I challenge any of you to tell me you would agree to lend your stock to be used in this way. I suspect no one here would agree to having your stock depreciated in this matter. Wall Street knows this and had the power to stop the selling of their stock short and avoided destroying the value of their shares.

A small 401k investor does not have the power to protect his stock’s value.

From what I can tell, he seems to be stating that, potential loaners of shares with “inside knowledge” of certain companies, might be setting the shorts up for a beating from time to time.

I am a large fan of Deep Capture and the coalition’s work, at the same time I am always trying to find objectivity.

As an investor, I am finding the lack of transparency on the institutional side of the equation, to be just as perplexing and without full disclosure.

For fun, I’m going to watch the video now.

How in the hell can the regulatory authorities for publicly traded equities look the other way when it concerns “NAKED SHORT SELLING” WITH THE ABILITY TO COVER THOSE NAKED SHORT SHARES THAT WERE SOLD NAKED SHORT THREE YEARS EARLIER, THREE YEARS LATER BY STAGING ACTUALTRADES AND THEN ADDING TWO EXTERNALLY ADDED ZEROS TO THE VOLUME OF THESE ACTUAL TRADES!! You therefore have covered 5,000,000 plus “NAKED SHORT SALES” of Daleco Resources Corp three years later, with 1/100 of the actual volume of shares that were sold “NAKED SHORT” !! Who will ever pay any capital gains taxes on this transaction, since the transaction has been able to circumvent any scrutiny by any regulatory authority in the United States?

Marv Eatinger

—– Original Message —–
From: marv eatinger
To: ENFORCEMENT ; Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 7:42 PM
Subject: DALECO RESOURCES CORP – WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. – JB OXFORD & CO – JB OXFORD HOLDINGS – J.B. OXFORD SUBSIDIARY “NATIONAL CLEARING CORP.”

Dear Regulatory Authorities For Publicly Traded Equities On United States Markets:
Was Wall Street Equities, Inc. who was one of Daleco Resources Corp Market Makers from March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 while Daleco was delisted to the Pink Sheets from the OTCBB market, involved in “Naked Short Selling” of Daleco’s common stock and the fraudulent addition of TWO ZEROS to all of Daleco’s actual trades from March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 while Daleco was using two symbols of DLOV & DLVO while listed only the Pink Sheets????

Is it like BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER?

Sincerely,

Marv Eatinger
================================================================
The following hypothesis is presented for evaluation:

From approximately December 1, 1996 through January of 1997 Daleco Resources Corp had more than 9,000,000 Regulation “S” shares traded on the NASDAQ Market. WAS WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. (DISCOUNT BROKER IN NEW YORK) ONE OF DALECO RESOURCES CORP MARKET MAKERS? How was Wall Street Equities, Inc. of Rhode Island connected to Wall Street Equities, Inc. of New York?

On February 24, 1998 (official record) Daleco Resources Corp effected a 1 for 10 reverse split of its common stock. Prior to this February 24, 1998 date Daleco Resources Corp issued a press release stating that the effective date for the 1 for 10 reverse split was February 17, 1998! There is good evidence that Daleco was able to disguise and hide from the SEC in Daleco’s public filings, that this 1 for 10 reverse split ever took place. IS IT POSSIBLE THAT DALECO RESOURCES CORP HAD AN OFFICIAL EFFECTIVE REVERSE SPLIT DATE OF FEBRUARY 24, 1998 (DALECO’S PUBLIC FILINGS WITH THE SEC), BUT ALSO HAD AN EFFECTIVE REVERSE SPLIT DATE OF FEBRUARY 17, 1998 (AS CHANGED WITH ITS CHARTER IN DELAWARE WITH FILING ON FEB. 17, 1998 WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF DELAWARE’S OFFICE) AS PART OF A DUAL AGENDA? INSTEAD OF A 1 FOR 10 REVERSE SPLIT, IT MIGHT BE CONSTRUED AS A 1 FOR 100 REVERSE SPLIT AS PART OF A DUAL AGENDA?

