Deep Capture Forums

NSS ~ Counterfeiting Stock ~ MM Games Played 

Moderator: fourkids_9pets Assistants: Paula, camper9, SevenTenEleven, ThePennyGuru, dehydratedman  Share   Followers: 233 

Created: 7/20/2010 5:52:25 PM 

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=18322



AlanC

Thursday, March 08, 2012 6:42:35 AM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9014

Post # of 9023


A tad dated but if you haven't seen it, it is worth the watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_911154&feature=iv&v=Q48eSoTNByQ&src_vid=NcjssQSthNU


fourkids_9pets 

Thursday, March 08, 2012 8:31:15 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9015

Post # of 9023

re-listened >> and reminded how little has been accomplished

except for DC and MM

short selling hedge funds >> transparency nill

here's to one *imploding* or severely incapacitated due to
the cover coming on JBII

sad sigh for the loss of the American middle class
and what never had to come to pass over the past decade

===
4kids
all jmo




grantg2 

Thursday, March 08, 2012 9:18:51 AM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9009

Post # of 9023


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
don't worry tho' >> the authorities have all the info from events
in real time (2009 and 2010) where EXPO is concerned >> after all
i'm an actual shareholder who didn't manipulate the stock in any
fashion but courtesy of a phone call from a braggart too intent
to share specifics those *details* are with those who can actually do something


psssst pass it along

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRICELESS!!!!!!!!! ROTFL...

now THAT is what I call blowing a whistle!!!!



AlanC

Thursday, March 08, 2012 9:53:43 AM

Re: grantg2 post# 9017

Post # of 9023

Overstock.com Announces Court Declines to Seal Evidence in Goldman Sachs/Merrill Lynch Case
PrintAlert
Overstock (NASDAQ:OSTK)
Intraday Stock Chart
Today : Thursday 8 March 2012
Overstock.com, (NASDAQ: OSTK) today announced that in its stock manipulation suit against Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch the court denied mostly all of defendants' motion to seal the evidentiary record on the summary judgment hearing. The ruling is significant because the evidence submitted to the court lays out in detail the means by which Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch used naked short selling, in concert with others, to manipulate downward Overstock.com's share price.

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20120110/LA33954LOGO)

"We are thrilled," said Patrick Byrne, chairman and ceo of Overstock.com. "I could not imagine that a post-2008 public would be denied access to this evidence, which displays in living color the flaws in our capital markets and in the regulatory structure that governs them. Now the public will have a window through which to view this evidence and judge for itself the fraudulent and systemically risky behavior at issue in this case."

Jonathan Johnson, president of Overstock.com, said, "On the one hand, defendants have gone overboard to keep this evidence locked away from public view, while on the other they maintained that the conduct is perfectly legal. We believe it's not legal, and that the public has an independent right to make that determination, based on the evidence."

Four major media groups, The Economist, The New York Times, Rolling Stone Magazine and Bloomberg News intervened in the case and joined Overstock.com in opposing Goldman and Merrill's motion to seal the evidence.

Overstock.com officials acknowledged that Goldman and Merrill will likely appeal to try to keep the evidence sealed, but expressed confidence in the correctness of the court's ruling and that the decision will be upheld on appeal.

On January 10, 2012, Overstock.com announced that the court granted a summary judgment motion in favor of the defendants, ruling that the conduct at issue in the case did not take place "in California" as required under California law. The company believes the summary judgment ruling was error and is appealing.

At the summary judgment hearing, counsel for Overstock.com reviewed Defendant's extensive "in California" conduct showing: a large percentage of the trades that were part of the manipulative scheme were effected on the Pacific Coast Stock Exchange, which was located in San Francisco; Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corporation's San Francisco office played a significant role in the fraud; and that Goldman Sachs concertedly purchased a type of "conversion trades" that were part of the manipulative scheme which were cleared by Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corporation in San Francisco, and were effected on the Pacific Coast Stock Exchange. Counsel also laid out for the court the evidence to support the stock manipulation claim, evidence that yesterday, the court refused to seal.

"Ultimately, despite defendants sanding the gears with the summary judgment, we will win this case," Byrne said. "It will be a hard fight, but we will prevail, first on appeal and then at trial. Almost as important to us as a trial victory is the fact that now the public will know about Goldman and Merrill's conduct."

About Overstock.comOverstock.com is a technology-based retail company offering customers a wide variety of high-quality products, at great value, with superior customer service. The company provides its customers with the opportunity to shop for bargains by offering suppliers an alternative inventory distribution channel. Headquartered in Salt Lake City, Overstock.com is a publicly traded company listed on the NASDAQ Global Market System and can be found online at http://www.overstock.com and http://www.o.co. Overstock.com regularly posts information about the company and other related matters on its website under the heading "Investor Relations."

Overstock.com®, O.co®, Worldstock Fair Trade® and Club O Rewards® are registered trademarks of Overstock.com, Inc. O.info™, Club O™, and Club O Rewards Dollars™ and Your Savings Engine™ are trademarks of Overstock.com, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the legal ruling covered and the future of this and any subsequent case or case issue. Our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, our subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, or any amendments thereto, and our other subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission identify important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in our projections, estimates or forward-looking statements.

SOURCE Overstock.com, Inc.




grantg2 

Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:08:16 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9018

Post # of 9023


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...the court denied mostly all of defendants' motion to seal the evidentiary record on the summary judgment hearing. The ruling is significant because the evidence submitted to the court lays out in detail the means by which Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch used naked short selling, in concert with others, to manipulate downward Overstock.com's share price.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alan, shame on both of us... we are not listening to wiser heads nodding as we mention NSS:

NSS is a fairy tale believed by kool-aid drinking sheeple who won't admit that PPS level is merely the market acting according to supply-demand based on company value!!!!

How silly... NSS INDEED!

LMAO... looks like one court, one judge has had a sip of the grape-flavored K-A, and HE LIKES IT!

MAYBE a BEGINNING of AWARENESS has occurred!



AlanC

Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:12:01 AM

Re: grantg2 post# 9019

Post # of 9023

Whistleblower says BofA defrauded HAMP

3/7/2012
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/03_-_March/Whistleblower_says_BofA_defrauded_HAMP/

NEW YORK, March 7 (Reuters) - Bank of America NA prevented homeowners from receiving mortgage-loan modifications under a federal program in order to avoid millions of dollars in losses while benefiting from financial incentives for participating in the program, according to a complaint unsealed in federal court Wednesday.

The suit is the second whistleblower complaint unsealed so far with apparent ties to the $1 billion False Claims Act settlement announced by Bank of America and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York on February 9.

The Bank of America settlement is also part of the sweeping $25 billion agreement reached between state and federal authorities.

Final settlement documents have yet to be filed in the BoA settlement, which the U.S. Attorney's Office said was the largest ever False Claims Act payout related to mortgage fraud.

The settlement resolved claims that Bank of America's Countywide Financial subsidiaries defrauded the Federal Housing Administration by inflating appraisals used for government-insured home loans, as well as claims involving the Home Affordable Modification Program, a federal program to help American homeowners facing foreclosure.

The complaint unsealed Wednesday was filed by whistleblower Gregory Mackler, a Colorado resident who said he worked alongside Bank of America executives while an employee at Urban Lending Solutions, a company to which Bank of America contracted some of its HAMP work.

While working at Urban Lending, Mackler said he saw BofA and its loan servicing subsidiary, BAC Homes Loans Servicing LP, implement "business practices designed to intentionally prevent scores of eligible homeowners from becoming eligible or staying eligible for permanent HAMP modification."

The bank and its agents routinely pretended to have lost homeowners' documents, failed to credit payments during trial modifications and intentionally misled homeowners about their eligibility for the program, the complaint alleged.

BoA let through just enough HAMP modifications to avert suspicion and allay congressional critics, while not enough to incur any substantial losses to its own bottom line, according to the complaint.

"In other words, BoA has had it both ways. BoA has continued to maximize the value of its mortgage portfolio with anti-HAMP modification practices and managed to make money by committing fraud on homeowner," the lawsuit said.

A lawyer for Mackler could neither confirm nor deny that the complaint was tied to the settlement. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office and a representative for Bank of America declined to comment.

In February, a whistleblower complaint was unsealed from Kyle Lagow, a former employee in a Countrywide appraisal unit which detailed allegations of Countrywide's "corrupt underwriting and appraisal process." Bank of America purchased Countywide in June 2008.

Under the False Claims Act, successful whistleblower complaints can earn that whistleblower up to 25 percent of the settlement amount.

According to the docket, the Department of Justice has until March 16 to decide whether to intervene in both the Mackler and Lagow case.

The case is United States of America v. Bank of America NA et al., in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, no. 11-3270.

For Mackler: Shayne Stevenson of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro.

(Reporting by Jessica Dye)

Follow us on Twitter: @ReutersLegal

http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/03_-_March/Whistleblower_says_BofA_defrauded_HAMP/



fourkids_9pets 

Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:16:18 AM

Re: grantg2 post# 9017

Post # of 9023

yep >> just reflecting elsewhere about the FBI
in the ceo's office in march 2010 (specifics
by me are unknown) but the topic of *aliases*
did come to pass including one who rolled who
gave up 100 more >> now how that exactly applies
i don't know >> but i suspect based on the info
long since provided to those entities who can
actually do something about *gross and egregious*
stock manipulation and operate *en masse* due to
their knowledge of the OTC being poorly watched

i can certainly wait to see what comes to pass over
the coming years >> i find it remarkable that two
ceos (both set up by various *entities*) underwent
foreclosure and the other personal BK >> and yet
the *spin* by the hedgie moles and trolls is that
they are the crooks >> i doubt these ceos' ever understood
how they would be played when bringing their co.s public via r/m

>> with the CONS winning all albeit via very different methods

the short selling unregulated hedge funds have connections that
run deep >> including a captured sec >> ironically one of the crew
on exph >> had the stupidity to attribute a false statement to an
sec atty who was so outraged (she was young and naive) she opened
a file and sent info off to sec enforcement (june 2010)

i remember her calling me a few days later asking me if i'd been
contacted by sec enforcement >> i had to gently explain that her
belief in enforcement's ability to move that quickly (it was about
2 to 3 days since she'd first sent the file and about 9 months
since i had first contacted the sec re: exph's curious trades)
was flawed >>

at that point in time i still had some faith in the sec

i have none today >> i find them a national disgrace who lack
a collective conscience and are amoral >> en masse

i want to know what it takes to allow the utter destruction of
legit co.s (vulnerable micros and small caps) due to NSS and a
total lack of transparency >> the loss of jobs >> tax revenue
new technologies and the wholesale destruction *of belief in
the American dream* >>

i want to know how anyone can *defend* their bogus bs .. technology
wise (still set in the 1950s) in 2012 and why they *CAN'T
or WON'T* electronically tag every publicly traded stock
so that there is no issue of NSS >> all shares traded are
actually located >> and if *legally shorted* are actually
delivered b4 being utilized again >> this can't be done
because it would reveal just how high up the *exchange
food chain the rot goes* >> it's not just the poorly watched OTC

i want to know why the sec has *ignored* the impact of lies posted
24/7 on smbs' or *blogs* on co.s >> that financially benefit X
yet they would pay attn to FB & T ~ does that really make any sense
to anyone in 2012?

i want to know why there is no consistency >> at any level

i want to know what the cost of an sec complaint is >> cause someone
authored one that is poorly written on 1/4/2012 >> and i'd lay odds
the hedge fund stuck on stupid *paid for it*

i want to know what it will take to wake up this country to demand
change that matters

i'm so tired of years passing and nothing of substance changing

it's endemic of a 3rd world banana republic >> this country and
the majority of Americans deserve far better than the greed and
corruption that has been on offer for the last decade +

==
4kids
all jmo



grantg2 

Thursday, March 08, 2012 10:51:24 AM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9021

Post # of 9023

SAD, but true! We have NOT advanced much beyond the Dark Ages when it comes to Gubment Integrity!

(Must be that archaic sin nature of man thingy intellektuals skoff at!)

Be it a dictatorship, king & parliament, wannabe-king & legislature... and even a few of the other republics around the globe!

Not sure a democracy actually exists... except as a Fantasy Gubment!

lol



fourkids_9pets 

Thursday, March 08, 2012 3:15:06 PM

Re: None

Post # of 9024


JBII >> re: the oxygen sensor

mgmt sourced the new sensor out of switzerland
the *delay* cost 2 months' time in 2010 for
the original oxygen sensor specific to membrane failure

i was struck *contemporaneously* how that was literally
ignored as a topic after the CC >> and the tripe posted
by the hit piece out on 7/8/2010

of course not surprisingly *accompanying* the above mentioned
hit piece >> CSTI was *imported* to lighten NITE's *burden*
that event came one day after the JBI hit piece on 7/9/2010

oh yeah ~ in case a diagram needs to be drawn
it's also the month it was clear the legal shorts
had gone to abusive status on JBII
which had *originated* in MAY 2010 with the 8k of WSB's hire

and 2 months b4 the sec would *generate* a letter never
publicly disclosed until after the sec's complaint was
*released* on 1/4/2012 >> and a call was made into the
boston office of the sec where that wordy and poorly
written complaint *originated* >> the hooks and rot run deep

hedge funds >> minions >> authors >> trolls >> crap legal firms
on the hedgies' speed dials >> a captured sec >> talking heads

it's all one nasty toxic cesspool that is without a conscience
and amoral where the only aspect that matters is the $$$$$$ bilked and the co.s killed

==

time delays exist in the real world >> it would be nice if
all had exposure to that reality of starting a co. from
scratch >> meeting pay roll >> answering to share holders
discerning *intent* of all with interest in said co. >> and oh yeah
producing the first viable plastic to fuel processor that
can be replicated in a time of X at a cost of X >> and do
this in under 3 years >> talk to VCs >> about their time
lines b4 expectation of ROI comes >> can't wait to see what
the VCs' *return* is from the A co. >> realize nothing is
given for *free* >> they will IPO and all info will be known

of course the street (underwriters of the firm bringing them
public) will *protect* pps till the big money takes their profit

and unlike some >> i welcome the competition >> real or perceived
for many reasons not the least of which is the analysts' who will
follow this technology >> who the firm is that brings them public
what the IPO prices at >> what the SS is >> and what the subscription run rate is

funny thing >> there is no other publicly traded co. that does
this *currently* >> except JBI >>

i can't wait till competition is publicly traded via the US market
so all can migrate there to *discuss* and scrutinize aspects
with actual FACTS at hand

==
4kids
all jmo


5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm

Last edited by Bull Finch (2012-03-08 14:41:08)

NSS ~ Counterfeiting Stock ~ MM Games Played 

Moderator: fourkids_9pets Assistants: Paula, camper9, SevenTenEleven, ThePennyGuru, dehydratedman  Share   Followers: 233 

Created: 7/20/2010 5:52:25 PM 

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=18322


grantg2 

Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:27:33 AM


Re: None

Post # of 9146



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, i kept digging after purchasing the shares and came across the Kurt Feierabend article on Seeking Alpha, which Im sure many of you here are familiar with. The article did make a lot of sense, and put forth a lot of inconsistencies behind the flashy press releases.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



wow... just wow! So much information made available every day diligently by so many... and yet Kurt Feierabend gets all the credit!

