<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Well, Isn&#8217;t That Special?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/</link>
	<description>Investigating naked short selling, economic warfare, and the financial crisis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:53:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara Perkins-Applebaum</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-150001</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Perkins-Applebaum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:51:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-150001</guid>
		<description>As you know, I am not some great wall street financier nor am I an economist. However, doesn&#039;t the recent failings of Wall street affirm what you have been trying to say for years?

Being vocal about misconduct and corporate espionage once cost me a job. I turned in a group of people for reading the CEO&#039;s and COO&#039;s email. The harassment that followed by the CTO and his son was so bad I finally just quit. However, I am sure it is nothing compared to the insults and harassments you have received by pointing out the obvious.

In the end, my tormentors lost their Jobs too, even their stock options. 
I am sure those who have harassed and harangued you are some of the folks getting blasted and resigning from their positions in disgrace.

Karma it always comes around..sometimes it just takes a bit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As you know, I am not some great wall street financier nor am I an economist. However, doesn&#8217;t the recent failings of Wall street affirm what you have been trying to say for years?</p>
<p>Being vocal about misconduct and corporate espionage once cost me a job. I turned in a group of people for reading the CEO&#8217;s and COO&#8217;s email. The harassment that followed by the CTO and his son was so bad I finally just quit. However, I am sure it is nothing compared to the insults and harassments you have received by pointing out the obvious.</p>
<p>In the end, my tormentors lost their Jobs too, even their stock options.<br />
I am sure those who have harassed and harangued you are some of the folks getting blasted and resigning from their positions in disgrace.</p>
<p>Karma it always comes around..sometimes it just takes a bit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jburke6000</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149969</link>
		<dc:creator>jburke6000</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149969</guid>
		<description>Dr. Byrne,
Apparently we have a mutual friend. He is a pilot that had the pleasure of flying you recently. He related my appreciation for your site, your work, and the work of your friends at Deep Capture. 
Well Done!
I always knew you were dead on. It&#039;s a shame the crooks had to collapse the economy to prove it. 
Keep It Coming! They can&#039;t ignore it now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dr. Byrne,<br />
Apparently we have a mutual friend. He is a pilot that had the pleasure of flying you recently. He related my appreciation for your site, your work, and the work of your friends at Deep Capture.<br />
Well Done!<br />
I always knew you were dead on. It&#8217;s a shame the crooks had to collapse the economy to prove it.<br />
Keep It Coming! They can&#8217;t ignore it now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RVAC106</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149861</link>
		<dc:creator>RVAC106</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 19:09:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149861</guid>
		<description>For further clarification....

Based on the above chart, how much money was looted from the shareholders of SearsHoldings between January and December of 2008?

I estimated that 3.8 Billion was looted from the shareholders of Verasun, but that was easy, &#039;cause they were shut down completely through bankruptcy.  

How much did they get away with, from Sears?

How much did they get away with, from GM?
From Lehman?

But, let&#039;s not get carried away.  Let&#039;s just concentrate on Sears....

How much?

At your convenience...

RVAC</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For further clarification&#8230;.</p>
<p>Based on the above chart, how much money was looted from the shareholders of SearsHoldings between January and December of 2008?</p>
<p>I estimated that 3.8 Billion was looted from the shareholders of Verasun, but that was easy, &#8217;cause they were shut down completely through bankruptcy.  </p>
<p>How much did they get away with, from Sears?</p>
<p>How much did they get away with, from GM?<br />
From Lehman?</p>
<p>But, let&#8217;s not get carried away.  Let&#8217;s just concentrate on Sears&#8230;.</p>
<p>How much?</p>
<p>At your convenience&#8230;</p>
<p>RVAC</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tommytoyz</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149805</link>
		<dc:creator>tommytoyz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149805</guid>
		<description>The other issue is the tax code. If, as Patchie points out, the company shuts down, the money collected by naked short selling might never be taxed as the short position is never closed by the naked short seller - it&#039;s open indefinitely. But the mark to market rules allow the naked short sellers to pull the cash out on worthless securities to spend as they please without paying taxes on the &quot;open&quot; positions.