From March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 (while Daleco Resources Corp was deleted from the OTCBB and only listed on the Pink Sheets) Daleco Resources Corp had trading volume of 13,451,000 as shown on http://www.moneycentral.com historical data. http://WWW.YAHOO.COM finance shows Daleco’s (symbol DLOV.OB) total trading volume for the period starting March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 as 144,500 shares. So, as associated with some certain area of regulatory control for public equities, Daleco Resources Corp would appear to have traded a total volume of 13,451,000 shares from March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000, when in fact Daleco Resources Corp only traded a total volume of 144,500 shares DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME!

FACT: UNDER ONE OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED DUAL AGENDAS DALECO RESOURCES CORP HAD TWO ZEROS ADDED TO THEIR ACTUAL DAILY TRADING VOLUME FROM MARCH 1, 2000 TO AUGUST 1, 2000 WHILE DALECO WAS ONLY LISTED ON THE PINK SHEETS AND USING TWO SYMBOLS OF “DLOV” AND “DLVO” !

During the period of time from March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 Wall Street Equities, Inc. (discount broker in New York) was one of four market makers for Daleco Resources Corp while trading on the Pink Sheets.

IN APRIL OF YEAR 2002 WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. SOLD ALL OF THEIR ACCOUNTS TO J.B. OXFORD AND WENT OUT OF BUSINESS!!!!!
[ "J.B. Oxford, which sold off its main operations in 2004 as regulators closed in, did not return calls seeking comment." ]

================================================

ARCHIVED RECORD…ID# 89337
Wall Street Equities, Inc.
Purpose: INVESTMSNT MANAGEMENT, ACQUISITIONS, FINANCIAL SERVICES,CAPITAL GROWTH AND ACQUISITION.
General Information
Status: RC
Charter: DBC
Chapter: TITLE: 7-1.1-51
State: RHODE ISLAND
Duration: PERPETUAL
File Date: 04/29/1996
Effective Date:N/A
Last Report Date: N/A
Archived Date: 09/20/1999
Annual Report Image: Not available
Help On Viewing Annual Reports

Sic Code: 6130–

Authorized Shares: 1,000 SHS NO PAR COMMON

====================================

Publication: Business Wire
Publication Date: 03-APR-02
Format: Online – approximately words
Delivery: Immediate Online Access

Article Excerpt
Business Editors

LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–April 3, 2002

With Its Fourth Acquisition, JB Oxford to Gain 3,800 Accounts

and $140 Million in Customer Assets

JB Oxford Holdings, Inc. (Nasdaq:JBOH), which through its JB Oxford & Company subsidiary is a leading provider of discount brokerage services to clients nationwide, has signed an asset purchase agreement to purchase the customer accounts of Wall Street Equities, Inc., a New York-based discount brokerage firm. Under the terms of the all-stock transaction, JB Oxford & Company…

=================
—– Original Message —–
From: “Ron Franz”
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: [CSI Website Query: daily volume figures multiplied by 100 - symbol DLOV]

>I had them remove the extra digits.
> Yahoo should have it corrected by this afternoon.
> Please let me know if you do not see the corrections.
> Thank You,
>
>
> marv@mitec.net wrote:
>> Regarding:
>> Data Error Report
>>
>>
>> Message:
>> On March 7, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 2,300 shares: FinancialWeb.com and Quicken.com.
>>
>> On March 8, 2000 the following web sites showed volume for the day for DLOV – Daleco Resources CP of 26,200 shares: FinancialWeb.com, Quicken.com and MSN Money Central.com.
>>
>> On March 13, 2000 Barchart.com showed DLOV – Daleco Resources Corp volume for the day as 2,000 shares.
>>
>> Daleco Resources Corp was deleted from the OTCBB to the Pink Sheets on February 22, 2000 to be effective on February 28, 2000. Yahoo Finance & MoneyCentral web sites are presently the only web sites that I can find that show Historical Volume figures for the time period of March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000 when Daleco Resources Corp was listed only on the Pink Sheets.
>>
>> Yahoo Finance Historical Volume figures for the above mentioned dates is shown as follows:
>> March 7, 2000——————–230,000 shares
>>
>> March 8, 2000——————2,620,000 shares
>>
>> March 13, 2000——————200,000 shares
>>
>> Apparently from the period starting March 1, 2000 to August 1, 2000, all trades that took place in Daleco’s stock had two zeros added to the daily trading volume!
>>
>>
>> From:
>> marv@mitec.net

http://seekingalpha.com/article/129192-overstock-com-questionable-payment-to-director-consultant?source=yahoo

Buyers will always seek the lower price. Short Sellers have an incentive to drive the price down. Therefore, as they are selling the shares that they borrow (or don’t), it is very easy for them to say to a potential buyer “Look, XYZ just traded for $100 per share. I can sell it to you for $97, $96, $95…..