One can ONLY HOPE that it is a communal tip jar so everyone shares!


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was able to sell my purchase from yesterday for a small loss today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



As Scarlett proudly declared: "Tomorrah is anothah day!"

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73288179

WHO SAID FUD was no longer an effective device for fleecing NEWBIES? Hubville fudsters should be so proud tonight... not to mention toasting all around in certain authoritative spheres of influence! This is surely one of iHub's finest hours!



nikitikitaki   

Wednesday, March 14, 2012 10:59:18 PM

Re: None

Post # of 170934


Perspective of a shareholder that bought 650 shares on Wednesday, March 13,2012 and sold 650 shares on Thursday, March 14, 2012.

I was watching JBII passively for a year, before buying any shares. I was hooked in by some of the press releases announcing contracts with big companies and permit approvals from regulators. I did see the lawsuit put forth against the company, but thought maybe it was just a novice mistake or one-time error of judgement by a young CEO. All in all, i fell for the story and bought a small amount of shares, thinking that with the annual report coming out, theres a lot to gain, and probably not a lot to lose.

However, i kept digging after purchasing the shares and came across the Kurt Feierabend article on Seeking Alpha, which Im sure many of you here are familiar with. The article did make a lot of sense, and put forth a lot of inconsistencies behind the flashy press releases.

I was able to sell my purchase from yesterday for a small loss today. Im sure a lot of you here are more emotionally attached to this company than I am. However, I recommend that you don't put all your eggs in this basket, as this may not turn out to be all that you have made it out to be in your mind.

Can't say I'm right for sure, but I did feel strongly enough to post my opinion. If it wasn't for Kurt Feierabend's article, I would have had a much more skewed impression of this company, so hopefully I can provide some words of caution as well.



AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 6:35:10 AM

Re: grantg2 post# 9136

Post # of 9146


Arn't you being a little hard on someone making their first post on their birthday no less? Jeeesh!!! lol
Times have changed since I was banned from posting on that board!



AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 8:06:40 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9137

Post # of 9146


Geithner Turfed Out by EU Bankers==>

"Pretty much a criminalization of the financial market here in the US.

And actually, there has been a Nobel prize given to Akerlof for describing the financial sector as a criminalized sector.

So it's pretty much recognized in academia that Wall Street are crooks.

But this isn't played up so much in the newspapers.

Now we're going to see, when as we say in America: 'the s-h-i-t hits the fan'."

Prof Hudson appears on the Renegade Economists radio show to discuss the economic growth trap, compound interest, Sumeria, the corruption of economics and how US interests are flexing in the debate over what constitutes a CDO default in the EU.

According to Professor Michael Hudson, that when Geithner went over to Europe a short time ago to convince them they need to cover US banks losses on Greek debt or else, - the EU bankers told Geithner, and this is a direct quote by Hudson: "get the hell out of here, you a-s-s-h-o-l-e !

Seems the US banks are into it for about $50 billion.

It starts at about 12:20 into the interview.

Recorded March 7th.

http://michael-hudson.com/wp-content/upl....007.03.2012.mp3
original post by clem



AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 8:08:17 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9138

Post # of 9146


Goldman Stunned by op ed loses 2.2 billion for shareholders

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/g/a/2012/03/14/bloomberg_articlesM0WH081A1I4H01-M0WMZ.DTL



AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 8:09:23 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9139

Post # of 9146


FDIC shoots to kill on "too big to fail"

http://news.yahoo.com/fdic-shoots-kill-too-big-fail-232407416.html;_ylc=X3oDMTNrdDE1YTVuBF9TAzc2NjM1MzYEYWN0A21haWxfY2IEY3QDYQRpbnRsA3VzBGxhbmcDZW4tVVMEcGtnAzE3YTdlMzA5LTdmNWQtMzk1NC1iMzE2LWE4NTBmMWMwNDBiOQRzZWMDbWl0X3NoYXJlBHNsawNtYWlsBHRlc3QD


AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 8:10:30 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9140

Post #


Lehman to emerge from bankruptch and wind down:

http://news.yahoo.com/lehman-emerge-bankruptcy-wind-down-171048668.html;_ylc=X3oDMTNrYTEyNmx2BF9TAzc2NjM1MzYEYWN0A21haWxfY2IEY3QDYQRpbnRsA3VzBGxhbmcDZW4tVVMEcGtnAzg5YjkzZWM4LTNjMDctMzU1NS05ZDk5LWFkZDBjZDkxOThjNgRzZWMDbWl0X3NoYXJlBHNsawNtYWlsBHRlc3QD



AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 8:11:18 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9141

Post # of 9146


Can Goldman become servant rather than master?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17373551



AlanC

Thursday, March 15, 2012 9:07:37 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9142

Post # of 9146


Whistleblowers reap millions in U.S. mortgage suits

3/14/2012
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/03_-_March/Whistleblowers_reap_millions_in_U_S__mortgage_suits/

Troubled homeowners are not the only ones set to get a financial lift from the U.S. government's $25 billion landmark mortgage settlement.

Whistleblowers who were instrumental in revealing epidemic mortgage abuses, some of whom risked their careers to do so, are getting multi-million-dollar payouts, court documents show.

Victor Bibby and Brian Donnelly, two Georgia mortgage brokers, are among the handful of whistleblowers whose stories are coming into focus.

Bibby and Donnelly said they started noticing in 2005 that lenders were charging veterans hidden fees on mortgage refinancing - a violation of the government's Interest Rate Reduction Refinancing Loans program.

The pair, who worked for U.S. Financial Services Inc, a mortgage brokerage firm in Alpharetta, Georgia, said they became suspicious when lenders told them not to show an amount charged for attorneys fees on loan documents, but instead add the sum to the charge shown for "title examination fee."

After lenders ignored their concerns, Bibby and Donnelly hired an attorney and filed a whistleblower suit.

The suit remained under seal to give the government time to investigate. Bibby and Donnelly had to keep mum for more than five years and try to find ways to avoid charging the hidden fees.

"For both our families being hushed for such a long time and holding this inside was unbearable," Donnelly said in an interview. "It puts a lot of stress on you."

The wait paid off in the form of a $45 million government settlement with JPMorgan Chase & Co that became public this week. Bibby and Donnelly and their attorneys will receive 26 percent, or $11.7 million.

The case is one of five whistleblower suits settled for a total of $227 million as part of the broader $25 billion deal with five lenders over foreclosure abuses, according to court documents filed this week.

Details of the cases are emerging slowly as suits are unsealed and prosecutors disclose settlements.

The complaints were brought under a whistleblower provision in the U.S. False Claims Act, which allows private individuals with knowledge of wrongdoing to bring suits on behalf of the government and share in the proceeds of any settlement.


GOOD RETURN FOR TAXPAYERS TOO

Of the five settlements outlined in court documents this week, the largest was for $95 million.

U.S. Attorneys in North Carolina and South Carolina said on Monday that five banks - Bank of America Corp, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo & Co, Citigroup Inc and Ally Financial - agreed to pay the amount to address allegations they participated in a nationwide practice of failing to obtain the required mortgage assignments, documents used to transfer ownership of loans.

The lenders also used false assignments to submit Federal Housing Administration insurance claims, prosecutors said.

The whistleblower in the case, Florida homeowner Lynn Szymoniak, will receive $18 million.

She gained national attention last year when CBS' "60 Minutes" profiled her role in uncovering the robo-signing of foreclosure documents by large lenders.

While trying to save her own home from foreclosure, according to the "60 Minutes" report, Szymoniak used her legal training to research other mortgages and discovered that a "Linda Green" had signed thousands of mortgage documents, in varying signature styles.

Multiple employees in a mortgage document "sweat shop" in Georgia were using the name Linda Green to recreate missing mortgage assignment documents for the banks, the report said.

Szymoniak declined to comment.

Bill Nettles, the U.S. Attorney in South Carolina, said the $95 million settlement sparked by Green's discovery also provided a strong return for taxpayers, considering the annual budget for his office is $10 million.

Prosecutors said the $95 million payment is only a partial settlement, indicating other banks could be under scrutiny. Nettles would neither confirm nor deny the existence of an ongoing investigation.

Two of the other settlements outlined this week - for $75 million and $6.5 million - appear to be related to an investigation into whether Bank of America and its Countrywide Financial unit knowingly made FHA-insured loans to unqualified borrowers.

Prosecutors in New York said in February they had reached a $1 billion settlement with the bank over these practices, but have not yet filed court documents.

Court documents have not been filed in the fifth case, which resulted in a $6.2 million settlement.

Legal releases in the $25 billion mortgage settlement indicated other whistleblower cases are still in the works.


"DEAD IN THIS INDUSTRY"

Bibby, one of the Georgia mortgage brokers, said it was difficult not knowing if the government would take up their case and watching the fraud continue.

A spokesman for JPMorgan declined to comment. In the mortgage settlement documents filed this week, the bank said it did not admit liability. Bibby and Donnelly are continuing to press their case against the other lenders, including Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo.

Bibby, who is 46 and married with three children, and Donnelly, who is 56 and married, said they don't have plans for their portion of the settlement. They will have to pay taxes and attorney fees out of the $11.7 million sum.

U.S. Financial Services at one time had about 50 employees, but is now basically out of business. They are not sure what they will do next.

"I think we're kind of dead in this industry, to say the least," Bibby added.

(Reporting by Rick Rothacker)

Follow us on Twitter: @ReutersLegal

http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/03_-_March/Whistleblowers_reap_millions_in_U_S__mortgage_suits/




fourkids_9pets 

Thursday, March 15, 2012 9:50:38 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9139

Post # of 9146


really makes one wonder the *road to denial*
that conditioning by rote at GS must take

==
4kids
all jmo



fourkids_9pets 

Thursday, March 15, 2012 10:08:18 AM

Re: grantg2 post# 9136

Post # of 9146


the whole post was a lie designed to trigger responses
and it worked >> the author of that hit piece in jan
got *volume* >> and some entity financially benefited
from the timing of that slag piece >> just like some
entity financially benefited from the sec's complaint

what price does an sec complaint go for these days

must be galling for some to not have JBI dumped to the grays
it clearly was expected >> hopefully the OIG has started their
investigation of at least *one* employee of the boston office
of the sec >> it would be nice to know who the author of said
complaint actually is >> and how *trolls* knew it was originating
from the boston office 2 weeks b4 it *first appeared*

just how corrupt is an *element* of the boston office
of the sec >> also realize there is another entity *working*
JBII besides the hedgie stuck on stupid >> they both have
access to level 3 >> very little is as it appears on JBII

they have been wash trading the stock up to suit >> both entities
are sloppy these days >> particularly when it comes to signals
utilized (re: trades)

==
4kids
all jmo



grantg2 

Thursday, March 15, 2012 11:28:17 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9138

Post # of 9146


fascinating... and AMAZING...

maybe there is hope on the other side of disaster!


grantg2 

Thursday, March 15, 2012 2:33:29 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9148

Post # of 9151


LOL... and lookey who's pointing the finger & yelling scam! Why it's the always infallible caped scam-busters brigade!

Wonder if any of them ALSO deny the existence of bear raids on stocks... we already know NSS is a figment of one's imagination (they often tell us so)... in spite of some pretty credible press describing the activity of late!

More credible press than where some of the hit pieces that facilitate manipulation are known to appear!



grantg2 

Thursday, March 15, 2012 2:42:00 PM

Re: None

Post # of 9151


OOPS... JBII strong UP today...

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=73288179

What was a small loss could have been a small gain IF ONLY someone thought about a decision for 24-48 hours instead of clueless haste!

ALTHOUGH... with every passing hour of no further posting... this looks to be JUST ANOTHER desperate FUDSTER trick!

ROTFL... soon that board will have to be renamed... FAR SIDE... of the Rabbit Hole!




nikitikitaki   

Wednesday, March 14, 2012 10:59:18 PM

Re: None

Post # of 170955


Perspective of a shareholder that bought 650 shares on Wednesday, March 13,2012 and sold 650 shares on Thursday, March 14, 2012.

I was watching JBII passively for a year, before buying any shares. I was hooked in by some of the press releases announcing contracts with big companies and permit approvals from regulators. I did see the lawsuit put forth against the company, but thought maybe it was just a novice mistake or one-time error of judgement by a young CEO. All in all, i fell for the story and bought a small amount of shares, thinking that with the annual report coming out, theres a lot to gain, and probably not a lot to lose.

However, i kept digging after purchasing the shares and came across the Kurt Feierabend article on Seeking Alpha, which Im sure many of you here are familiar with. The article did make a lot of sense, and put forth a lot of inconsistencies behind the flashy press releases.

I was able to sell my purchase from yesterday for a small loss today. Im sure a lot of you here are more emotionally attached to this company than I am. However, I recommend that you don't put all your eggs in this basket, as this may not turn out to be all that you have made it out to be in your mind.

Can't say I'm right for sure, but I did feel strongly enough to post my opinion. If it wasn't for Kurt Feierabend's article, I would have had a much more skewed impression of this company, so hopefully I can provide some words of caution as well.



5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

Last edited by Bull Finch (2012-03-15 13:52:29)

SEC Orders DTC to Adopt Fairness Procedures on Suspensions


By David Feldman at 19 March, 2012, 9:26 am

Last Thursday, the SEC ruled In the Matter of the Application of International Power Group, Ltd. for review of action taken by Depository Trust Company or DTC. When the SEC started a case alleging, among other things, sales of unregistered securities by IPG (but neither IPG nor its officers or directors were named), the DTC suspended its electronic trading capability. Two years later the SEC has now ruled.

Essentially, the SEC ruled that IPG is a “person” entitled to a fair and orderly procedure, including a hearing and the opportunity to appeal the matter to the SEC, with respect to the suspension. DTC tried to argue that IPG, since it is not a broker-dealer “participant,” was not a “person.” They also ruled that DTC “did not provide IPG with adequate fair procedure in connection with the suspension.”

