be allowed access to
this information, we don't need a "wall street filter" to decide what we should
see or not see.
Mark Dugan
Dugan Associates
6800 Pittsford Palmyra Road
Fairport, NY 14450
716/223-4204
Author: "Chuck Elliott" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 7:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC:
As a former CFO of a Fortune 100 company, I've long been distressed by the
way analysts are treated by public companies. They are often given
"guidance" to allow them to "run their models". The bright analyst can
usually determine what the company believes the EPS for the period will be
by receiving this "guidance". The individual investor not only doesn't
receive "guidance", they aren't even allowed to listen to the conference
calls in which the analysts are briefed.
I believe investors should be allowed to obtain any information that is
shared with the analysts any time there is a practicable way of doing it.
If it isn't technically feasible to provide the information directly to the
investors, organizations like Motley Fools and new organizaitons should be
allowed to receive and diseminate the information. This wouldn't solve the
problem, but it might give the individual investor a better chance.
Thank you for asking for comments.
Charles W. Elliott
Author: Nenette Evans at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 6:05 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Public disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
I beleive full disclosure is the right thing.
Sincerely,
Nenette Evans, business owner for 16 years
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 12:06 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Reg FD File57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
We are a retired couple and we both manage our own portfolios. We have found
the advice of stockbrokers and financial advisors to be poor as such people
have a financial interest in advising you to frequently trade and produce
commissions for them!
How will we be able to manage our funds without access to all available
information? Are you trying to force individuals to use stockbrokers?
This is America, for heaven's sake. We don't do things that way! We don't
need advisors to make our decisions for us.
We are asking you to defeat this proposed regulation.
Very truly yours.
Ronald and Anne Favor
322 N. Via Del Ciruelo
Green Valley, AZ 85614-5904
(520) 648-5075
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 12:20 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Please..
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC,
I wholeheartedly support your efforts to level the playing field. I think it
is disgraceful to allow selective disclosure, especially in this age of the
internet. As I have gained more knowledge of the market, I am losing
confidence in the fairness to small investors. Please don't give in to the
"big money" interests who seek to maintain their unfair advantage. While the
US market is the best, a loss in confidence in its fairness will surely deter
more and more investors.
Best wishes,
Bob Fiocco
Author: "Rick Gandenberger" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:55 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed regulation FD "Full Disclosure"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please approve SEC Regulatory Change Proposal for Full Disclosure.
As an individual investor, it is apparant that there are "insiders" with an
agenda and "investors" who look at a company's securities from a financial
perspective.
When a major, influential, brokerage house announces that it it is paying
attention to a security, and then, in spite of positive fundamentals, the
security has huge institutional short interest, and subsequently the company
is either sold below value or the stock spikes on a positive recommendation,
it is obvious that there is an agenda being followed.
Brokerages who participate in limited information phone conferences, etc.,
should be considered "insiders."
George F. Gandenberger
330 S. Salem Street
Dover, NJ 07802-0171
Author: Andrew Gill at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 9:17 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sirs:
Allowing selective disclosure of information violates the desire that
everyone be treated equally and fairly. The fight for equality and to be
treated fairly s is a fight that many Americans have already fought.
Investors are now a new group fighting for another form of equality.
Since we as investors own the companies on Wall Street, investors should be
allowed access to the information about those companies without having to
play catch-up with the insiders!
No one would support such a practice except for those who profit by it and
who would be seen as violators.
Andrew Gill
Author: "Daniel Goldschmidt" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 10:57 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD File No. 57-31-9
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentlemen:
It is of the utmost importance that we have full disclosure to all interested
parties. I am retired and make my living from being a individual investor. I
analyze all pertinent news, and listen to all earnings conference calls
available to me in order to do this in a profitable astute manner. Please do
not allow others to have more information than is available to me.
Author: "Daniel Goldschmidt" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 10:57 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD File No. 57-31-9
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentlemen:
It is of the utmost importance that we have full disclosure to all interested
parties. I am retired and make my living from being a individual investor. I
analyze all pertinent news, and listen to all earnings conference calls
available to me in order to do this in a profitable astute manner. Please do
not allow others to have more information than is available to me.
Author: "Steve" at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 9:40 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Level the playing field --STOP selective disclosure
Steve Goldstein
San Jose, CA
Independent Investor
Author: Larry Hill at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 6:40 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fair Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom it May Concern,
I would like to go on record as being in support of the SEC's efforts to
promote rules that will ban selective disclosure of information by
publicly held companies. As an individual investor, I would like to have
all the information I can possibly have in order to make good investment
decisions. The allow some people to have access to more or different
information is to provide them with an unfair advantage that makes them
an 'insider' when compared to the average investor. That is not fair and
does a disservice to people who can think for themselves.