Someone correct me if I&#039;m wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other issue is the tax code. If, as Patchie points out, the company shuts down, the money collected by naked short selling might never be taxed as the short position is never closed by the naked short seller &#8211; it&#8217;s open indefinitely. But the mark to market rules allow the naked short sellers to pull the cash out on worthless securities to spend as they please without paying taxes on the &#8220;open&#8221; positions.</p>
<p>Someone correct me if I&#8217;m wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patchie</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149801</link>
		<dc:creator>Patchie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 23:08:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149801</guid>
		<description>If what you mean is, in the end the fails are covered the answer would be yes - for the most part.  These fails are never covered when a company shuts down.

Who has the names?  SEC, DTCC</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If what you mean is, in the end the fails are covered the answer would be yes &#8211; for the most part.  These fails are never covered when a company shuts down.</p>
<p>Who has the names?  SEC, DTCC</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ginger</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149795</link>
		<dc:creator>ginger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:06:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149795</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the clarification Dave.

In other words in the end all FTDs are repurchased to mask the fact that they didn&#039;t really exist and couldn&#039;t be delivered?

Who&#039;s concealing the names of the people responsible for this fraud?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the clarification Dave.</p>
<p>In other words in the end all FTDs are repurchased to mask the fact that they didn&#8217;t really exist and couldn&#8217;t be delivered?</p>
<p>Who&#8217;s concealing the names of the people responsible for this fraud?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patchie</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149791</link>
		<dc:creator>Patchie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:17:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149791</guid>
		<description>ginger, these are aggregate fails not number of fails per day.  If were to have say 10 Million fails on day 1 and on day 2 you covered 2 million fails but added 3 million more the net report on day 2 would be 11 Million.  The net being only 1 million additional fails not 11 million fails time the price for that day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ginger, these are aggregate fails not number of fails per day.  If were to have say 10 Million fails on day 1 and on day 2 you covered 2 million fails but added 3 million more the net report on day 2 would be 11 Million.  The net being only 1 million additional fails not 11 million fails time the price for that day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ginger</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149786</link>
		<dc:creator>ginger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149786</guid>
		<description>Judd, can you explain the message of the FTD regions in easy to follow terms? The scale is way too small for what I need.

The increments anong the bottom are periods of two months. Can I assume correctly that this is made up of approximately 42 business-day events?

For example, take the period July 2 to Sep 2 2008. where the FTDs peaked to around 8,300,000 

Would I be correct in saying there were an average of ~ 6,000,000 shares/day traded in this 42 business day period which weren&#039;t delivered to the buyer&#039;s broker, and each share had a value averaging $85 at the time?

42 x 6,000,000 x $85 is over $21 Billion stolen from the economy over a 2 month period using Sears Holding Corp as the vehicle. This was happening to many other targetted companies. Tommytoyz has a 9 pages of similar graphs accompanying his recent letter to Ms. Schapiro (SEC).

This figures can&#039;t be correct. Please help me decipher the message of these charts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Judd, can you explain the message of the FTD regions in easy to follow terms? The scale is way too small for what I need.</p>
<p>The increments anong the bottom are periods of two months. Can I assume correctly that this is made up of approximately 42 business-day events?</p>
<p>For example, take the period July 2 to Sep 2 2008. where the FTDs peaked to around 8,300,000 </p>
<p>Would I be correct in saying there were an average of ~ 6,000,000 shares/day traded in this 42 business day period which weren&#8217;t delivered to the buyer&#8217;s broker, and each share had a value averaging $85 at the time?</p>
<p>42 x 6,000,000 x $85 is over $21 Billion stolen from the economy over a 2 month period using Sears Holding Corp as the vehicle. This was happening to many other targetted companies. Tommytoyz has a 9 pages of similar graphs accompanying his recent letter to Ms. Schapiro (SEC).</p>
<p>This figures can&#8217;t be correct. Please help me decipher the message of these charts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Jim DeCosta</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149785</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Jim DeCosta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:56:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149785</guid>
		<description>THE CRITICAL ROLE OF THE “BUY-IN”