More importantly, the Commission also directed DTC to “adopt procedures that accord with the fairness requirements of [the Securities Exchange Act] , which may be applied uniformly in any future such issuer cases.”

This ruling is good news for issuers facing a so-called DTC “chill.” It is now clear they have standing to insist on a proper and fair hearing, and the chance to appeal to the SEC if they are not satisfied.

Categories : SEC


http://www.reversemergerblog.com/2012/03/19/sec-orders-dtc-to-adopt-fairness-procedures-on-suspensions/

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2012/34-66611.pdf


5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

Last edited by Bull Finch (2012-03-21 09:32:47)

SevenTenEleven
Saturday, March 24, 2012 4:15:02 PM




wrenchman

Share
Saturday, March 24, 2012 4:11:33 PM
Re: RoadLessTraveled post# 196924

Post # of 196930
READ UP this is why this stock is where its at and why we are here!!!GO FFGO!!!

The Daleks
offline

3,219 Posts. Joined 12/2008
Karma: 1

1) This article primarily involves .0001 stocks & stocks which oscillate around those very low levels.

2) I wish I could identify the author of the article but, alas, I cannot. Too bad, as its informational content suggests a "real" author should be ascribed to it. If you can legitimize the author, please let me know so I can edit this post and assign credit where credit is due. Thanks!

3) Especially of note is the near-penultimate paragraph with discusses "paid Internet bashers". The information goes great lengths in explaining the motives behind certain posters whose rate of stock bashing is extremely disproportionate to their rate of stock praising.........


http://newcmkx.proboards.com/index.c...nt&thread=5893


PART I

Quote:
There’s a form of the securities fraud known as naked short selling that is becoming very popular and lucrative to the Market Makers that practice it. It is known as “Cellar boxing” and it has to do with the fact that the NASD and the SEC had to arbitrarily set a minimum level at which a stock can trade. This level was set at $.0001 or one-one hundredth of a penny. This level is appropriately referred to as “the cellar”. This $.0001 level can be used as a "backstop" for all kinds of market maker and naked short selling manipulations.

“Cellar boxing” has been one of the security frauds du jour since 1999 when the market went to a “decimalization” basis. In the pre-decimalization days the minimum market spread for most stocks was set at 1/8th of a dollar and the market makers were guaranteed a healthy “spread”. Since decimalization came into effect, those one-eighth of a dollar spreads now are often only a penny as you can see in Microsoft’s quote throughout the day. Where did the unscrupulous MMs go to make up for all of this lost income? They headed "south" to the OTCBB and Pink Sheets where the protective effects from naked short selling like Rule 10-a, and NASD Rules 3350, 3360, and 3370 are nonexistent.

The unique aspect of needing an arbitrary “cellar” level is that the lowest possible incremental gain above this cellar level represents a 100% spread available to MMs making a market in these securities. When compared to the typical spread in Microsoft of perhaps four-tenths of 1%, this is pretty tempting territory. In fact, when the market is no bid to $.0001 offer there is theoretically an infinite spread.

In order to participate in “cellar boxing”, the MMs first need to pummel the price per share down to these levels. The lower they can force the share price, the larger are the percentage spreads to feed off of. This is easily done via garden variety naked short selling. In fact if the MM is large enough and has enough visibility of buy and sell orders as well as order flow, he can simultaneously be acting as the conduit for the sale of nonexistent shares through Canadian co-conspiring broker/dealers and their associates with his right hand at the same time that his left hand is naked short selling into every buy order that appears through its own proprietary accounts. The key here is to be a dominant enough of a MM to have visibility of these buy orders. This is referred to as "broker/dealer internalization" or naked short selling via "desking" which refers to the market makers trading desk. While the right hand is busy flooding the victim company's market with "counterfeit" shares that can be sold at any instant in time the left hand is nullifying any upward pressure in share price by neutralizing the demand for the securities. The net effect becomes no demonstrable demand for shares and a huge oversupply of shares which induces a downward spiral in share price.

In fact, until the "beefed up" version of Rule 3370 (Affirmative determination in writing of "borrowability" by settlement date) becomes effective, U.S. MMs have been "legally" processing naked short sale orders out of Canada and other offshore locations even though they and the clearing firms involved knew by history that these shares were in no way going to be delivered. The question that then begs to be asked is how "the system" can allow these obviously bogus sell orders to clear and settle. To find the answer to this one need look no further than to Addendum "C" to the Rules and Regulations of the NSCC subdivision of the DTCC. This gaping loophole allows the DTCC, which is basically the 11,000 b/ds and banks that we refer to as "Wall Street”, to borrow shares from those investors naive enough to hold these shares in "street name" at their brokerage firm. This amounts to about 95% of us. Theoretically, this “borrow” was designed to allow trades to clear and settle that involved LEGITIMATE 1 OR 2 DAY delays in delivery. This "borrow" is done unbeknownst to the investor that purchased the shares in question and amounts to probably the largest "conflict of interest" known to mankind. The question becomes would these investors knowingly loan, without compensation, their shares to those whose intent is to bankrupt their investment if they knew that the loan process was the key mechanism needed for the naked short sellers to effect their goal? Another question that arises is should the investor's b/d who just earned a commission and therefore owes its client a fiduciary duty of care, be acting as the intermediary in this loan process keeping in mind that this b/d is being paid the cash value of the shares being loaned as a means of collateralizing the loan, all unbeknownst to his client the purchaser.
Reply
post #2 of 5
4/11/09 at 7:48pm
Thread Starter

The Daleks
offline

3,219 Posts. Joined 12/2008
Karma: 1

....continued from above.....

PART II

Quote:
An interesting phenomenon occurs at these "cellar" levels. Since NASD Rule 3370 allows MMs to legally naked short sell into markets characterized by a plethora of buy orders at a time when few sell orders are in existence, a MM can theoretically "legally" sit at the $.0001 level and sell nonexistent shares all day long because at no bid and $.0001 ask there is obviously a huge disparity between buy orders and sell orders. What tends to happen is that every time the share price tries to get off of the cellar floor and onto the first step of the stairway at $.0001 there is somebody there to step on the hands of the victim corporation's market.


Once a given micro cap corporation is “boxed in the cellar” it doesn’t have a whole lot of options to climb its way out of the cellar. One obvious option would be for it to reverse split its way out of the cellar but history has shown that these are counter-productive as the market capitalization typically gets hammered and the post split share price level starts heading back to its original pre-split level.

Another option would be to organize a sustained buying effort and muscle your way out of the cellar but typically there will, as if by magic, be a naked short sell order there to meet each and every buy order. Sometimes the shareholder base can muster up enough buying pressure to put the market at $.0001 bid and $.0002 offer for a limited amount of time. Later the market makers will typically pound the $.0001 bids with a blitzkrieg of selling to wipe out all of the bids and the market goes back to no bid and $.0001 offer. When the weak-kneed shareholders see this a few times they usually make up their mind to sell their shares the next time that a $.0001 bid appears and to get the heck out of Dodge. This phenomenon is referred to as “shaking the tree” for weak-kneed investors and it is very effective.


At times the market will go to $.0001 bid and $.0003 offer. This sets up a juicy 200% spread for the MMs and tends to dissuade any buyers from reaching up to the "lofty" level of $.0003. If a $.0002 bid should appear from a MM not "playing ball" with the unscrupulous MMs, it will be hit so quickly that Level 2 will never reveal the existence of the bid. The $.0001 bid at $.0003 offer market sets up a "stalemate" wherein market makers can leisurely enjoy the huge spreads while the victim company slowly dilutes itself to death by paying the monthly bills with "real" shares sold at incredibly low levels. Since all of these development-stage corporations have to pay their monthly bills, time becomes on the side of the naked short sellers.

At times it almost seems that the unscrupulous market makers are not actively trying to kill the victim corporation but instead want to milk the situation for as long of a period of time as possible and let the corporation die a slow death by dilution. The reality is that it is extremely easy to strip away 99% of a victim company’s share price or market cap and to keep the victim corporation “boxed“ in the cellar, but it really is difficult to kill a corporation especially after management and the shareholder base have figured out the game that is being played at their expense.

As the weeks and months go by the market makers make a fortune with these huge percentage spreads but the net aggregate naked short positions become astronomical from all of this activity. This leads to some apprehension amongst the co-conspiring MMs. The predicament they find themselves in is that they can’t even stop naked short selling into every buy order that appears because if they do the share price will gap and this will put tremendous pressures on net capital reserves for the MMs and margin maintenance requirements for the co-conspiring hedge funds and others operating out of the more than 13,000 naked short selling margin accounts set up in Canada. And of course covering the naked short position is out of the question since they can’t even stop the day-to-day naked short selling in the first place and you can't be covering at the same time you continue to naked short sell.
Reply
post #3 of 5
4/11/09 at 7:50pm
Thread Starter

The Daleks
offline

3,219 Posts. Joined 12/2008
Karma: 1

.....continued from above.....

PART III

Quote:
What typically happens in these situations is that the victim company has to massively dilute its share structure from the constant paying of the monthly burn rate with money received from the selling of “real” shares at artificially low levels. Then the goal of the naked short sellers is to point out to the investors, usually via paid “Internet bashers”, that with the, let’s say, 50 billion shares currently issued and outstanding, that this lousy company is not worth the $5 million market cap it is trading at, especially if it is just a shell company whose primary business plan was wiped out by the naked short sellers’ tortuous interference earlier on.

The truth of the matter is that the single biggest asset of these victim companies often becomes the astronomically large aggregate naked short position that has accumulated throughout the initial “bear raid” and also during the “cellar boxing” phase. The goal of the victim company now becomes to avoid the 3 main goals of the naked short sellers, namely: bankruptcy, a reverse split, or the forced signing of a death spiral convertible debenture out of desperation. As long as the victim company can continue to pay the monthly burn rate, then the game plan becomes to make some of the strategic moves that hundreds of victim companies have been forced into doing which includes name changes, CUSIP # changes, cancel/reissue procedures, dividend distributions, amending of by-laws and Articles of Corporation, etc. Nevada domiciled companies usually cancel all of their shares in the system, both real and fake, and force shareholders and their b/ds to PROVE the ownership of the old “real” shares before they get a new “real” share. Many also file their civil suits at this time also. This indirect forcing of hundreds of U.S. micro cap corporations to go through all of these extraneous hoops and hurdles as a means to survive, whether it be due to regulatory apathy or lack of resources, is probably one of the biggest black eyes the U.S. financial systems have ever sustained. In a perfect world it would be the regulators that periodically audit the “C” and “D” sub-accounts at the DTCC, the proprietary accounts of the MMs, clearing firms, and Canadian b/ds, and force the buy-in of counterfeit shares, many of which are hiding behind altered CUSIP #s, that are detected above the Rule 11830 guidelines for allowable “failed deliveries” of one half of 1% of the shares issued. U.S. micro cap corporations should not have to periodically “purge” their share structure of counterfeit electronic book entries but if the regulators will not do it then management has a fiduciary duty to do it.

A lot of management teams become overwhelmed with grief and guilt in regards to the huge increase in the number of shares issued and outstanding that have accumulated during their “watch”. The truth however is that as long as management made the proper corporate governance moves throughout this ordeal then a huge number of resultant shares issued and outstanding is unavoidable and often indicative of an astronomically high naked short position and is nothing to be ashamed of. These massive naked short positions need to be looked upon as huge assets that need to be developed. Hopefully the regulators will come to grips with the reality of naked short selling and tactics like "Cellar boxing" and quickly address this fraud that has decimated thousands of U.S. micro cap corporations and the tens of millions of U.S. investors therein.

Thoughts on this?

Reply
post #4 of 5
4/15/09 at 12:36am
Thread Starter


5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

NSS ~ Counterfeiting Stock ~ MM Games Played 

Moderator: fourkids_9pets Assistants: Paula, camper9, SevenTenEleven, ThePennyGuru, dehydratedman  Share   Followers: 233 

Created: 7/20/2010 5:52:25 PM 

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=18322




AlanC

Friday, April 06, 2012 6:50:35 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9424

Post # of 9427

The Wall Street Conspiracy: Naked Short Selling

http://vimeo.com/39748584



fourkids_9pets 

Friday, April 06, 2012 7:40:19 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9425

Post # of 9427

an absolute must see interview >> counterfeiting across the board
that could have been fixed by the gutless wonders at the
sec >> at anytime in the last 8 years >> but due to being
incompetent at best and complicit at worst >> chose to do
nothing >> they grandfathered fraud >> after denying it existed
and now the collusionistas >> have had years to *re wreck* the
system >> across even more levels than just equities/stocks

nice to see mark faulk and richard keane jr >> discuss in detail
(approx 20 mins) the issue cf counterfeiting stock/bonds/cds

hope all will take the time and listen >> and then get active
i've said for years now >> that what *eludes* the conditioning
by rote trolls >> is that no company is safe from this behavior

there has to be change >> that matters >> that is transparent

===

thanks for the link alan >> make sure to note the no. on the
last screen for more info

FOR ADDITIONAL INFO: >> folks can contact producer gloria messer
at 212/355/0814 >> who like so many others who try to expose
this cretinous filth >> has had her website hacked

http://vimeo.com/39748584

===
4kids
all jmo



5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

CMKM Diamonds Inc. (fka CMKX)

Moderators:jarta, hasher, nufced, janice shell, TSXminer, jimmym4, pantherj

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=1561




StockdungU   

Monday, April 23, 2012 7:53:06 PM

Re: None

Post # of 334365

SEC OBTAINS $4.8 MILLION JUDGMENT AGAINST MARCO GLISSON, WHO WAS CHARGED WITH MAKING A MARKET IN DEREGISTERED SECURITIES OF CMKM DIAMONDS, INC.



U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 22340 / April 23, 2012
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Marco Glisson, Civil Action No. 2:09-cv-00104
SEC OBTAINS $4.8 MILLION JUDGMENT AGAINST MARCO GLISSON, WHO WAS CHARGED WITH MAKING A MARKET IN DEREGISTERED SECURITIES OF CMKM DIAMONDS, INC.
The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced that a judgment was entered on April 11, 2012 in its civil injunctive action against Marco Glisson, filed in the United States District Court of Nevada. Without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint, Glisson consented to entry of a permanent injunction against violations of the registration provisions of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933, and the broker dealer registration provisions of Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Glisson was ordered to pay $2,765,650.65 in disgorgement, which represented profits gained as a result of the conduct alleged in the complaint, together with prejudgment interest in the amount of $670,574.79. In addition, Glisson was ordered to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $1,400,000, and was permanently barred from participating in the offering of penny stock.

