http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/basel.php

In other words, they are crashing the economy for a reason.

Hollywood, CA (PRWEB) June 16, 2009 — “Stock Shock” is the first of 3 major films to be released about the fleecing of the American investor. This timely movie reveals the tricks of traders who use lightening fast market technology to make profitable bets on stocks they never even own, landing legitimate investors in the poorhouse. “Stock Shock” is told through the eyes of stunned Sirius XM investors who saw their stock nearly evaporate.

Stock Manipulators Celebrate Gains

This movie exposes a technique known as naked short selling, which has resulted in the collapse of the stock value of some of America’s most famous and promising public companies, all so that a small handful of jaded market manipulators could make a fast buck.

Thousands of investors have flocked to “Stock Shock” fan sites in anticipation of the release of the movie. Tens of thousands of American investors are twittering Stock Shock developments as word of the film and its message spreads.

“Stock Shock” zeroes in on one of the most shorted stocks on Nasdaq: Sirius XM, which hit a high of $9.00/share and then plummeted to a horrifying low of 5 cents in 2009, leaving an estimated one million investors with their dreams crushed and their bank accounts emptied. Stock Shock interviews individual investors who lost their shirts and who are in a rage because it didn’t have to happen.

Michael Moore, Oliver Stone and Ridley Scott are all working on films about this latest round of greed. But “Stock Shock” is first out of the gate.

“Shocking and eye opening,” says CNN Headline News TV Host Jane Velez-Mitchell of the film, “Stock Shock offers a clear and simple explanation of some of the most complex financial shenanigans in the history of the markets.”

“This fraud has wiped out thousands of companies, millions of jobs and billions of investment dollars. No part of the American economy is unaffected.” So says Bud Burrell, industry expert and shareholder advocate adding “You don’t annihilate the companies in this economy that create new jobs without destroying the entire country.”

Movie Director and select cast available for interviews.

For inquiring minds, a “Failure to Deliver” position or “FTD” is a “Naked Short” position. See the important video below by Senator Robert F. Bennett that all investors should see as it is very short while making concise statements explaining a major issue within the market for all to fully understand:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=652216599&play=1

“Rule 204T requires clearing firms, by 9:30 a.m. on the day after settlement date, which is the third day after the trade, or T+3, to close out short sales that did not settle. The SEC added Rule 204T to Regulation SHO to counter naked short selling, in which investors fail to borrow the shares needed for settlement. Abusive naked short selling occurs when investors deliberately don’t borrow the shares.

The SEC’s rule imposes strict penalties on firms whose internal desks or customers flout the new rule. Until the failed trades settle, those firms must “pre-borrow” (arrange in advance to borrow) shares for new short sales in that name, instead of simply locating the shares. That raises trading costs for those firms.”

…. So let me get this straight in my mind – the author stated……:

“The SEC’s rule imposes strict penalties on firms whose internal desks or customers flout the new rule. Until the failed trades settle, those firms must “pre-borrow” (arrange in advance to borrow) shares for new short sales in that name, instead of simply locating the shares. That raises trading costs for those firms.”

….. if any “clearing firms” engages in abusive naked short counterfeit selling, they are “PENALIZED” by requiring the clearing firm to “PRE-BORROW” REAL SHARES of STOCK BEFORE sell can sell any additional shares of a specific stock?

… And this “PRE-BORROW” requirement of REAL SHARES of STOCK raises the trading costs a clearing firm engaged in Counterfeit Naked Short Selling?

WOW, what a horrendous penality…. – the Counterfeiting Clearing firm is then ONLY allowed to sell REAL SHARES OF A COMPANY STOCK!!!!!!!

Requiring a clearing firm to sell ONLY REAL SHARES of Stock is the PENALTY!!!

Only the Wall Street Counterfeit Machine would call this requirement a PENALTY!!!

If any of us common people were to sell a car which we did not delivery after receiving a payment for 100% the cost of the car, the penalty would be JAIL TIME!… not the requirement of only SELLING REAL CARS!!