As many of you know the single most important deterrent to abusive naked short selling crimes is FEAR of an untimely buy-in.  Qualifying as an “untimely” buy-in would be one executed in the midst of a “short squeeze”.  The “buy-in” is also the ONLY cure available when the seller of securities absolutely refuses to deliver to the buyer that which he sold.  The “buy-in” or the fear thereof is the ultimate provider of investor protection and market integrity when it comes to abusive naked short selling frauds.

Over the years the NSCC management has rather curiously attained a monopoly on 15 of the 16 sources of empowerment to execute buy-ins.  The 16th source of empowerment belongs to the brokerage firm of the buyer that failed to get delivery of that which he paid for.  Unfortunately for investors NSCC policies essentially “bribe” the buying brokerage firm into not opting to exercise his empowerment to execute a buy-in when he does not receive delivery of that which his client purchased.  This is done via allowing the buying brokerage firm to earn interest off of the funds of the investor UNTIL delivery occurs.  This makes the buying brokerage firm the last party in the world wanting to execute a buy-in of a fellow NSCC participant.

Further to this the NSCC has introduced a failsafe mechanism to further circumvent buy-ins.  They expressly forbid their participants from executing open market buy-ins on fellow NSCC participants.  What they do is to mandate any NSCC participating brokerage firm contemplating executing a buy-in to file an “Intent to buy-in” with NSCC management.  Management than has the right to deal with this “Intent” filing in any manner they so choose. They could deal with the associated delivery failure by utilizing their self-replenishing “stock borrow program’s” lending pool of securities.  They could also just “RECAP” the delivery failure out of existence as if by magic.  They could also opt to just sit on it and do nothing.

Why is the NSCC management so obsessed with circumventing buy-ins?  The 2003 study of Evans, Geczy, Musto and Reed revealed that only one-eighth of 1% of even mandated buy-ins ever occurs on Wall Street.  For one reason or another NSCC management has gone to an awful lot of trouble to make sure that the crime deterrent effect as well as the mechanism to provide the only cure available when the sellers of securities refuse to deliver that which they sell do NOT get provided when they’re needed to provide investor protection and market integrity.  This is very questionable behavior for a “self regulatory organization” (SRO) acting as “the first line of defense against market frauds” like abusive naked short selling.