The Commission’s complaint alleged that from December 2005 through April 2007, Glisson acted as an unregistered broker or dealer and illegally sold deregistered securities of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. CMKM's registration with the Commission was revoked and the stock delisted on October 28, 2005. According to the complaint, Glisson, a retired auto worker and part-time restaurant worker who used the name “Deli Dog” or “Deli” in Internet chat rooms, identified potential buyers and sellers by frequenting CMKM related internet chat rooms and through referrals from past buyers and sellers. Glisson then negotiated the terms of the transaction and consummated it by exchanging money for the pertinent CMKM stock certificate. Through these practices, Glisson made a market in deregistered CMKM securities at a time when legitimate broker-dealers refused to execute such purchases or sales because of the Commission's deregistration of CMKM.

See Litigation Release No. 20855/January 15, 2009, for information on the filing of the original action and a link to the Commission’s Complaint.



http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2012/lr22340.htm



5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

NSS ~ Counterfeiting Stock ~ MM Games Played 

Moderator: fourkids_9pets Assistants: Paula, camper9, SevenTenEleven, ThePennyGuru, dehydratedman  Share   Followers: 233 

Created: 7/20/2010 5:52:25 PM 

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=18322


SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, May 24, 2012 9:36:56 PM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9801

Post # of 9852

Is te SEC hiring "experts" to post on IMB's?


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To lead the effort, the S.E.C. selected one of its rising stars, Thomas A. Sporkin, whose father was the agency’s enforcement director in the 1970s. Mr. Sporkin has built a team of more than 40 former traders, exchange experts, accountants and securities lawyers to sift through roughly 200 pieces of intelligence a day, distilling the hottest tips into a daily “intelligence report.”

“It’s the central intelligence office for the whole agency,” Mr. Sporkin said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If they are, how come they are not TRUE advocates for shareholders? Why is their agenda to support those committing market fraud by naked short selling?

Tic Toc



SevenTenEleven 

Thursday, May 24, 2012 11:12:46 PM

Re: AlanC post# 9794

Post # of 9852

Short interest in Facebook rises: Data Explorers


NEW YORK | Thu May 24, 2012 9:47am EDT

(Reuters) - Demand to borrow Facebook Inc shares for shorting has increased, with nearly 8 percent of the stock out on loan, according to financial data company Data Explorers.

About 70 percent of the shares available for lending are out on loan as demand to borrow, and possibly short the stock, strengthens, Data Explorers said on Thursday.

Some 33 million Facebook shares are out on loan, or 7.9 percent of the free float.

The cost to borrow the online social network's shares has fallen sharply, Data Explorers said.

On the firm's scale of 1 to 10, from least expensive to most expensive, Facebook shares scored a 6 after trades settled on Wednesday, down from 10 the day before. One reason for the decline is that more shares are available for borrowing.

Facebook shares were higher in premarket trading on Thursday, up 57 cents to $32.57.

Shorts borrow shares and sell them, betting the price will fall so they can buy back the shares at a lower price and pocket the difference. There are also other reasons to borrow stocks; prime brokers do so for market-making purposes.

(Reporting by Rodrigo Campos; editing by John Wallace)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/24/us-facebook-shares-shortsellers-idUSBRE84N0VK20120524




AlanC

Friday, May 25, 2012 8:34:41 AM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9796

Post # of 9852

Amen! Patrick Byrne is a true American hero and I have no doubt will go down in history as one of the honest men/women who exposed the rampant fraud that was being perpetrated on investors throughout the world. Suzanne Trimbath is another who will be recognized for her courage and integrity. We need more honest folks like this to step up to the plate!



SevenTenEleven

Friday, May 25, 2012 8:45:20 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9807

Post # of 9852

I like how Citadel's hedge fund unit was not affected by the "loss" they claim to have experienced. I bet their hedge fund unit made, or is in the process of making, $1B or more. LOL!



fourkids_9pets 

Friday, May 25, 2012 9:21:57 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9783

Post # of 9852

Facebook market makers' losses total at least $100 million

By Jessica Toonkel and John McCrank
Friday May 25, 2012 12:48am

(Reuters) - Claims by four of Wall Street's main market makers against Nasdaq over Facebook's botched IPO are likely to exceed $100 million, as they and other traders continue to deal with thousands of problems with customer orders.

A technical glitch delayed the social networking company's market debut by 30 minutes on Friday and many client orders were delayed, giving some investors and traders significant losses as the stock price dropped. The exchange operator is facing lawsuits from investors and threats of legal action from brokers.

Four of the top market makers in the Facebook IPO -- Knight Capital, Citadel Securities, UBS AG and Citi's Automated Trading Desk -- collectively have probably lost more than $100 million from problems arising from the deal, said a senior executive at one of the firms.

Knight and Citadel are each claiming losses of $30 million to $35 million, potentially overwhelming a $13 million fund the exchange set up to deal with potential claims.

Nasdaq also has to contend with the outside prospect that it could lose the Facebook listing entirely after having just obtained it.

Facebook shares ended regular trading on Thursday up 3.2 percent at $33.03, about $5 short of their offering price. Action on the stock, however, has essentially become secondary to the fallout from the IPO -- its price, its size, its execution and questions about selective disclosure of its financial prospects.

Regulators including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin are now looking into how the IPO was handled. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is also reviewing the matter.

BROKERS UP IN ARMS

Advisers familiar with the situation said many investors are now finding out, nearly a week after the fact, that their orders were not executed at the prices they thought.

Fidelity, in a statement, said it was working with regulators and market makers on its clients' issues "and we will continue to do so until we are confident that Nasdaq has done everything it can to mitigate the impact to our customers."

Morgan Stanley is also still tending to trade orders placed by brokerage customers on Friday, two people familiar with the situation said. Nasdaq has said all orders were returned by 1:50 p.m. EDT last Friday, but a Morgan Stanley Smith Barney source said it did not get trade information in a "systemic, orderly way.

Late Thursday, the company held a call with its brokers and told them adjustments would be made to thousands of trades so that no limit orders would be filled at more than $43 a share for stock from the IPO day, a person familiar with the call said.

While brokerages may have received confirmation of trades made on Friday, many were still handling customer disputes over what price they received on the trades, officials said.

The question is "who is going to eat the cost" of compensating those investors, said Alan Haft, a financial adviser with California-based Kings Point Capital LLC, which has $200 million in assets.

One prominent plaintiffs lawyer said what happened with Facebook was reminiscent of the dot-com bubble.

"This is just another spin on the same game of unfair treatment of individual investors," said Stanley Bernstein of Bernstein Liebhard. He chaired the plaintiffs' committee in an IPO class-action suit challenging the role of investment banks in more than 300 IPOs between 1998 and 2000. The litigation ended in a $586 million settlement in favor of the plaintiffs.

MARKET MAKERS LOOM

The claims by market makers Knight and Citadel could end up dwarfing some of the brokerage issues, though.

"They are certainly facing the specter of some significant lawsuits if this pool is not enough," a source familiar with Knight's situation said of the Nasdaq claims pool.

Citadel has sent its losses to Nasdaq for potential compensation, a source familiar with the matter said. Citadel's hedge fund was not affected.

The head of trading at Instinet said it still had no idea when Nasdaq would respond to requests for accommodation -- essentially, compensation for the order problems -- or if those requests would be honored.

"Were gonna be looking at a loss on our books" if Nasdaq does not honor the requests, Mark Turner said. "We basically made most of our clients whole because Nasdaq told us to go through the process and file for accommodation. If Nasdaq does not accommodate us we're going to end up taking a loss."

"I don't know that I want to put a dollar amount on that but it's not nearly as significant as Knight's ($30-$35 million)," he said.

Citadel and Knight, as market makers to the Nasdaq, honor their clients' buy, sell and cancellation orders. The orders are supposed to be processed by the exchange within milliseconds, but there was a nearly two-hour delay in processing Facebook orders at the Nasdaq.

During that time, market makers had no idea where their orders stood. And in reality, the price clients bought or sold at was sometimes different than the price they actually got.

For example, Facebook shares began trading with an opening cross price - the first price at which those not in on the IPO could buy or sell - of $42 per share. If an order to sell 10,000 shares at $42 went in at that time, but wasn't filled until later in the day when shares were trading at around $39, a market maker like Citadel or Knight would make up the difference - in this case, at a cost of $30,000.

FEWER PROBLEMS ELSEWHERE

Several analysts who cover exchanges said Nasdaq's legal liability should be limited, though. According to the analysts, securities rules give Nasdaq wide discretion in determining what, if any, compensation it should pay to customers who claim that they suffered losses due to trading execution.

Under exchange rules, Nasdaq's liability regarding client losses from certain trading issues is limited to $3 million a month. Market makers will be arguing that Nasdaq was so grossly negligent that its actions during the IPO opening override the limits, said a source with knowledge of Knight's situation.

Other firms said they did not have similar problems to those of Knight, raising questions about the scope of the losses.

"The problems were where people were trying to cancel orders; we didn't have that," said Peter Boockvar, equity strategist at Miller Tabak & Co in New York. "Because we didn't have a problem doesn't mean there weren't problems."

E*Trade Financial Corp said its market making operations realized losses of "well under a million dollars."

Charles Schwab Corp had a "small number" of the "tens of thousands of clients" who traded Facebook whose issues still have not been resolved, a spokesman said. "Each one requires some analysis to resolve, which can be time consuming."

Shares of Nasdaq fell 1 cent to $21.80 on Thursday. As of Thursday's close the stock was down 5.2 percent from its last close before the Facebook debacle. Over the same period NYSE Euronext is down just 0.1 percent.

The slide in the shares is adding to the pressure on Nasdaq Chief Executive Robert Greifeld, who defended the exchange's performance at its annual meeting last Tuesday.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/05/24/oukin-uk-facebook-fidelity-idUKBRE84N0Z320120524

===

karma

===
4kids
all jmo




SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 9:26:02 AM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9809

Post # of 9852

Their market making operations may have lost money, but their hedge fund operations, or that of their biggest clients gained. That is the piece of the puzzle that will be left out.




AlanC

Friday, May 25, 2012 11:51:33 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9804

Post # of 9852

25% of Facebooks volume on the first day of trading was short sales assisted by none other than Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs the underwriters! What a bunch of pigs!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304065704577424733907622256.html



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:14:26 PM

Re: AlanC post# 9812

Post # of 9852

Well that disproves angled claims that shorting is not possible during an IPO.

Also, i wouldn't doubt if a majority of the shorting was at or above $38. Then ME sold shares to he naked short selling market makers and hedge funds allowing them to cover within T3.

Lock them up!




BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:21:44 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9813

Post # of 9852

Actually it didn’t read it again, it proved everything I stated, the lead Broker on the IPO cannot loan shares due to Regulation M, that article confirms MS did not lend shares and in fact infuriated some hedge fund managers because they held the line. No one was able to short on Friday, what they were in fact doing were getting in line to be the first to borrow shares once shares were located, they could not sell until Tuesday afternoon and or actually short FB until then. But as I said they paid a premium to be first in line up to 40%, by Tuesday afternoon it was down to 6%.

So once again shorting is not possible during that type of IPO, it took T+3 as I stated before anyone could actually begin shorting FB. Price decline on Friday was purely bungled opening and over valuation of the security and had nothing to do with SHort sales of the security.



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:28:59 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9814

Post # of 9852

Of course it is. I have proved that to you already.

Thanks for the DD!

Good Luck!



BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:37:42 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9815

Post # of 9852

No you didn't I pointed it out to you on the DD board, that FB was not shorted by anyone on Friday and in fact could not be for a period of time, which is the T+3. Borrowing is not shorting the security until one can actually sell the security at a lower price, and nobody could do so until Tuesday afternoon.

FB price decline was strictly over priced and poorly handled open.



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:39:55 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9816

Post # of 9852

Sorry! But I did prove it to you that it is indeed possible to short during an IPO. I could post the proof once again if it helps.

Good Luck!



AlanC

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:44:29 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9814

Post # of 9852

You are wrong! Millions of dollars were made by shorting Facebook. Once again investors were shafted by the shorts while regulators looked on: http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2012/05/25/facebook-fallout-how-to-short-an-historic-ipo-early-and-effectively/



BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:48:42 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9817

Post # of 9852

Your claim was the following:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bankers and brokers are dumping and the hedge finds have been shorting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=75872217

That is false as hedge funds could not sell short for the T+3 period until shares settled in all accounts. Tuesday afternoon would have been the first time hedge funds could actually sell short FB. You had claimed they HAVE been, which is past tense that they had been doing since the IPO went public. That is not possible considering the type of IPO FB was.

So those who borrowed on Friday took a significant gamble that by Tuesday the price was not going to bounce before they had the opportunity to sell. The simple fact is if it had not been over priced and bungled so badly they likely would have lost or took a long time to cover their postions.



BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 12:53:38 PM

Re: AlanC post# 9818

Post # of 9852

Ha ha…. read that article again, it does not support your claim it simply confirmed what I said again T+3, rumors are not proof it happened but those that actually tried were given the right answer.. NO YOU CANNOT SHORT UNTIL T+3…




SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 1:06:47 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9819

Post # of 9852

Might want to go back a few posts and read. The proof of the ability to short is in one of the articles I posted.

Good Luck!



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 1:12:23 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9820

Post # of 9852

Maybe retail investors cannot short during an IPO, but sure as heck market makers and hedge funds do, AND DID! The rule is set up to protect the banks and brokers. They do not want competition selling and shorting into the dilution.



BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 1:16:17 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9821

Post # of 9852

No it is not, in fact every article posted has stated the same thing over and over again, T+3 is required. In fact the last one posted had rumors that they heard someone was able to short, yet when they tried they were in fact told T+3. Rumors mean nothing here, actual occurrences however do. The fact is Regulation puts it in writing and several articles supported that fact by showing the lead UNDERWRITER did in fact not LEND shares and people tried shorting were in fact told not until T+3 in accordance with SEC Regulations.

Once again nobody cares about the people who borrowed shares at 40% rates to be first in line to short, the fact that they could not short until Tuesday afternoon shows FB was an over priced and bungled security on Friday and nothing more. Think about that for a moment someone is giving up 40% of their possible profits based on what the security trades 3 days later, pretty hefty and completely ballsy on their part. Compared to late Tuesday afternoon of 6%, which is still high but nothing compared to that 40% to be first.



BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 1:23:10 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9822

Post # of 9852

They couldn't, but you hit on one thing that was not present here in the begining and thus why MM's and Hedge funds couldn't THERE WERE NO RETAIL ON THE OFFERING... NONE!