June 2009

The Securities and Exchange Commission is expected to make permanent an emergency order it instituted last September to reduce naked short selling. The temporary rule, known as Rule 204T, was put in place when markets were in free fall and investors blamed abusive short-selling practices for the decline. The rule expires on July 31.

“I expect the Commission to consider adoption of that [rule],” said James Brigagliano, co-acting director of the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets. He added that the SEC could “adopt it as it exists or in response to comments” from the industry. Brigagliano spoke at a Security Traders Association conference in Washington, D.C., last month.

Kevin Cronin

Rule 204T requires clearing firms, by 9:30 a.m. on the day after settlement date, which is the third day after the trade, or T+3, to close out short sales that did not settle. The SEC added Rule 204T to Regulation SHO to counter naked short selling, in which investors fail to borrow the shares needed for settlement. Abusive naked short selling occurs when investors deliberately don’t borrow the shares.

The SEC’s rule imposes strict penalties on firms whose internal desks or customers flout the new rule. Until the failed trades settle, those firms must “pre-borrow” (arrange in advance to borrow) shares for new short sales in that name, instead of simply locating the shares. That raises trading costs for those firms.

Richard Ketchum, the newly installed head of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, called Rule 204T a success. “It’s remarkable how well that has worked,” he said at the STA conference. He noted that it was implemented “in a fairly short time when firms didn’t even have technology systems in place.”

Industry members also support the rule. Kevin Cronin, director of global equity trading at mutual fund giant Invesco, said the problem of naked short selling “has been effectively dealt with through Rule 204T.” At last month’s SEC roundtable discussion on short selling, Cronin said the rule should be made permanent.

According to the SEC’s Office of Economic Analysis, the average daily number of stocks on the “threshold list” of securities (those with large and persistent levels of failures-to-deliver, which represent stock sold short whose shares were never borrowed) decreased to 63 per day in March, down from nearly 600 last July. Overall, the daily fails in all securities declined 81 percent to 0.43 billion shares on March 31, from a high of 2.2 billion shares last July 16. Fails can result from abusive naked short selling as well as operational glitches.

———vvv——-vvv——-
But not everybody thinks the SEC is off the hook. Roel Campos, a former SEC commissioner who is now a partner at law firm Cooley Godward Kronish, credits the SEC with reducing fails. But he doesn’t think the agency went far enough. “Failures-to-deliver, a proxy for naked short selling, continue to occur in companies that do not appear on the Regulation SHO threshold list,” he wrote in a letter to the SEC on behalf of a dozen issuers. This can happen when the company has a large number of shares outstanding, raising the bar to get on the threshold list. Campos thinks the SEC should require investors to pre-borrow shares for all short sales.

( http://www.tradersmagazine.com/issues/20_295/short-sales-fails-sec-103844-1.html )

Commentary: Awaiting the Next Pecora Commission
By Stephen J Nelson; The Nelson Law Firm, LLC

June 13, 2009

On May 20, 2009, President Obama signed into law the “Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (FERA),” legislation enacted in response to the financial crisis by an overwhelming vote of both houses of Congress.

As one might expect, the Act raises penalties for financial fraud, expands the reach of government agencies, including the SEC, to investigate fraud, and expands the type of instruments that would be covered by existing prohibitions on fraudulent activities. It is a typical legislative response to ramp up enforcement resources in response to notorious criminal behavior. Old movie buffs will recall that the good citizens of Dodge City hired Wyatt Earp when things had gotten out of hand.

FERA also creates, within the legislative branch, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission to determine what caused the current financial crisis. The establishment of the Commission is intended to recreate the success of the famous Pecora Investigation, which examined the causes of the First Great Depression.
There actually was no “Pecora Commission.”

On March 4, 1932, the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency launched an investigation into the causes of the 1929 Market Crash. The Senate at the time was Republican controlled, and Democrats charged that the whole thing was a white wash. In 1933, the now Democratic controlled Senate hired Ferdinand Pecora, a New York assistant district attorney, to write the final committee’s report. He found the investigation was incomplete, and asked for an additional month of hearings.