So, if they are providing a share (and that is a big IF) for a lower price, a buyer is always going to take advantage of the opportunity to buy at a lower price. So, this notion that Short Sellers are helping to “discover the fair price” is absurd because they are incentivized to drive the price down. When you factor that in with the now widely-held belief that many Short Sellers are not borrowing or delivering the share that they are selling, it is going to do great damage to share prices.

Why is it that the only people who don’t seem to understand this are those who are strongly in favor of (and likely profiting from) Short Selling??

http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/nail-the-shorts/

“1. Immediate seizure of the DTCC by the Department of Justice.

2. Followed by full public disclosure of the real securities “float” of all publicly traded U.S. corporations, which would include all “securities entitlements”.”

It’s too confusing for the layman to realize what’s going on.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=BCOM&date=20090408&id=9773028

By Joseph Checkler

Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–Noted short seller James Chanos said Wednesday that Securities and Exchange Commission proposals to curb short sellers must be weighed against the possibility of “ill-conceived” government intervention, in a statement made in his capacity as chairman of the Coalition of Private Investment Companies.

CPIC issued the statement in response to the SEC’s vote Wednesday morning to seek public comments on all proposed rules that would limit short sales.

“Skeptics, independent research and critical analysis must continue to play a vibrant role for our markets to grow sustainably and with integrity,” Chanos said.

The SEC will consider two kinds of proposals: one that would create market-wide restrictions and another that would look at individual securities. Among the considerations is the restoration of the “uptick” rule, which allows a stock to be shorted only if the last trade price was higher than the previous price.

“Proposals to inhibit short selling have the effect of limiting this vital market-based antidote to corporate fraud and speculative bubbles, and must be carefully weighed against the clear harm that comes from ill-conceived government intervention in basic market functions,” Chanos said.

Chanos, who runs Kynikos Associates, is famous for making the right call on Enron Corp. (ENE), which he started investigating in 2000, a year before the company’s collapse.

CPIC is a group of private investment companies.

-By Joseph Checkler; Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4297; joseph.checkler@dowjones.com

Stay away from language that can be deflected into short selling in general, or the cause of the meltdown, etc. Just stay focused on: DELIVERY OF WHAT IS SOLD.

That message is more likely to spread.

(You will notice that Manuel did not speak to that matter at all.)

It strikes me how much the behavior of Manuel resembles behavior exhibited by the Emperors of the past. As far as I can tell, people like Manuel are being used to further the interest of someone wishing to destroy the modern concepts of the corporate entity, of which Overstock is one example.

Even if success is achieved, and naked short selling is stopped, the other areas in which the corporate entity is under attack will need concerted defensive effort, and the attacking force (for lack of a better term) should be discovered and, stressed (as it were) if modernity is to survive.

I’m taking down Manuel’s address. No more of that, please.

Patrick

And even then, there is no guarantee that they will enforce their own regulations.

The only way to really cure it is to pass legislation along the lines recently proposed, but which additoinally makes it clear that a violation is criminal and can be investigated by DOJ. The SEC should be given regulatory oversight and compelled to enforce as well, but in the end there should be criminal actions.

In contrast, those who take a long position are financing a prospective creation of wealth, as the equity issuer endeavors to make and market products and/or services at a profit. This is a greater than zero-sum game, especially in the aggregate. The purchase of stock also aids price discovery.

The incentives are different – the short seller seeks to take as much as possible away from the investor. The investor seeks to gain from wealth creation by the company. Both positions can benefit from manipulation and fraud of course, but the ability of certain of the former to sell shares without restraint nor fear of meaningful punishment has made this a preferred means of acquiring – stealing – vast wealth through fraud. Those who would “pump and dump” are constrained, after all, by the limited number of shares that can be bought. They also have to reverse their trade at one point, not necessarily the case for the fraudulent short seller.