FB was strictly Institutional investors only, thus why it was impossible to locate securities to borrow and why rates were ridiculous to do so. Either way nobody could sell for profit until T+3 due to required settlement first.

Now I am certain if retail were in on the offering it would have been a whole different ballgame, they would have certainly borrowed and shorted against retail accounts all day long.

That is why the rates dropped on Tuesday afternoon, because retail were now in the T+3 settlement window into their accounts. Shares were available to borrow against, but how much of a dip would FB have taken if retail were also involved in the IPO? I doubt much if any and in fact a totally different outcome would have occured.




SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 2:00:34 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9823

Post # of 9852

I will post the proof for you again, so it can be ignored once again.

Good Luck!



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 2:50:41 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9823

Post # of 9852

Here you go!

Shorting Facebook on first day: Tough even for the gutsiest

No it is not, in fact every article posted has stated the same thing over and over again, T+3 is required. In fact the last one posted had rumors that they heard someone was able to short, yet when they tried they were in fact told T+3. Rumors mean nothing here, actual occurrences however do. The fact is Regulation puts it in writing and several articles supported that fact by showing the lead UNDERWRITER did in fact not LEND shares and people tried shorting were in fact told not until T+3 in accordance with SEC Regulations.

Once again nobody cares about the people who borrowed shares at 40% rates to be first in line to short, the fact that they could not short until Tuesday afternoon shows FB was an over priced and bungled security on Friday and nothing more. Think about that for a moment someone is giving up 40% of their possible profits based on what the security trades 3 days later, pretty hefty and completely ballsy on their part. Compared to late Tuesday afternoon of 6%, which is still high but nothing compared to that 40% to be first.


Reuters – 15 minutes ago


By Edward Krudy and Alistair Barr

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shorting the Facebook IPO on its first day of trading will not be for the faint of heart.

As the hottest initial public offering in recent memory, Facebook has drawn 1990s-style tech-mania interest from mom and pop investors and big institutions alike.

That intense appeal means even short-selling veterans are a bit wary, at least for now.
"I have no interest in shorting a cultural phenomenon," hedge fund manager Jeffrey Matthews of Ram Partners in Greenwich, Connecticut, told Reuters in an email interview.

Asked if this was because such stocks trade without regard to normal market valuation, he wrote back, "Bingo."

Short sellers looking to get in are facing an uphill battle. Traders interviewed said the stock is going to be hard to borrow, at least for a few days, and only the best-sourced hedge fund managers will able to find lenders.

A prime broker at one of the top underwriters of the IPO said the firm will not be lending shares at least until the initial settlement in three business days.

"I don't know how many shares will be available for shorting," said the broker, who requested anonymity. "We would only provide them once the deal has stabilized."

The bigger-than-usual percentage of retail-investor ownership of the shares may make shorting more difficult, as those investors don't tend to lend their shares for those who want to take a short bet.

"It will likely be difficult to get shares to borrow," said Adam Reed, professor of finance at UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

"In our research, we found that around 70 percent of IPOs are borrowable on the first day, but many of those names were only borrowable by well-placed investors."

The stock priced at $38 a share Thursday.

Those who are able to short will need nerves of steel. The borrowing cost will be high, and short-sellers may find the trade hard to get out of by buying back the stock in the open market, and could face a lender calling in their shorts if the stock rallies sharply.

Still, some have started laying the groundwork to short Facebook well before trading started.
"I'm doing the legwork now and calling all the brokers," said a hedge fund manager earlier in the week. "Goldman and Credit Suisse are our prime brokers, so I am in contact with them about this."

"This is about as bubbly as you can get," he said. "My mother asked me if she could get Facebook shares and she has never been interested in IPOs before. A cab driver asked me about the IPO too. That's when you want to short it."

The hedge fund manager asked not to be named as he expected to be involved in trading the stock on Friday.

Some hedge funds, remembering the heady days of the tech bubble in the late 1990s, have been sensing the blood in the water in the recent flurry of social media and networking IPOs, including Groupon, LinkedIn, and Zygna.

Many believe those stocks' valuations are too high, given expectations for their growth and revenue outlook. Should shares surge to $70 or so in short order, it will be an opportunity for managers when the initial flurry of retail interest fades in coming days or weeks.

However, Facebook may be an exception.

"I think it's going to be an extraordinarily successful IPO and it's going to be a must-own stock institutionally, besides the massive retail demand, for obvious reasons - it's the dominant factor in social media, social networking," said Doug Kass, president of Seabreeze Partners in Palm Beach, Florida.

Kass hasn't been afraid of shorting hot IPOs in the past - he made quick, short bets on LinkedIn in the initial days after it began trading in May 2011. That stock had a small float of just 7.84 million shares, compared with the 421 million shares Facebook sold.

At the $38-a-share IPO price, Facebook would trade at over 100 times historical earnings, versus Apple Inc's 14 times and Google Inc's 19 times.

Even among the skeptical, there is a good deal of caution in facing down what is likely to be a stampede. As economist John Maynard Keynes famously noted, the market can stay irrational longer than investors can stay solvent.

"Facebook is the kind of stock that, if you don't like it, you simply avoid it," said Mohannad Aama, managing director at Beam Capital Management LLC in New York.

(Editing by David Gaffen and Bernadette Baum)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/shorting-facebook-first-day-tough-143541954.html

Good Luck!




BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 3:04:56 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9826

Post # of 9852

Did you read it? At no point did it ever say you could short FB the first day, who cares about people that WANT to short it but found out they were not going to be able to until T+3? I certainly do not care of people speculative nature that they thought they could do so, but in the end as cited y the article it was clear that most already knew the answer even before it started trading:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short sellers looking to get in are facing an uphill battle. Traders interviewed said the stock is going to be hard to borrow, at least for a few days, and only the best-sourced hedge fund managers will able to find lenders.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A prime broker at one of the top underwriters of the IPO said the firm will not be lending shares at least until the initial settlement in three business days.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Pretty clear and exactly as I have stated multiple times now, until T+3 it was not going to happen and the primary source was not lending which has been confirmed by several articles already. End of story it has been proven time and time again that nobody was able to SELL SHORT on FB the very first day, they spent time and money specifically in locating shares at ridiculous rates and hoped for no rebound in the security when it became eligible to sell short.




SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 3:19:48 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9827

Post # of 9852

Here we go! One more time!

"It will likely be difficult to get shares to borrow," said Adam Reed, professor of finance at UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

"In our research, we found that around 70 percent of IPOs are borrowable on the first day, but many of those names were only borrowable by well-placed investors."

I am sure that is not good enough. But hey, I understand!

Good Luck!



BigBake1 

Friday, May 25, 2012 3:34:13 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9828

Post # of 9852

You are right it is not good enough, because it does not specify the types of IPOs and FB specifically and it is a general statement. The only means in which anyone could borrow and sell short the very same day FB went public was through MS. It has been confirmed multiple times that they would not lend their security and followed Reg M. The only means of borrowing was to wait for T+3 and the only way to lock in the price was to pay a ridiculous rate of 40% and yet wait until T+3 to sell short.

Failure to realize that FB was an institutional investor only IPO is where you are going wrong. It was not your typical IPO.



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 3:44:31 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9829

Post # of 9852

It doesn't matter, no matter what is posted as proof, there are some who prefer to wordsmith and twist the truth.

So, for those who have access to the truth, and do their own due diligence, they know that what has been posted here regarding the ability to short on the first day of an IPO is in FACT TRUE!

Good Luck!



fourkids_9pets 

Friday, May 25, 2012 4:41:06 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9830

Post # of 9852

RE: FB

there was a segment on cnbc just about an hour ago with MB
specific to GS and JPM *loaning* out shares for hedgies to *short*
last friday >> ML as the underwriter chose NOT to >> not so *others*

(segment was partly about ML >> er >> not *profiting* from loaning
shares)

too bad the sec is a captured entity and the system as noted in the
segment is BROKEN

gee i'm shocked >> NOT

if i have the time (and cnbc posts the link) i'll post it here

==

4kids
all jmo



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 7:08:55 PM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9831

Post # of 9852

Many know what is going on, but few are willing to listen.

While the NASDQ "glitch" was occurring, it is likely the hedge funds were naked short selling into the initial buying. Those same hedge funds were covering their shorts over the course of the next few days.

They likely made billions on their short positions, while their "broker" divisions lost a measly $30-35MM.

Kinda like the fines they pay to the SEC for illegal behavior. Small portions of what they actually make on their illegal activity are paid as fines, with no guilt ever admitted.

The only difference with the FB IPO is that the brokers may get a portion of their "losses" back.

What a beautiful system the SEC oversees.

Tic Toc



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 8:10:12 PM

Re: fourkids_9pets post# 9831

Post # of 9852

FB - Short Volume for May 25th - 41%

20120525|FB|4036162|0|9869637|Q



AlanC

Friday, May 25, 2012 8:45:51 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9820

Post # of 9852

You need to read it again. Nobody cares what the rules say. Naked short naked short naked short.



AlanC

Friday, May 25, 2012 8:48:07 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9826

Post # of 9852

Comprehension can be a problem for some no matter how clearly it is written.



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 9:41:25 PM

Re: AlanC post# 9835

Post # of 9852

Confirmed today that CNBC reported that MS and JPM were borrowing Facebook (FB) shares to hedge funds so they could short on Friday, May 18, 2012.

One could Prove it over and over again, yet some "experts" claim it does't happen. Must work for the hedge funds. Wonder why they are not required to disclose their compensation?

I really feel sorry for the investor who comes across one of their posts and makes investment decisions based upon their lies and their distortions.

Tic Toc



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 9:52:20 PM

Re: BigBake1 post# 9829

Post # of 9852

Thanks for pointing out that shorting on the first 3 days of an IPO are illegal.

Crazy that CNBC was running a segment today discussing how GS and JPM were boring shares to hedge funds on the first day of trading. You know, the day with the NASDQ glitch and the underwriters not disclosing the true value of Facebook to ALL INVESTORS!

Unbelievable fraud confirmed! I am sure those who pride themselves as fraud busters will be all over Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan, as well as disclosing each and every hedge fund that was borrowing shares and breaking securities laws.

Thanks so much for point out how ILLEGAL this activity is!

Good Luck!



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 11:18:52 PM

Re: AlanC post# 9835

Post # of 9852

Facebook's market maker losses may top $115 million: sources

Reuters – 6 hours ago

By John McCrank

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Four of Wall Street's major market makers involved in Facebook's botched initial public offering last Friday expect their losses from technical glitches on Nasdaq's exchange to be around $115 million.

A software error on Nasdaq OMX Group Inc's U.S. exchange delayed the social networking company's market debut by 30 minutes last Friday. Many client orders were delayed, leading to significant losses to some investors and traders as the stock price dropped.

The exchange operator is facing lawsuits from investors and threats of legal action from brokers.
Claims from market makers look to overwhelm the $13 million fund the exchange aims to set up to deal with potential claims. Nasdaq's liability is limited to $3 million in certain cases, but electronic trader Knight Capital Group, for one, has said it will fight to be fully compensated.

According to sources with knowledge of the situation:

* UBS AG had trading losses of around $30 million stemming from Facebook's IPO;

* Knight Capital Group saw losses of between $30 and $35 million;

* Citadel Securities booked losses of $30 million; and

* Citigroup Inc's Automated Trading Desk notched losses of about $20 million, according to a source.

A market maker is a firm that stands ready to buy and sell a particular stock on a regular and continuous basis at a publicly quoted price.

Other firms are expected to report additional losses from Facebook's IPO, including a $1 million loss by E*Trade Financial, potentially adding millions of dollars in cumulative claims, sources said.

Regulators, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin are now looking into how the IPO was handled. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is also reviewing the matter.

(Reporting By John McCrank; Writing by David Randall; Editing by Walden Siew and Kenneth Barry)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/facebooks-market-maker-losses-may-211231230.html



SevenTenEleven 

Friday, May 25, 2012 11:20:32 PM

Re: None

Post # of 9852

NASDAQ OMX board elects interim chairman

Reuters – 3 hours ago


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Nasdaq OMX said on Friday its board of directors elected Börje Ekholm to serve as the interim chairman of the exchange operator, replacing Furlong Baldwin, who retired.

Ekholm, chief executive of Nordic-based industrial holding company Investor AB, Nasdaq's No. 2 shareholder, steps into the position a week after technical glitches at Nasdaq led to a series of problems in Facebook's highly anticipated initial public offering.

A software error delayed the social networking company's market debut by 30 minutes last Friday. Many client orders were delayed, leading to significant losses to some investors and traders as the stock price dropped.

Four of Wall Street's major market makers involved in the IPO expect their losses as a result of the problems to be around $115 million.

Other firms are expected to report additional losses from Facebook's IPO, potentially adding millions of dollars in cumulative claims, sources have said. These include a loss of under $1 million by E*Trade Financial.

Regulators, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin are now looking into how the IPO was handled. The U.S. Senate Banking Committee is also reviewing the matter.

(Reporting by John McCrank; Editing by Gary Hill)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nasdaq-omx-board-elects-interim-233900452.html



AlanC

Saturday, May 26, 2012 8:05:37 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9836

Post # of 9852

It sure is odd how some folks who are compensated are required to disclose while others are not required to do so. I believe that either all should be required to disclose under penalty of prosecution or all who are paid in any shape or form by the industry should be barred from posting on any message board related to the industry.




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, May 26, 2012 8:11:41 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9842

Post # of 9852

I am sure there is a clause with various employers that their employees are not allowed to post on stock message boards. Yet that is what they do. Also, it is a fact that there are demoters who are compensated to post. They should be required to disclose who is compensating them and on which stocks, just like promoters are required. If they have a "different system" for compensation, then that needs to be disclosed.



SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, May 26, 2012 9:48:35 AM

Re: None

Post # of 9852

Insight: Minute by minute, Nasdaq chaos engulfed Facebook IPO

Reuters – 2 hours 31 minutes ago

By Rodrigo Campos and John McCrank

(Reuters) - Dead silence.

For nearly 20 minutes on the morning of Facebook Inc's trading debut last Friday, the line Nasdaq had opened up to keep traders informed about the social media company's $16 billion IPO had been mute. Well after the stock was supposed to have opened at 11 a.m. New York time, no one from Nasdaq was talking - and there was still no sign of trading.

Finally, at 11:28 a.m., an unidentified person announced that the shares would open in about 2 minutes. Nasdaq also said orders and cancellations were still being processed, according to several sources listening to the call.