Pecora conducted the hearings loaded for bear. His expose of National City Bank (now Citibank) caused the resignation of its president. Under Pecora’s grilling, JP Morgan admitted that he, and many of his partners, had paid no income taxes in 1931 and 1932, resulting in a huge public outcry.

But the greatest success of the Pecora investigation was its public exposure of a wide range of abusive practices by banks and their affiliates. Among other things, Pecora was able to place on the public record evidence of banks underwriting unsound securities to pay off bad bank loans and pools created to support market prices of bank stocks.

The hearings resulted in massive public support for new regulations. Congress responded by passing in rapid fire order the Glass-Steagall Banking Act of 1933 to separate commercial and investment banking, the Securities Act of 1933 to set penalties for filing false information about stock offerings, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which formed the SEC to regulate the stock exchanges.

The FERA Commission has been charged to examine a list of twenty-two potential causes of the financial crisis. Among other things, these include the failures of federal and state regulators, monetary policies, global imbalances in savings, trade flows and fiscal imbalances of various governments, accounting practices, tax treatment of financial products, lending practices and securitization, derivatives and short selling. Compensation is on the list twice, as compensation structures generally and compensation for employees of financial services firms in particular. Finally, the Commission is required to examine the causes of each major financial institution that failed, or would have failed without exceptional governmental assistance.

To accomplish all of this, the Commission is empowered to hold hearings, subpoena witnesses, and retain staff, including consultants. I expect the Commission will seek outside legal help, and if so, we will submit our application to assist the Commission in its work.

Will the FERA Commission match the success of the Pecora Investigation? If so, we should see a substantial change in financial services regulation in the wake of its final report.

One thing that makes this seem unlikely is that the Commission’s report is due on December 15, 2010. The Obama administration, as well as the relevant Committees in the House and Senate, seemed determine to introduce legislation later this year, a full year before the Commission’s work is complete. If this effort succeeds, the FERA Commission’s report will be anticlimactic.

Rumors emanating from the House and Senate, as well as the White House, suggest that the zeal for regulatory reform has diminished, as the economic outlook appears to be brightening. The legislation developed this year will reflect economic conditions. If the favorable economic trend continues, the vaunted reforms that result from the crisis are likely to be fairly modest.

On the other hand, if the current improvement in financial conditions is temporary, we may be knee-deep in financial tragedy next year. The FERA Commission’s report in 2010 would then be very timely and result in a regulatory upheaval. As is so often the case, events on the ground will determine the outcome.

*****

Stephen J. Nelson is a principal of The Nelson Law Firm in White Plains, N.Y. Nelson is a weekly contributor and columnist to Traders Magazine’s online edition. He can be reached at sjnelson@nelsonlf.com

And the Obama administration’s failure to quickly and adequately address the issues of market manipulation and naked short selling is absolutely fair game….

What do you all think?

DALECO RESOURCES INC AS FOLLOWS:

Entity Information: DALECO RESOURCES INC
PO BOX 483 C/O DALE CHEPULIS,PRESIDENT
LEWISVILLE, TX 75067-0483

Status: NOT IN GOOD STANDING
Registered Agent: DALE M CHEPULIS
4999 LUSK LANE
DOUBLE OAK, TX 75028
Registered Agent Resignation Date:
State of Formation: TX
File Number: 0112441900
SOS Registration Date: August 22, 1989
Taxpayer Number: 17522921778

—– Original Message —–
From: marv eatinger
To: philip.long@yale.edu
Cc: franzese@ou.edu
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 8:01 PM
Subject: REGULATORY CONTROL – HISTORICAL DATA – DUE DILIGENCE & THE AVERAGE INVESTOR?