I'm sure you have many of these to read, so I won't take any more of
your time.
Sincerely,
Laurance O. Hill
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 10:12 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Rule
------------------------------- Message Contents
As the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), you are 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 disagree, when Wall Street is spending big and lobbying hard to
keep the current system of selective disclosure in place, something is wrong.
Unequal information is unequal advantage for the possessor of the
information. The entire market place has an equity in available information.
Richard Hogue
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 6:36 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am opposed to the analysts getting advance information on what companies
are doing.
Sandra Hughes
Author: "Irish; S" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:04 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: file no. S7- 31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To whom it may concern,
As a "small investor", I feel that I should have the same information
available to me that large companies and brokerages have. As the U.S. moves
further into the technology era, with expanded market hours and online
trading, individual investors should access to the same information that
Wall Street analysts do. I am fully capable of making my own investment
decisions - change the rules so that I can be better informed.
Sincerely,
Shawn W. Irish
U.S. Navy
Author: Kenneth Jack at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 1:39 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. 57- 31-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs:
Concerning your upcoming decision on Securities Information Releases, I
firmly believe that release of such information should NOT BE WITHHELD
FOR A CHOSEN FEW who can thus make their market moves ahead of an
Ignorant Public. The present system provided information to those who,
quite frankly, need it the least with large research staffs, etc.
I strongly urge you to make it so the little guys can receive what is
now privileged information reserved for a privileged few.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Jack
710 Nuckols Street
Red Oak,Iowa 51566
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 7:55 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Full Disclosure to the public
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an independent investor, why can I not have the same information as the
people who are paid the large sums in select companies? I support full
disclosure to the public.
Raymond J. Kelly
4399 Brandywine Drive
Boca Raton, Fl 33487
Author: Al Licause at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:06 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Unfair selective disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
It has been brought to my attention that current rules and regulations
allow selective corporate information to be released to select
sccurities
brokers. This information is purposely held from the public.
Such information gives the security houses an unfair advantage in the
market place.
With so many individuals trading directly through Internet accounts and
other methods, avoiding the high fees and in many cases, poor advice
given
by these financial institutions, it seems very unfair and quite
unethical to
continue this practice of selective information.
I for one, would like to go on record as objecting to "insider"
information
to be used increase their already sizeable financial fortunes at the
expense
of the small investor. The SEC would be quick to prosecute individuals
for acting on private information. So should they stop this current
practice.
Sincerely,
Al Licause
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 10:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective disclosure is a financial scandal. I have taken my money back from
some of the best brokerage houses in the nation, (which I entrused for some
20 years), and in the past 5 years done far better than they ever did. (Me,
a mere Physical Therapist).
Full public disclosure, without preference towards any financial
institution can only improve the world of investing in our country by the
individual in an equitable way. Gayle Magruder
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 11:27 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: The new proposed selective disclosure law by SEC
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs: The new law as it is proposed with selective disclosure to
registered brokers of certain financial information which would not be
available simultaneously to the public at large is to my way of thinking
unfair to the public and to the self directed investor such as myself. I am
opposed to its passage and implimentation. Respectfully, William M. Marsh
Author: "Dave McFerren" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:02 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
------------------------------- Message Contents
It is of the upmost importance that the SEC take action to stop selective
disclosure and Insider trading. Leveling the playing field is necessary.
Individual traders make up the majority of trading done in todays market.
Allowing the passing of sensitive informantion that allows a select few to
profit is not ethical nor should it be considered the way business is done.
You must act to force the providing of information to everyone at the same
time. Give us the chance to participate in the information passing and the
profits that currently are going to the select few.
Author: "KENT OHARA" at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 11:23 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective disclousre
------------------------------- Message Contents
Selective disclosure should be ended right away. This is one of the worse forms
of inside trading to ever have existed.
Author: Jack Outhier at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 11:13 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Ignorance is not beneficial
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs/Madams:
As a Registered Investment Advisor who has given himself to developing
appropriate investor behavior, I have come to resent the small core of
"analysts" who manipulate and play the market for their own benefit.
Anyone investing their precious life's earnings or retirement savings in
any company should be privy to every bit of information that is
available regarding that company -- good or bad. For another to presume
that they can benefit the individual investor by enforcing a degree of
ignorance through secrecy is extremely insulting.