Those crucial 20 minutes created confusion that turned into chaos over the next few hours as market makers - the brokers who quote bid and offer prices - struggled to figure out what was happening. They were rebuffed in their attempts to get Nasdaq to halt trading and sort out a growing number of problems.

A lack of communication and, some say, misinformation from Nasdaq may have been central to the failed debut of Facebook's shares. Market makers - crucial to the smooth operation of stock trading - were unsure about their exposure for hours. Investors were in the dark as to whether their trades had gone through, in some cases for days afterwards.

The turmoil caused the four big market-makers for Facebook's stock, Knight Capital Group, Citigroup's Automated Trading Desk, Citadel Securities, and UBS AG to lose around $115 million between them.

"There was very little if any communication from Nasdaq throughout the entire process," said Mark Turner, head of trading at Instinet, another market-maker based in New York. "As a matter of fact, we feel there was miscommunication."

Instinet said it also suffered a loss, though it wasn't specific other than to say it was significantly less than the $30-35 million reported by Knight.

The precise actions taken by Nasdaq officials last Friday are still unclear. Spokespeople for Nasdaq declined numerous requests for comment, referring Reuters to a status alert issued on Monday that outlined some of the problems encountered and some of the steps it took in an attempt to resolve them.

FIST-PUMPING

The Nasdaq call, led by Nasdaq Vice President Todd Golub, according to sources, was scheduled to last 2 hours from 10:15 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. to make sure that the exchange was keeping in close touch with the market. It is a normal event for a big IPO.

However, this call stretched into the late afternoon, as the most anticipated new U.S. stock offering in years turned into one of the ugliest.

The fallout from the events last Friday has become a continuing nightmare for Nasdaq OMX Group, which wooed the social media network for months and openly prides itself on its technology.

The result is another black eye for an exchange industry already suffering because investors not only lost confidence in the financial crisis but through the "flash crash" in May 2010 when $1 trillion in shareholder equity was temporarily wiped out in a matter of minutes.

Nasdaq CEO Bob Greifeld pumped his fist at the symbolic opening bell ceremony at Facebook's headquarters in Menlo Park, California next to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg an hour-and-a-half before the company's stock was due to start trading. There were no outward signs then of the problems that were about to unfold back on Wall Street.

At 10:58 a.m., Nasdaq issued a notice that the Facebook opening would be delayed until 11:05 a.m. IPO delays of that nature are not unusual, especially with a massive launch like Facebook.

But then the revised start time passed without an opening trade on the stock. Minutes passed as traders waited. Nasdaq's next communication came at 11:13 a.m., when it noted in a terse emailed message to people who subscribe to the exchange's alerts that Nasdaq is "experiencing a delay in delivering the opening print in Facebook," with no other details.

Meanwhile, market-makers were receiving messages about their orders that later proved to be inaccurate. They say they were told during the period between 11:05 and 11:30 a.m., when the stock finally opened, that orders were still being taken for the opening price.

"Nasdaq representatives were stating right up until 11:29 that they were still accepting orders in Facebook for the open," said Turner of Instinet.

But that wasn't the case. Later, Turner said he was told that orders submitted up to 25 minutes before the opening were either canceled or not submitted into the marketplace until about 1:50 p.m. - more than two hours later. Other market makers received similar messages.

Behind the scenes, the massive order volume was overwhelming Nasdaq's systems.

Orders that were supposed to be processed in 3 milliseconds were taking 5 milliseconds, said one person familiar with exchange operations. This proved to be a major problem: In the extra two milliseconds new orders flooded in, thwarting the system's ability to establish an opening price for the stock and leading to a backup in unprocessed orders.

"This is starting to get bizarre," Wayne Kaufman, an equity market strategist at brokerage John Thomas Financial, said from the firm's trading floor on Wall Street, around 11:15 a.m.

Finally, the decision was made to put through a fix to the systems problem and get the stock trading. That move to a secondary matching engine used the order book as it appeared at 11:11 a.m. - but this meant new orders and changes in orders that came in later did not show up in the opening price. A matching engine is a computer that pairs bids and offers to complete trades.

Eric Noll, Nasdaq's head of transaction services, said in a statement earlier this week that the fix instead led to 2-1/2 hours of uncertainty during which brokers were unable to see the results of their trades.

TRADING HALT?

The stock opened at 11:30:09 a.m. at $42.05 a share. An investor looking at a quote screen might have thought the trouble had ended there. In reality, the problems were about to worsen.

After initially heading to a high of $45, the stock soon began to plunge towards its issue price at $38. Lead underwriter Morgan Stanley stepped in to defend the stock while some others - unsure whether their orders had been processed or not - backed away from trading or decided to sell.

If confidence is undermined at the open, people "pull back because their orders are essentially going into a black hole," said former Nasdaq Vice Chairman David Weild.

Clients were telling their brokers they had not received confirmation of orders - which normally come through in seconds.

"Multiple market makers called Nasdaq and asked them to halt the stock and said, 'You have a problem and it's getting worse,' and their response was, 'The stock is trading normally,'" said an executive at one market-maker.

It is unclear who would have the authority to halt the stock. Nasdaq would not comment on whether it considered such a move.

For market-makers, the chaos was particularly problematic because they didn't know what they and their clients owned, and at what price.

"Should I be selling stock, should I be buying? And what's my price point?" said another official at a market-making firm. "You just don't know, so you were in effect flying blind until 2 o'clock."

ANEMIC

The Nasdaq call had been a one-sided affair with the market makers apparently placed on mute by Nasdaq throughout. In a sign of how desperate the market makers were getting, they even attempted to ask questions which were probably never heard, said Turner, who called the information flow "anemic at best."

Nasdaq was telling call participants with questions to call the transaction services line. Some calls were not answered, and those who had their calls answered encountered delays of 45 minutes to an hour, the market-makers said.

Nasdaq posted few status updates. Shortly before noon the exchange said in an email it was investigating the delivery of trade execution messages. An hour later, it said it was still working on those issues.

Investors weren't sure if their orders had been filled, prompting some to cancel. That led to losses for market makers who have also, in many cases, compensated their clients for losses on delayed trades.

Finally, at 1:47 p.m. Nasdaq said it would electronically process all orders that were supposed to have been done at the opening price at 11:30 a.m.

That meant that more than 12 million Facebook shares traded between 1:49 p.m. and 1:51 p.m., one of the busiest periods for the stock that day, according to Thomson Reuters data.

But market participants say these trades, according to time-and-sales data, did not appear to be executed at the opening price of $42.05. Instead they were recorded at the then prevailing lower price.

"Those trades that came across at 1:50 should have had an indicator on them called a late sale - in other words, these are not trades that just happened, these happened two hours ago," said Joe Saluzzi, co-head of trading at Themis Trading in Chatham, New Jersey.

The barrage of orders added to selling pressure as it created the perception that a lot of investors were still trying to get out of the stock.

The stock wobbled around $40 a share for another hour when more sellers came in, dropping the price to near the $38 issue price - where it spent several agonizing minutes as lead underwriter Morgan Stanley defended that level. Facebook's shares closed that day at $38.23, but have since slumped and ended this Friday at $31.91.

The problems from Facebook's debut prompted Nasdaq to say on Monday that it was changing its IPO procedures, and would use the software it currently runs for its regular opening and closing numbers for future IPOs, rather than the software in place during Facebook's market launch.
That may not be enough for traders who feel burned.

Or, as one market-maker put it: "Why didn't you just halt the stock?"

(Reporting By Rodrigo Campos and John McCrank; Additional reporting by Herb Lash, Edward Krudy, Jonathan Spicer; Writing by David Gaffen, Jennifer Merritt; Editing by Martin Howell and Richard Chang)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/insight-minute-minute-nasdaq-chaos-002729307.html



SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, May 26, 2012 10:03:45 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9845

Post # of 9852

http://signup.archivesocial.com/financial-services/firm-at-risk/start-archiving-free/?utm_campaign=firm-at-risk&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=finra-woman



AlanC

Saturday, May 26, 2012 10:08:48 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9846

Post # of 9852

The cockroaches are scurrying! lol




SevenTenEleven 

Saturday, May 26, 2012 10:12:37 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9850

Post # of 9852

Guess I need to park this here since some hedge fund didn't like the post the first time around:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FFGO - Things aren't going so well for GS and JPM and a number of hedge funds. I wonder how many of the same folks are guilty of illegally naked short selling FFGO from above $1 to $0.0001?

A recent IPO debacle is about to come to haunt them all. Not a pink/OTC like FFGO, but a NASDQ stock that has 1B people aware of it.

Looks like whatever the principles of FFGO do now, those illegally short, and not reporting, will have no one to run to, to help their cause.

Tic Toc



5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

NSS ~ Counterfeiting Stock ~ MM Games Played 

Moderator: fourkids_9pets Assistants: Paula, camper9, SevenTenEleven, ThePennyGuru, dehydratedman  Share   Followers: 233 

Created: 7/20/2010 5:52:25 PM 

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=18322



SevenTenEleven 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 2:53:58 PM

Re: AlanC post# 9850

Post # of 9872

The ENSSFM sell when they short. They have to buy to cover (which they never do). Instead of covering to capture their profits, their short accounts are "marked to market" meaning they get the use of the money they are up as the stock price of the scam declines. This allows them to fund the big bashes they throw on Cydonia to celebrate their enormous success at fleecing the sheep of the penny stock scam market. It also allows them to build very expensive monuments in their own honor. - overachiever

Smart professional sounding Bullshit but I like it, what you say they avoid to cover as the dont want to book the profits *giggle ... and cause they are their Broker Heros, they get Margin on their not realized, but permanent rolled positions ? LOL ... ET ... callng home but, welcome to prove me wrong ... a qualified link could do the Trick - KimC



basserdan 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 5:11:34 PM

Re: None

Post # of 9872

US Decides to Backstop the Anglo-American Derivatives Exchanges with Fed Dollars - 'Too Big To Fail'

Posted by Jesse
at 5:12 AM 25 May 2012

It sounds like the principle of keeping AIG whole on its obligations so that it can pay off to the banks at 100 cents on the dollar. This should make Jamie feel a little better about his bad derivatives trades.

And Blythe should rest easy knowing that Benny has her back on those massive metals shorts.

Sounds like they even plan to have the Fed backstop the derivatives trade in London.


Heads the banks win, tails those holding US dollars lose.