[PDF]
CRSP Data Definitions and Coding Schemes Guide
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
Daleco Resources, Inc. 85619. Meditrust Corp. … PERMCO is a unique permanent company identification number assigned by CRSP to all …
http://www.som.yale.edu/itg/research_unix/pdf/data_defs.pdf – Similar pages

http://www.som.yale.edu/itg/research_unix/pdf/data_defs.pdf

http://WWW.SOM.YALE.EDU:

FROM PAGE 9 OF THE ABOVE SHOWN YALE.EDU PDF: THE FOLLOWING ISSUES WITH DATA PRIOR TO 1998 HAVE BEEN ADDED TO
THE DATA FILE:

PERMNO NAME
78387 DALECO RESOURCES, INC.

AFTER READING APPENDIX B: CRSP TERMINOLOGY (PAGE 177 OF 210), I AM COMPELLED TO ASK THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: HOW
DID DALECO RESOURCES, INC. EVER END UP BEING SHOWN WITH A PERMNO NUMBER OF 78387 FOR THE YEAR OF 1998????? IN
EVERY FILING THAT DALECO RESOURCES CORP OR DALECO RESOURCES CORPORATION HAS FILED WITH THE SEC, DALECO
RESOURCES, INC. HAS NEVER ENTERED THE PICTURE AS ASSOCIATED WITH DALECO RESOURCES CORP OR DALECO
RESOURCES CORPORATION!

CRSP THROUGH YEAR 1998 SHOWS DALECO RESOURCES, INC. WITH A CRSP PERMNO NUMBER OF 78387. DOES THIS CRSP NUMBER
OF 78387 REALIZE THE EFFECT OF DALECO RESOURCES CORP APPARENT EFFECTIVE REVERSE 1 FOR 10 COMMON STOCK SPLIT DATES
OF FEBRUARY 17, 1998 AND FEBRUARY 24, 1998? NOTICE THAT DALECO RESOURCES CORP NEVER USED CUSIP NUMBER OF 23437P208
(POST REVERSE SPLIT CUSIP NUMBER AS COMPARED TO 23437P109 PRE REVERSE SPLIT NUMBER) ON ANY OF DALECO’S FORM
12B-25 FILINGS WITH THE SEC AFTER FEBRUARY 24, 1998 (COPIES OF 12B-25 FILINGS SHOWN BELOW)!
============================================================================================================
“On February 17, 1998 by BUSINESS WIRE (BW1566) Wayne, Pa. and REUTERS (15:46 02-17-98) Wayne, Pa. Daleco Resources Corp
issued a Press Release that included the following information: In the annual meeting held on Feb. 16, 1998 the shareholders
overwhelmingly approved the board of directors proposed amendment for a ten for one reverse split of the company’s common shares.

The effective date for the reverse stock split is Feb. 17, 1998.”
=============================================================================================================
“FROM 10KSB REPORT FILED BY DALECO RESOURCES CORP ON MAY 18, 1999 WITH THE SEC – PAGE 39 – NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPT. 30, 1998, 1997 AND 1996: Item k.
k. Reverse Stock Split

Effective February 24, 1998, the majority of
stockholders of the Company approved a reverse
ten-for-one stock split. The effect of the reverse
stock split has been retroactively reflected in these
financial statements. All reference to the number of
common and preferred shares, stock options, warrants,
and per share amounts elsewhere in these financial
statements and related footnotes have been restated
as appropriate to reflect the effect of the reverse
split for all periods presented.”
============================================================================================================

DALECO RESOURCES CORPORATION (OTCBB) FORM 12(b)-25 SEC FILINGS USING CUSIP NO. 23437P109 AS A REFERENCE:

FORM 12(b)-25 CUSIP NO. 23437P109 FORM 12(b)-25 SEC FILING DATE

NT 10-Q YES FEB. 11, 2005

NT 10-K NONE DEC. 28, 2004

NT 10-K YES DEC. 29, 2003

NT 10-K YES DEC. 30, 2002

NT 10-K YES DEC. 27, 2001

NT 10-K YES DEC. 28, 2000

NT 10-K NONE DEC. 29, 1999

NT 10-Q YES AUG. 13, 1999

NT 10-K NONE DEC. 30, 1998
===============================================================================================================================

Marv Eatinger
711 no. 92ct #408
Omaha, NE 68114

Telephone: 402-391-7536