I applaud your proposal of Regulation FD and heartily endorse Fair
Disclosure for everyone!
In an "Information Age", your move toward more open and free information
is highly appropriate.
Benjamin Franklin said, "Put your money in your head and your head will
fill your purse." His maxim supporting education is still true; the
most powerful tool for investing success is knowledge. Let us invest in
our education about the companies we are considering purchasing, and
that investment will be rewarded many times over!
These "analysts" have certainly not added stability or decreased
volatility as they would have you believe... just review the history of
the market and you can see that is a false claim.
Sincerely,
Jack Outhier
Registered Investment Advisor
Author: "Bill Padgett" at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 11:23 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: ProposedReg FD: File # S7 31 99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am in accord with the proposed regulation and request the proposed regulation
be instituted.
Thank You,
William J. Padgett
Retired Engineer and purchaser of stock.
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 1:23 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Selective Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC:
I've been an investor for more than 30 years, and have done reasonably well,
despite the small investor's disadvantages. I always thought it unfair that
the large funds got all the hot issues, preferred placement in new issues,
and most of all the "first tips on new issues and changes in
recommendations." The public always gets screwed, unless you own one of
these funds that gets the most timely information.
Also, I always felt that if I owned the stock, I should know what the P/R
troops are telling the Street. It also ways seemed to me, that the trick in
having a great stock was to keep the existing shareholders from selling.
Losing shareholders or customers is very expensive and it costs plenty to
replace them than to keep them. Just send along the research to the existing
shareholders.
If you have lots of money in the market, you have to see what is happening on
CNBC. This show has real power over the market. The real problem is the Press
likes wars rapes, murders, and disasters (i.e., bad news). CNBC, I postulate,
adds volatility to the market! But, how much I don't know.
About the only advantage the public individual investor has today are (1)
much lower brokerage commissions, (2) the ability to sneak in between the
bid's and asked prices, and (3) to sell quickly a small amount of stock
before the major institutions kill a stock.
The public never gets a fair shake in buying bonds; this is a market for
pirates and idiots. There is no information like the stock tables on the
internet or the newspapers.
As far as "selective disclosure goes" there is absolutely no excuse for a
company when its "doing a road show" not to disseminate the information on
the Internet. Full and Fair disclosure means that everyone gets equal shot
at the target. There have been lots of decisions like Cady-Roberts and Ray
Dircks tip the fraudulent financial company in California. The internet is a
terrific medium to help disclosure to many people at once.
I also think there should be much "faster disclosure" of the Federal
Reserve's Actions, not six weeks late. But, I surmise this is a
jurisdictional dispute with you. The "fear of the Fed" has more to do with
stock prices than all, but the most damaging sales and earnings information
from companies. The Fed has sort of taken over from God during the Middle
Ages!
Thank you for your consideration.
Joseph P S Pampel
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:33 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentlepersons,
We have to level the playing field now. This proposal should go into effect.
Cordially,
CAPT. Roman E. Piotrowski
USNR Ret.
Author: Brian Rafferty at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 7:25 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Free flow of information
------------------------------- Message Contents
In America, the "free marketplace of ideas",
institutions should not have an artificial advantage
over individuals.
When companies disclose their information to the
"public", it should not be filtered or shown first to
brokerage firms, giving them an artificial advantage
over individual investors.
The individual investors are the ones who must decide
where to put their money. Let them have the
information directly rather than forcing them to go
through brokerages who may not be any wiser than
individuals.
Thanks,
Brian Rafferty
Senior Programmer-Analyst
Parkland Health & Hospital System (Dallas, Tx)
Author: "Lance Rossier" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 2:54 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: SEC rule change! A new day and age has come to pass!
------------------------------- Message Contents
In a DAY AND AGE PAST, when individuals entrusted others to execute and manage
their investments, the rule that has stood worked fine, although it was elitist
and protectionist in nature. But, in this NEW DAY AND AGE, when individual
investors DIRECTLY EXECUTE AND MANAGE THEIR OWN MONEY, it is essential that they
have access to the same information as licensed investors. The SEC, being an
arm of the federal government, exists for the purpose of protecting the interest
and needs of "We The People", and not to serve the business elitist wishes for
exclusionary protectionism. The playing field MUST be leveled!