How will they support the next bailout? Austerity!

~~~~~~~~

A Mess the 45th President Will Inherit

Taxpayers Now Stand Behind Derivatives Clearinghouses

Wall Street Journal
Thursday, May 24, 2012

...Little noticed is that on Tuesday Team Obama took its first formal steps toward putting taxpayers behind Wall Street derivatives trading -- not behind banks that might make mistakes in derivatives markets, but behind the trading itself. Yes, the same crew that rails against the dangers of derivatives is quietly positioning these financial instruments directly above the taxpayer safety net.

As we noted in May 2010, the authority for this regulatory achievement was inserted into Congress's pending financial reform bill by then-Senator Chris Dodd. Two months later, the legislation was re-named Dodd-Frank and signed into law by Mr. Obama. One part of the law forces much of the derivatives market into clearinghouses that stand behind every trade. Mr. Dodd's pet provision creates a mechanism for bailing out these clearinghouses when they run into trouble.

Specifically, the law authorizes the Federal Reserve to provide "discount and borrowing privileges" to clearinghouses in emergencies. Traditionally the ability to borrow from the Fed's discount window was reserved for banks, but the new law made clear that a clearinghouse receiving assistance was not required to "be or become a bank or bank holding company." To get help, they only needed to be deemed "systemically important" by the new Financial Stability Oversight Council chaired by the Treasury Secretary.

Last year regulators finalized rules for how they would use this new power. On Tuesday, they began using it. The Financial Stability Oversight Council secretly voted to proceed toward inducting several derivatives clearinghouses into the too-big-to-fail club. After further review, regulators will make final designations, probably later this year, and will announce publicly the names of institutions deemed systemically important.

We're told that the clearinghouses of Chicago's CME Group and Atlanta-based Intercontinental Exchange were voted systemic this week, and rumor has it that the council may even designate London-based LCH.Clearnet as critical to the U.S. financial system.

U.S. taxpayers thinking that they couldn't possibly be forced to stand behind overseas derivatives trading will not be comforted by remarks from Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler. On Monday he emphasized his determination to extend Dodd-Frank derivatives regulation to overseas markets when subsidiaries of U.S. firms are involved...

Read the rest at http://tiny.cc/ld8uew


Posted by Jesse at 5:12 AM

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2012/05/us-decides-to-backstop-anglo-american.html



SevenTenEleven 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 5:24:52 PM

Re: basserdan post# 9860

Post # of 9872

This is criminal! Federal Reserve is about to make ALL Americans, as well as most of the rest of the world's inhabitants, servants to the debt this will create! Who will own that debt?

The FED!

Just like Ben Franklin warned the founding fathers nearly 240 years ago! While they are in their counting houses, American will be their servants!

This is taxation without representation!

They should be hung for treason!



basserdan 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 7:40:01 PM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9861

Post # of 9872

<<<Just like Ben Franklin warned the founding fathers nearly 240 years ago! While they are in their counting houses, American will be their servants!
This is taxation without representation!
They should be hung for treason!>>>

I couldn't agree more, SevenTenEleven!

I've rec'd a couple of PM's from folks who couldn't get the link for the rest of the article to work so I'll paste the piece for their reading repugnance.... er, I mean pleasure.


A Mess the 45th President Will Inherit

Taxpayers now stand behind derivatives clearinghouses

REVIEW & OUTLOOK
May 23, 2012, 7:11 p.m. ET

President Obama's standard gripe is that the economy has performed so poorly during his term because of the financial crisis he inherited from George W. Bush. But this week it is Mr. Obama who has bequeathed to his successors a landmark in financial regulation. It is bound to haunt them, though not as much as it will haunt taxpayers.

J.P. Morgan's recent trading loss and the resulting Washington blather about tighter regulation have grabbed headlines. Little noticed is that on Tuesday Team Obama took its first formal steps toward putting taxpayers behind Wall Street derivatives trading—not behind banks that might make mistakes in derivatives markets, but behind the trading itself. Yes, the same crew that rails against the dangers of derivatives is quietly positioning these financial instruments directly above the taxpayer safety net.

As we noted in May 2010, the authority for this regulatory achievement was inserted into Congress's pending financial reform bill by then-Senator Chris Dodd. Two months later, the legislation was re-named Dodd-Frank and signed into law by Mr. Obama. One part of the law forces much of the derivatives market into clearinghouses that stand behind every trade. Mr. Dodd's pet provision creates a mechanism for bailing out these clearinghouses when they run into trouble.

Specifically, the law authorizes the Federal Reserve to provide "discount and borrowing privileges" to clearinghouses in emergencies. Traditionally the ability to borrow from the Fed's discount window was reserved for banks, but the new law made clear that a clearinghouse receiving assistance was not required to "be or become a bank or bank holding company." To get help, they only needed to be deemed "systemically important" by the new Financial Stability Oversight Council chaired by the Treasury Secretary.

Last year regulators finalized rules for how they would use this new power. On Tuesday, they began using it. The Financial Stability Oversight Council secretly voted to proceed toward inducting several derivatives clearinghouses into the too-big-to-fail club. After further review, regulators will make final designations, probably later this year, and will announce publicly the names of institutions deemed systemically important.

We're told that the clearinghouses of Chicago's CME Group and Atlanta-based IntercontinentalExchange were voted systemic this week, and rumor has it that the council may even designate London-based LCH.Clearnet as critical to the U.S. financial system.

U.S. taxpayers thinking that they couldn't possibly be forced to stand behind overseas derivatives trading will not be comforted by remarks from Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler. On Monday he emphasized his determination to extend Dodd-Frank derivatives regulation to overseas markets when subsidiaries of U.S. firms are involved.

Readers know Mr. Gensler as the chief regulator of MF Global, which was run into bankruptcy by his old Beltway and Goldman Sachs pal Jon Corzine. An estimated $1.6 billion is still missing from MF Global customer accounts. What an amazing feat Mr. Gensler will have performed if, through his agency's oversight, he can manage to have U.S. customers eat the cost of Mr. Corzine's bets on foreign debt and have U.S. taxpayers underwrite bets in foreign derivatives trading.(my bolding for emphasis)

If there's one truth we've learned about government financial backstops, it's that sooner or later they will be used. So eventually taxpayers will have to bail out one derivatives clearinghouse or another. It promises to be quite a mess. And if the 45th president spends his first term whining about his predecessor's mistakes, he'll have a point.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304840904577422393164106270.html



fourkids_9pets 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 7:58:12 PM

Re: waikikian post# 9858

Post # of 9872

thanks for the kind words wai

have one wacky week left > should be back a week from monday

due to the *surprise* factor out of the most recent round of filings

i suspect *volume and pps* on JBII this week and next will be telling

gotta love a strategist


===
4kids
all jmo



SevenTenEleven 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 11:50:33 PM

Re: basserdan post# 9862

Post # of 9872

The derivatives they are backstopping have $300TRILLION worth of risk behind them!

YES $300,000,000,000,000 (THREE HUNDRED TRILLION DOLLARS!)

The national debt is $15 TRILLION!

Where did something 20 times that value come into existence?

Oh yeah, another Banker Created Product (BCP)!

A BCP is selling something that doesn't exist, and placing a value on it as if it did. Then selling it to someone else for more than its original cost. (i.e. derivatives, options, futures, illegal book entries, etc)

The Federal Reserve is about to allow the system to implode and force the US taxpayer with the bill.

We will go from the most powerful and wealthy nation on Earth IMMEDIATELY to the poorest and most debt ridden nation on Earth!

PS We actually call it a JCP, but to be politically correct, let's just go with "banker" for now.



SevenTenEleven 

Sunday, May 27, 2012 11:57:04 PM

Re: None

Post # of 9872

JPMorgan replaces prime brokerage head: source

Reuters – 5 hours ago


By Douwe Miedema
LONDON (Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase & Co (NYS:JPM - News) has named Teresa Heitsenrether as the new head of its global prime brokerage business, a source familiar with the situation said.

Heitsenrether, who had been setting up the business from London in the European, Middle East and Africa region, replaces Lou Lebedin.

The firm, which strengthened its competitive position through the 2008 financial crisis, disclosed earlier this month that it had suffered trading losses of more than $2 billion, giving ammunition to proponents of tighter rules on Wall Street.

But the change at the unit -- which is part of the investment bank and provides loans and other services to hedge fund clients -- was unrelated to the loss, or any other incident, and had long been in the works, said the source, speaking on condition of anonymity.

JPMorgan declined to comment.

The bank became a major prime broker in 2008 when it bought the failed Bear Stearns, bringing in Lebedin.

Heitsenrether has long worked in JPMorgan's fixed-income prime brokerage business, the source said, and would return to New York to take up her new position.

She had moved to London to set up the prime brokerage business in the region, and it had always been the plan that she would take the global role from Lebedin, though this had now been "accelerated", the source said.

JPMorgan was looking for new opportunities for Lebedin within the organization, the source said, but it had not decided yet what his role would be.

(Editing by Alwyn Scott and Dale Hudson)

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/jpmorgan-replaces-prime-brokerage-head-225213829.html



Long2Retire 

Monday, May 28, 2012 1:29:42 AM

Re: basserdan post# 9862

Post # of 9872

“While they are in their counting houses, America will be their servants”

I like Benjamin Franklin so I decided to look up this quote. What I found is quite disturbing. It appears to be part of an anti-Semitic hoax. Some of the links lead to white supremacists sites, and other anti-Semitic sites.

Here is the best article I found on this:
http://www.jewishpost.com/archives/news/the-franklin-prophecy-an-anti-semitic-hoax-gets-new-life-on-the-internet.html

“The Franklin Prophesy is an example of the power of the Internet to spread hatred. However, it also affords us an important opportunity to educate the public about the distinction between implication and reality. It may not be possible to defeat individual cases of propaganda, but it is possible to teach a vital lesson as a whole: that of the difference between disinformation and fact. This skill is crucial. It is especially critical because the issue of plausibility changes over time. In the same manner that Benjamin Franklin's ideas were perverted, anti-Semites used the Internet to spread the falsehood that the Mossad planned the September 11 attacks using Arabs as dupes. That notion may seem absurd in the present, but it might not appear so to a population that is uninformed in the future. The efforts of the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center have been laudable, but they must be intensified. School curriculums must be modified to mandate lessons that will equip the young to guard themselves against extremism. The Franklin Forgery is a perfect vehicle through which we can fight fanaticism through education.”

More:
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/franklin_prophecy/franklin_prophecy.asp

Anti-Semitic:
http://www.missionislam.com/nwo/usarulerslist.htm

Do a word search on counting houses in the articles.

Google page:
http://www.google.com/search?q=While+they+are+in+their+counting+houses&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1&rlz=



AlanC

Monday, May 28, 2012 6:56:55 AM

Re: SevenTenEleven post# 9865

Post # of 9872

Check out the Facebook litigation and know that every dirty detail is going to come out for all to see. Discovery is going to be mind blowing imho.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=squote&symbol=fb



AlanC

Monday, May 28, 2012 7:02:27 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9867

Post # of 9872

SEC Dropping Lehman Case: Where’s the Outrage?
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/sec-dropping-lehman-case-where-outrage-175140685.html



AlanC

Monday, May 28, 2012 8:40:22 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9869

Post # of 9872

If you get scared and / or disgusted reading this, don't worry -- such reactions are PERFECTLY normal.

http://www.economywatch.com/economy-business-and-finance-news/wall-streets-blatant-derivatives-conspiracy.17-02.html



AlanC

Monday, May 28, 2012 8:48:58 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9870

Post # of 9872

It Ends with Derivatives Finality
« Thread Started Today at 4:29pm »
Zerohedge says it the best...BOHICA

I think Mr. Adobe said it all ends with derivatives finality or close to that. Looky looky, the idiot kloWnz have finally started to make the American taxpayer responsible for backstopping the derivatives clearing houses, in plain sight. Assumed value from sources between $1.6Q and $2.2Quadrillion...now let's be the nice sheeple we've grown to be and assume only a 10% notional value...

...$160 to $200 Trillion needs covering...equals $513,000+ per man, woman and child based on 312 million souls.

The idiots have now assigned to the US taxpayer pretty much every liability under the sun. Wall Street sold Europe 80+% of the the toxic turds. Just wait till the DTCC is added to the list next to Clearnet. I would now hope that the assignment of insurmountable debt can be totally written off the books, zeroed out, vaporized. On the other side of the equation we, the people, have lots of the debt that comprises much of these derivatives, in essence, the final counter party.

You can't start a new system unless BOTH sides of the Tug-O'War rope are clean...this is beyond my comprehension of the meaning of HUMANITY...imo


http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/201....leari nghouses-


As An Encore to Bailing Out the Big Banks, Government to Backstop Derivativees Clearinghouses …

The government has been bailing out the giant, insolvent banks for years. (Many of the bailed out banks are foreign.)

That is preventing the economy from recovering … like countries that have grabbed the bull by the horns.

The government has allowed the amount of derivatives to reach 1.2 quadrillion dollars.

That is feeding the parasite of casino gambling … which is preventing the real economy from recovering and is killing the host of actual productivity.

What is the government doing for an encore? Bailing out the derivatives clearinghouses.

As the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday:

Little noticed is that on Tuesday Team Obama took its first formal steps toward putting taxpayers behind Wall Street derivatives trading — not behind banks that might make mistakes in derivatives markets, but behind the trading itself. Yes, the same crew that rails against the dangers of derivatives is quietly positioning these financial instruments directly above the taxpayer safety net.

The authority for this regulatory achievement was inserted into Congress’s pending financial reform bill by then-Senator Chris Dodd.

Specifically, the law authorizes the Federal Reserve to provide “discount and borrowing privileges† to clearinghouses in emergencies.

To get help, they only needed to be deemed “systemically important† by the new Financial Stability Oversight Council chaired by the Treasury Secretary.

Last year regulators finalized rules for how they would use this new power. On Tuesday, they began using it. The Financial Stability Oversight Council secretly voted to proceed toward inducting several derivatives clearinghouses into the too-big-to-fail club. After further review, regulators will make final designations, probably later this year, and will announce publicly the names of institutions deemed systemically important.

We’re told that the clearinghouses of Chicago’s CME Group and Atlanta-based Intercontinental Exchange were voted systemic this week, and rumor has it that the council may even designate London-based LCH.Clearnet as critical to the U.S. financial system.

U.S. taxpayers thinking that they couldn’t possibly be forced to stand behind overseas derivatives trading will not be comforted by remarks from Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler. On Monday he emphasized his determination to extend Dodd-Frank derivatives regulation to overseas markets when subsidiaries of U.S. firms are involved.

If there’s one truth we’ve learned about government financial backstops, it’s that sooner or later they will be used. So eventually taxpayers will have to bail out one derivatives clearinghouse or another. It promises to be quite a mess.

(The government has actually been backstopping derivatives for some time).

Indeed, Nobel prize-winning economist George Akerlof demonstrated that if big companies aren’t held responsible for their actions, the government ends up bailing them out. So failure to prosecute directly leads to a bailout. Bailing them out- in turn – creates incentives for more economic crimes and further destruction of the economy in the future.

As financial incentive expert William Black notes, we’ve known of this dynamic for “hundreds of years†.

Note: It’s not just banks. The government has bailed out hedge funds and companies like McDonald’s and Harley-Davidson.

Indeed, drug dealers kept the banking system afloat during the depths of the 2008 financial crisis. So are the biggest drug cartels “systemically important† and “too big to fail†? Will the U.S. government backstop the Colombian drug lords?

Sure, their actions don’t help society, and instead harm a lot of people. But so do those of the giant banks speculating in derivatives.

And there may be more overlap than admitted in polite company.



SevenTenEleven 

Monday, May 28, 2012 9:06:20 AM

Re: AlanC post# 9868

Post # of 9872

AlanC, regulators are paid off. They are also incompetent. No surprises regarding the Lehman case.

The Federal Reserve is about to commit treason and drop $300T worth of debt on the American people. $300T in debt that they have no power to leverage.

The Revolutionary War was fought over taxation without representation.