One other aspect of contrasting manipulations is that short-selling fraudsters can mount an attack on the holdings of existing shareholders who had evaluated a company’s business and prospects prior to a fraudulent short-selling attack. Such shareholders may have made a very rational decision, based upon due diligence, to purchase ownership in a company whose prospects appear favorable. A pump and dump scheme depends on attracting gullible speculators who can only be buying on the basis of momentum, sans any reasonable due diligence.

The vulnerability to fraudulent short selling of companies with relatively thinly traded shares has become more and more obvious over the past several years, thanks in large part to the efforts of the creators and contributors of this site. This growing visibility, while helping the investor to recognize where the thieves may strike, has unfortunately dramatically increased the cost of capital for young, innovative companies that have historically been the source of many new jobs and wealth creation in this country. We – or more precisely, the SEC – have allowed the crooks to kill our young and/or those who would otherwise be only temporarily weak.

Claiming that NSS strengthens markets is akin the saying that releasing a pack of wolves into a pasture would strengthen a flock of sheep. First the young and weak are eaten as the wolves feast. As the wolves grow in strength the flock ceases to grow and actually begins to shrink. The wolves work together to isolate and take down even the strong , until none are safe. Sounds like the markets today, doesn’t it?

Make all short selling illegal!

Personalizing it allows one to see the thug and then is motivated to address.

* When pressed, Compos only responded that the reason against naked selling is (paraphrasing) “that is how we’ve always done it” and gave no tabgible reasons against naked shorting, like, oh, if legaliazed one can “sell” all or MORE then the public float of these “virtual” shares.
* Asencio only stated that it stops the shorters from doing their jobs of “finding the correct price” (whatever the hell that means) with no explaination of WHY abolishing Naked Shorting would prevent short sellers from doing this.
* The reporter seemed quite uninformed on the subject as her questioning was, at best, homoginized. I expect more from Bloomberg.

I choked when I read that (teach me to drink coffee and read at the same time).

From the link posted in Jim Hall’s post.
http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN0851574420090408

http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN0851574420090408

Due to the phraseology used in UCC Article 8-501 until there is appreciation of the underlying concept that ANY failure to deliver securities by T+3 results in the “issuance” of readily sellable “shares” albeit “shares” that TECHNICALLY have no “legal owner” and that are TECHNICALLY not “outstanding” then attempts at truly meaningful reform will fall short. The tricky nature of “securities entitlements” in which the holder has to be treated as having the right “to exercise all of the rights and property interest that comprise that security” needs to be appreciated as this is also the definition of a “share”. Whether the “shares” being “issued” with each and every failure to deliver TECHNICALLY have a “legal owner” or TECHNICALLY are “outstanding” makes no difference as they are still readily sellable as if they were legitimate “shares” issued by a corporation. They have all of the share price depressant effect from a dilutional point of view as the real McCoy.

“There is absolutely no economic reason why America should cause and force short sellers to borrow stock.”

…The America I live in has something about this written into it’s Constitution…Article 1 section 10 to be exact…and that states:

“No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or LAW IMPAIRING THE OBLIGATION OF CONTRACTS [capitalized for emphasis], or grant any Title of Nobility.”

Perhaps a little lesson in history is in order for Mr. Asensio. Part of the idea behind this particular clause was to curtail the practice of “private relief” laws written by state legislatures, laws that essentially forgave certain colonial debtors from their obligations to their creditors. This made it entirely too risky for foreign creditors and merchants to consider making any sort of investment, because they stood to lose 100% of their investment and had no method of legally enforcing their contracts. Without foreign investors and merchants, America never would have made it out of its infancy to become the economic powerhouse that we are known as throughout the world today.

There is an extremely valid economic reason for America to “cause and force short sellers to borrow stock”, because if there is no safe way to enforce our purchase contracts and protect our investments, we will stop investing altogether, and our market will choke and die.

I hope this video makes it to all the dark corners of the internet, people need to hear this garbage straight from the horse’s mouth to really appreciate the distorted views and outrageous mindset held by the very people who have perpetrated this fraud on our marketplace.