Author: "Lee Shelton" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 6:49 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD
------------------------------- Message Contents
As a person whose primary source of income is individual investment I am much
heartened by the fact that you are considering new rules that will level the
playing field -- putting needed information into the hands of individual
investors at the same time it goes to analysts and institutional investors. I
spent many years in senior executive positions at some of America's larger
corporations and have experienced first hand the problems with selective
disclosure. While much of the current dialog about selective disclosure focuses
on lack of access to scheduled analyst meetings managed by the company's
investor relations group (which is certainly a problem) I am also concerned
about the information that is passed in private phone calls and meetings between
the CEO and analysts (a very common occurrance) and hope your rules consider all
these avenues of disclosure.
What I have never understood is why I, as an executive of a company, could be
sent to prison for acting on insider information, while an analyst using that
same information to reap a profit is considered normal and acceptable. That
playing field needs also to be leveled -- by applying the laws of insider
trading to anyone who profits from selectively disclosed information.
Finally, I would like to respond to the primary argument in favor of continued
selective disclosure. Not only do I not need an analyst to interpret
information for me, I am concerned about the filtering that takes place in that
"interpretation". Analysts are not paid to serve the public good -- they are
paid to increase the profits of their employers. In many cases those increased
profits (based on selectively disclosed information) are at the expense of the
investors (individual and institutional) who did not have access to that same
information.
I look forward to a positive conclusion to this rule consideration. Thank you.
M. Lee Shelton
Author: Wesley Sine at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 9:34 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
To whom it may concern.
I strongly believe that the selective release of information only to those
wall street players with lots of power and money damages free enterprise
and inhibits social mobility. In essence it is opposed to those qualities
that make America great.
WESLEY SINE
Cornell University
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 9:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject:
------------------------------- Message Contents
It' absolutely outrageous that this rule even be considered. How would I be ale
to gather
ALL the information I require before investing in a venture.
Cindy Lee Stap, MCNE,MCSE
Download NeoPlanet at http://www.neoplanet.com
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Disclosure
------------------------------- Message Contents
It should be the basic freedom of each American to receive complete
information of products deemed to be public, i.e., stocks. Remember the "P"
in IPO.
For those that crave the information to digest and assume the risk associated
with the market, they should be allowed this opportunity. For those who wary
from situations such as this will continue to count on third parties for
investment advice. It should be the choice of the individual, not the
government.
Plus, providing this early information to the "in the know" individuals
guarantees results similar to that of the lottery.
Jason Stephenson
Tampa, FL
Author: "Sterling Suddarth" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:18 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: FD 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor I'm much infavor of this regulation . To have a level
playing field for all is just. Sterling Suddarth RT 1 Box 191P Martinsburg WV
25401
Author: "wares " at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 10:17 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: fair play
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please act on behalf of all investors and pass the proposed reg.FD:File S7-31-99
Bruce Ware
Venture North Associates
Author: "Don Whitlatch" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:02 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD; File No. S7 31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am in favor of proposed regulation FD.
I believe it is wrong for companies to discreetly disclose important
information to Wall Street analysts, without at the same time, also giving
that information to the public at large.
Don Whitlatch
whitco@home.com
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/26/2000 9:23 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed regulation FD: FileNo. S7-31-99 it is about time
thank you.
Dean Wilson
Author: "Tom Wilson" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:33 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed reg FD:File no. 57-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Level the playing field
Tom Wilson
Author: "ROLNREP" at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 8:21 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: at Internet
Subject: S E C INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an adult I feel I am in the best position to determine what information I
require . Please do not try to censor the information made available to me . I
will make the choice as to what is important and relevant to me and my
investment portfolios .
Thank you ,
Rod W ise
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 3:24 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD!
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir,
If I decide to invest in a company for many years, I should be entitled to
the same information that any or all Tom, Dick and Harrys receives whenever
an issuer intentionally discloses material information. I don't need an
analyst to "selectively disclose" this information at a time that may be most
advantageous to him or herself, and not to the public as I believe
occasionally occurs.
I salute you for this proposed regulation.
Thank you,
A. Zarvos
Author: Hazel & Henry Zimmer at Internet
Date: 04/27/2000 11:15 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Fairness to all investors
------------------------------- Message Contents
I believe the current system should be changed requiring publicly held
companies to give information to all investors at the same time, adhering to
the principle of fairness and the free flow of information.I support the
current proposed changes by the SEC.
Hazel Y. Zimmer
Social Worker
` HYZ Work Family Consulting
http://www.sec.gov/rules/0427b01.htm