Today, on Memorial Day, of all days, let the American People know that what was fought for, in the first war of this nation, is coming full circle.

Instead of the Crown of England taxing the people, it is now the Central Bankers.

The Central Bank is about to make each and every American a servant of the bank. Those that oppose, will be disposed.

Hang them all for Treason!


5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

story starts >> with this post


http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=77752207

specifically this article by peter kennedy most of the way down

===

back story is this >> copy of 2 PMs' sent to 7.10

===

btw .. check this out >> notice the time lapse and first post FMNL

2nd stock now after JBI where i can prove what daily reg sho >> shows >> shell has her uses

==========

#50      PPC ads running    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:57:32 AM    #49      We are on high alert    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:46:38 AM    #48      A cruise would be great too. or get    Heisenberg    05/20/12 02:43:25 AM    #47      I am ready to buy some toys this summer    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:37:37 AM    #46      Very true my friend    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:36:55 AM    #45      Dont matter to me as long as i    Heisenberg    05/20/12 02:36:31 AM    #44      Signs of a money making pick    LARRYMONEY    05/20/12 02:35:46 AM    #43      Who knows    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:35:09 AM    #42      Is this the next LEXG?    LARRYMONEY    05/20/12 02:34:15 AM    #41      Breakout ready imo    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:33:12 AM    #40      FMNL has been walked up from .10 .....    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:32:44 AM    #39      Wow that is great. now with volume this    Heisenberg    05/20/12 02:32:11 AM    #38      Waiting on Mine    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:31:03 AM    #37      Hope they are the glossy kind of physical mailers.    Heisenberg    05/20/12 02:30:40 AM    #36      200k bids were being flashed on Friday    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:30:27 AM    #35      Check out FMNL now    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:29:42 AM    #34      That is what caught my attention. Pullbacks met    Heisenberg    05/20/12 02:29:36 AM    #33      FMNL Hard mailers hitting mailboxes reported    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:28:45 AM    #32      This seems like it could have some upside    Heisenberg    05/20/12 02:28:05 AM    #31      Next week will be fun    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:27:58 AM    #30      Great , i love the buzz picking up    OxfordAlerts    05/20/12 02:27:30 AM    #29      I like it. Guys could play this to    LARRYMONEY    05/20/12 02:09:14 AM    #28      Just sent in a request    LARRYMONEY    05/20/12 02:07:34 AM    #27      Only a matter of time before investors start    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:58:49 AM    #26      The buzz on FMNL is starting to build    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:58:08 AM    #25      Low floater here, could be a sweet runner!    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:54:24 AM    #24      Stockcharts doesn't have the chart yet    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:51:20 AM    #23      chart has been creeping    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:49:35 AM    #22      Loading on any pull backs    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:49:15 AM    #21      Could be the hottest play this summer    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:48:54 AM    #20      I believe in this pick    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:48:24 AM    #19      Are Life Settlements the $170 Billion Elephant in    Bruce Romney    05/20/12 01:43:41 AM    #18      It says strong buy on FMNL    AWESOME Chaser    05/20/12 01:21:29 AM    #17      It has a $2 price target    AWESOME Chaser    05/20/12 01:20:54 AM    #16      I received this pick as a high alert    AWESOME Chaser    05/20/12 01:20:05 AM    #15      Promo rumors could be true after todays activity    LARRYMONEY    05/19/12 12:30:08 AM    #14      Promo rumors could be true after todays activity    LARRYMONEY    05/19/12 12:29:50 AM    #13      Great close    LARRYMONEY    05/19/12 12:27:22 AM    #12      FMNL on watch    LARRYMONEY    05/18/12 03:08:22 PM    #11      Rumor on $750k plus promo starting next week    OxfordAlerts    05/18/12 02:44:04 PM    #10      looks like a pre promo play    OxfordAlerts    05/16/12 01:44:18 PM    #9      Has anyone seen a landing page on this pick?    OxfordAlerts    05/16/12 01:43:53 PM    #8      has anyone seen this great news?    OxfordAlerts    05/16/12 01:43:23 PM    #7      No eyes on this yet    OxfordAlerts    05/16/12 01:43:05 PM    #6      Forum National Investments Reports Record Revenues and Earnings    di4    05/19/09 12:24:11 PM    #5      www.smallcapvoice.com/fmnlf/fmnlf-8-24-07.php Notes from the interview:    matthew288    08/28/07 11:07:36 AM



===
kris



FMNL >>

first batch of posters >>

di4 >> pays sub
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profilea.aspx?user=89305

oxford alerts >> booted
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profilea.aspx?user=284589

larry money >> freebie
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profilea.aspx?user=310763

awesome chaser >> booted
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profilea.aspx?user=343511

bruce romney >> booted
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profilea.aspx?user=333622

heisenberg >> booted
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/profilea.aspx?user=313536

hmmm

===
kris






fourkids_9pets 

Sunday, July 22, 2012 6:40:38 PM

Re: None

Post # of 10924

FMNL >>

basics ..

volume done in june 2012 (top 3 MMs' active)did 3.066.142
or 78.9 percent of the entire month's volume >> VERT did
47.5 percent all by their lonesome >> hmmmm

Total Share Volume     3,882,604     VERT  The Vertical Trading Group    1,846,461            NITE  Knight Execution & Clearing S    902,968            VFIN  vFinance Investments, Inc.    316,713

use the link to check back and see what VERT did in MAY 2012
then check the total lack of volume done >> in prior months

http://www.otcbb.com/asp/tradeact_mv.asp?SearchBy=issue&Issue=FMNL&SortBy=volume&Month=6-1-2012&IMAGE1.x=10&IMAGE1.y=9

this is historical >> to show when stock is frontloaded for the *orchestrated* run .. notice when *interest* ramps up >> 1 month b4

Date            Open    High    Low    Close    Volume        07/20/12    2.55    2.73    2.50    2.70    9,780      07/19/12    2.75    2.75    2.31    2.55    11,286      07/18/12    2.76    3.01    2.51    2.80    31,350      07/17/12    2.30    2.75    2.30    2.66    16,731  07/16/12    2.07    2.44    2.06    2.44    25,926  07/13/12    2.15    2.15    2.15    2.15    2,700      07/12/12    2.15    2.23    2.10    2.22    41,423      07/11/12    2.14    2.15    1.87    2.15    37,422      07/10/12    1.93    2.02    1.81    2.00    39,870      07/09/12    1.70    2.00    1.70    1.95    13,929      07/06/12    1.81    1.90    1.59    1.73    35,492      07/05/12    2.00    2.00    1.73    1.83    26,920      07/03/12    2.18    2.18    1.88    2.00    19,300      07/02/12    1.89    2.14    1.81    2.09    99,911        06/29/12    1.42    1.95    1.42    1.88    66,565      06/28/12    1.22    1.45    1.03    1.42    212,128      06/27/12    1.77    1.79    1.20    1.25    189,523      06/26/12    1.89    1.97    1.77    1.80    16,400      06/25/12    1.76    2.11    1.72    1.90    253,953      06/22/12    1.65    1.95    1.56    1.87    190,151      06/21/12    2.18    2.18    1.80    2.00    40,384      06/20/12    2.01    2.17    2.00    2.17    131,175      06/19/12    1.90    2.08    1.77    2.04    400,453      06/18/12    1.73    1.88    1.47    1.82    342,941      06/15/12    1.43    1.75    1.37    1.66    218,452      06/14/12    1.48    1.54    1.33    1.43    163,354      06/13/12    1.10    1.50    0.93    1.47    360,786      06/12/12    1.19    1.34    1.12    1.18    568,765      06/11/12    1.11    1.18    1.11    1.12    78,534      06/08/12    0.92    1.10    0.92    1.04    237,100      06/07/12    0.93    0.93    0.87    0.92    42,070      06/06/12    0.97    1.00    0.94    0.94    55,250      06/05/12    0.74    1.04    0.70    1.02    228,651      06/04/12    0.76    0.775    0.70    0.74    35,969      06/01/12    0.60    0.68    0.60    0.67    52,500      05/31/12    0.64    0.6401    0.60    0.64    77,720      05/30/12    0.76    0.76    0.61    0.66    110,495      05/29/12    0.79    0.85    0.75    0.75    404,525      05/25/12    0.83    0.83    0.64    0.795    196,664      05/24/12    0.79    0.83    0.70    0.75    71,613      05/23/12    0.935    0.935    0.54    0.84    525,178      05/22/12    0.68    0.95    0.67    0.94    444,084      05/21/12    0.55    0.68    0.548    0.68    410,758  05/18/12    0.45    0.55    0.445    0.55    482,600      05/17/12    0.45    0.45    0.45    0.45    3,777      05/16/12    0.37    0.39    0.365    0.39    45,400      05/14/12    0.31    0.36    0.31    0.36    14,500      05/11/12    0.329    0.329    0.329    0.329    8,500      05/10/12    0.31    0.31    0.30    0.30    55,000      05/09/12    0.333    0.44    0.333    0.44    6,990      05/07/12    0.26    0.32    0.26    0.32    3,900      04/23/12    0.19    0.19    0.19    0.19    14,800    

this is info from 6.19.12 re: promotion

http://newsletter.hotstocked.com/thirdparties/view/Welsson-Financial-Media-3692/

short info can be matched up >> courtesy of daily reg sho link

http://www.otcbb.com/asp/tradeact_mv.asp?SearchBy=issue&Issue=FMNL&SortBy=volume&Month=6-1-2012&IMAGE1.x=10&IMAGE1.y=9

i went back to check some *volume* dates against daily reg sho

starting in may >> when *volume shows* on 5.18.12

  20120518|FMNL|237350|0|438350|O 54.1%   44,250 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 58.3%    20120521|FMNL|214294|0|369294|O = 58%   41,464 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 62.5%    20120522|FMNL|160318|0|316352|O = 50.6%   127,732 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 64.8%    20120523|FMNL|95831|0|446678|O = 21.4%   78,500 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 33.1%    20120529|FMNL|94275|0|381325|O = 24.7%   23,200 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 29%    20120612|FMNL|72175|0|484035|O = 14.9%   84,730 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 27.5%    20120618|FMNL|104914|0|240541|O = 43.6%   102,400 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 60.4%    20120619|FMNL|57932|0|150753|O = 38.4%   249,700 t trade shares *bypass* daily reg sho = 76.8% 

what is interesting to me >> is there is no volume to speak of
after 6.19.12 >> there are 2 days vol is 200k+ and 2 days vol
runs over 189k+ >> after years of documenting trading data
i have a problem when *volume* closely aligns >> whether it's
what gets *reported* by X MM to finra >> or shown via daily trades

now why does this pique my curiosity? > it is because of this headline

Unusual trading in OTC stock sparks probe in British
Columbia

7/20/2012 9:01:18 PM | Peter Kennedy

The BCSC recently halted trading in Vancouver-based Forum National Investments, which saw its stock price soar to over $2.50 from 15 cents earlier this year.

The executive director of the British Columbia Securities Commission has issued a temporary order and notice of hearing against three men and a B.C.-based company over concerns about unusual trading volume and share price increases.

The temporary order bars all trading or transferring of the shares of Forum National Investments Ltd. (OBB: FMNL, Stock Forum), a B.C. reporting issuer that is quoted on the U.S. OTC Bulletin Board and recently saw its share price skyrocket in the wake of a paid promotion campaign.

The executive director initially intervened by issuing a halt trade order on June 28, 2012. But he will aim to have the order extended at a hearing in Vancouver on July 31.

Daniel Clozza, Martin Tutschek and Grant Curtis, all of whom are B.C. residents, are named in the notice of hearing. Clozza is the President, CEO, and director of Forum National, while Tutschek is the chief financial officer and a company director. Curtis is a shareholder.

The notice says BCSC staff is concerned with the unusual trading volume and price increase in the shares of Forum National that occurred between May and June 2012. Staff is also concerned with the apparent attempts to violate or circumvent the halt trade order by transferring or issuing shares of Forum National.

During the relevant period, the market for Forum National shares experienced a sudden increase in trading volume and price. In fact, the market capitalization of Forum National increased from just over US$6 million to over US$120 million.

On April 11, 2012 Forum closed at 15 cents on volume of 110,000, leaving the company with a market cap of $6.4 million, based on 42.4 million shares outstanding.

During May and June, Forum National shares experienced a sudden increase in trading volume and price that coincided with certain news releases and an internet promotion campaign.

On July 18, 2012, Forum National shares closed at US$2.80, raising the market cap to US$120.8 million, based on 43.1 million shares outstanding.

During this sudden increase, Forum National was the subject of an internet promotion campaign funded by undisclosed persons, and the company itself issued seven news releases related to the expansion of its viatical settlement business.

Viatical settlement

According to the BCSC, some of the internet stock promotion websites explicitly stated that over US$650,000 had been spent to promote Forum National. “The internet material was highly promotional and predicted a significant increase in the shares of Forum National, generally projecting a target price of US$10,’’ the BCSC said in the notice of hearing released on Friday.

A viatical settlement is a term used for a settlement involving an insured person who is terminally or chronically ill. It involves the sale of a policy owner’s existing life insurance policy to a third party for more than its cash surrender value, but less than its net death benefit.

Such a sale provides the owner with a lump sum. The third party becomes the new owner of the policy, pays the monthly premiums and receives the full benefit of the policy when the insured dies. According to Wikipedia, purchasing a viatical is similar to buying a zero coupon bond with an uncertain maturity date. The return depends on the seller’s life expectancy and when he or she dies.

The BCSC said the news releases allegedly indicate that between May 15, 2012 and June 25, 2012, Forum National had taken significant steps to expand its viatical insurance settlement business. However, the BCSC says these claims cannot currently be independently verified with publicly available information.

Significant trading

BCSC staff requested that Forum National issue a clarifying news release explaining what role, if any, the company or any of its management had in the promotional internet campaign. To date, the company has declined to issue the release.

Meanwhile, accounts in the name of individuals associated with Clozza engaged significant trading, the BCSC is alleging:

Between April 20, 2012 and June 22, 2012, the account belonging to Clozza’s 74-year-old mother bought 98,600 shares and sold 314,600 shares, for gross profits of $121,697.

Between April 26, 2012 and June 28, 2012, Curtis’s account received a transfer of one million Forum National shares, bought an additional 54,275 shares and sold 735,625 shares for gross profits of $738, 041.

These two accounts are held at a branch of a Vancouver investment dealer, which had at least 52 separate accounts that held positions or traded in Forum National during the relevant period.

These allegations have not been proven. Counsel for the executive director will apply to extend the temporary halt trade order pending an investigation into:

1. The source and funding of the internet material.

2. A connection, if any, between the internet material and the respondents.

3. Reasons for the increased price and trading volume of Forum National shares

4. Attempts to circumvent or violate the halt trade order through transferring and issuing shares of Forum National.

5. Forum National has adequately disclosed the extent to which the company and each of its directors, officers and insiders are involved in or had any knowledge of the Internet material.

6. Forum National has provided the executive director with information that adequately supports the claims make in its news releases.

More allegations about unexplained attempts to transfer shares

The BCSC alleges that on July 5, 2012, Clozza and Tutschek attended the offices of Forum National’s transfer agent in Vancouver. They allegedly carried with them share certificates representing approximately 2.7 million shares of Forum National. Among these, were certificates in the names of Curtis and Tutschek, the Commission alleges.

Clozza allegedly instructed the transfer agent to “overnight” transfer share certificates into the name of a Bahamian company by way of a U.S. brokerage firm. The transfer agent allegedly informed the commission.

On July 16, 2012, Tutschek allegedly sent the transfer agent a treasury direction signed by Clozza and Tutschek on July 11, 2012, directing it to issue share certificates representing 137,500 shares in Forum National. The transfer agent refused.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Peter Kennedy
Peter Kennedy is a Stockhouse reporter and web content editor.


===
disclosure >> i hold zero shares of FMNL >> but find the timing
interesting >> electronic footprints clearly exist and as i've
posted a few 1000 x over >> daily reg sho shows true re: buys

what is stunning to me is the ability to HIDE >> behind t trades
that bypass daily reg sho

will be watching >> rt l2 >> to see what comes to pass

===
4kids
all jmo



5T WD haha

BMFL<OD

next week(s) is here

Who's Next!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfuWXRZe9yA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQBLi5mukm


Shortmans Anthem!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRge7lXu56E

Hello. And Bye.

Этот блог - centeres.ru посвящен строительной тематики.
В нем размещаются статьи на тему строительства,
ремонту квартир, строительных советов, отделка и
множество других статей.
У нас вы найдете множество полезной строительной информации,
строительные статьи, новости, обзоры, сможете ознакомиться
с предстоящими выставками...

Mixing time, alas, to not refer to the bloody mercenary group of people whispering that He the Lord every last loved ones mainly because the emergence of Xiao Yan, gloomy eyes is Dayton in the latter, his power is naturally not see Xiao Yan shades, but just like velocity on the latter indicate out, but so was his modest worry, usually, I am concerned the 1st time is hands to kill. He family was the most crucial hearts strategy flashes involving Xiao Yan facial area however Furui no wave, reduced human body card gang pulled with the ground, checking out his pale encounter, frown, then an immortality into its mouth heart and soul secretly sneer, this guy honestly is not a light start off to swallow immortality card gang pale complexion are a few Xuhong Operate emotion. His hand trembling, clutching the Xiao Yan Xiupao, like over-excited, not even a.

Surface area Scarlet flame