The question becomes why would the NSCC with the congressional mandate “to act in the public interest, provide investor protection and to “promptly settle” all securities transactions as well as the party holding 15 of the 16 sources of empowerment to execute buy-ins mysteriously plead to be “powerless” to provide this crime deterrence and only cure available for intentional FTDs.  Could it be that they are only doing the bidding of their employers namely the abusive NSCC participants that are the financial beneficiaries of all of these investor thefts and are the parties refusing to deliver that which they sold?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE CRITICAL ROLE OF THE “BUY-IN”</p>
<p>As many of you know the single most important deterrent to abusive naked short selling crimes is FEAR of an untimely buy-in.  Qualifying as an “untimely” buy-in would be one executed in the midst of a “short squeeze”.  The “buy-in” is also the ONLY cure available when the seller of securities absolutely refuses to deliver to the buyer that which he sold.  The “buy-in” or the fear thereof is the ultimate provider of investor protection and market integrity when it comes to abusive naked short selling frauds.</p>
<p>Over the years the NSCC management has rather curiously attained a monopoly on 15 of the 16 sources of empowerment to execute buy-ins.  The 16th source of empowerment belongs to the brokerage firm of the buyer that failed to get delivery of that which he paid for.  Unfortunately for investors NSCC policies essentially “bribe” the buying brokerage firm into not opting to exercise his empowerment to execute a buy-in when he does not receive delivery of that which his client purchased.  This is done via allowing the buying brokerage firm to earn interest off of the funds of the investor UNTIL delivery occurs.  This makes the buying brokerage firm the last party in the world wanting to execute a buy-in of a fellow NSCC participant.</p>
<p>Further to this the NSCC has introduced a failsafe mechanism to further circumvent buy-ins.  They expressly forbid their participants from executing open market buy-ins on fellow NSCC participants.  What they do is to mandate any NSCC participating brokerage firm contemplating executing a buy-in to file an “Intent to buy-in” with NSCC management.  Management than has the right to deal with this “Intent” filing in any manner they so choose. They could deal with the associated delivery failure by utilizing their self-replenishing “stock borrow program’s” lending pool of securities.  They could also just “RECAP” the delivery failure out of existence as if by magic.  They could also opt to just sit on it and do nothing.</p>
<p>Why is the NSCC management so obsessed with circumventing buy-ins?  The 2003 study of Evans, Geczy, Musto and Reed revealed that only one-eighth of 1% of even mandated buy-ins ever occurs on Wall Street.  For one reason or another NSCC management has gone to an awful lot of trouble to make sure that the crime deterrent effect as well as the mechanism to provide the only cure available when the sellers of securities refuse to deliver that which they sell do NOT get provided when they’re needed to provide investor protection and market integrity.  This is very questionable behavior for a “self regulatory organization” (SRO) acting as “the first line of defense against market frauds” like abusive naked short selling.</p>
<p>The question becomes why would the NSCC with the congressional mandate “to act in the public interest, provide investor protection and to “promptly settle” all securities transactions as well as the party holding 15 of the 16 sources of empowerment to execute buy-ins mysteriously plead to be “powerless” to provide this crime deterrence and only cure available for intentional FTDs.  Could it be that they are only doing the bidding of their employers namely the abusive NSCC participants that are the financial beneficiaries of all of these investor thefts and are the parties refusing to deliver that which they sold?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patchie</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149784</link>
		<dc:creator>Patchie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149784</guid>
		<description>Mary Schapiro seems to be getting it.  I know she is listening and trying to make the right changes as quickly as she can.  She comes with high regards from people I trust as does the new Director of Enforcement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mary Schapiro seems to be getting it.  I know she is listening and trying to make the right changes as quickly as she can.  She comes with high regards from people I trust as does the new Director of Enforcement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patchie</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149783</link>
		<dc:creator>Patchie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:36:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149783</guid>
		<description>http://sec.gov/comments/s7-30-08/s73008-110.pdf</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://sec.gov/comments/s7-30-08/s73008-110.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://sec.gov/comments/s7-30-08/s73008-110.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149782</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:04:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149782</guid>
		<description>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&amp;sid=akCQ.BbqhxMk&amp;refer=home</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&#038;sid=akCQ.BbqhxMk&#038;refer=home" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&#038;sid=akCQ.BbqhxMk&#038;refer=home</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Jim DeCosta</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149779</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Jim DeCosta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149779</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t want to sound too pickie but how can the institution with the congressional mandate to &quot;promptly settle&quot; all securities transactions be recommending to their participants a program to dispose of &quot;aged fails&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t want to sound too pickie but how can the institution with the congressional mandate to &#8220;promptly settle&#8221; all securities transactions be recommending to their participants a program to dispose of &#8220;aged fails&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: unreal</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149778</link>
		<dc:creator>unreal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149778</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think I like the looks of this at all.

&quot;NSCC’s RECAPS service is a mandated service for all full-service Members that reconfirms and reprices Members’ aged fails in RECAP-eligible securities that represent positions that are currently failing outside of NSCC (i.e. non-CNS items). It thus provides a mechanism for reducing outstanding non-CNS member fails&quot;

http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2007/nscc/a6389.pdf

DATE:
January 30, 2007
TO:
ALL PARTICIPANTS
ATTENTION:
MANAGING PARTNER/OFFICER,
OPERATIONS PARTNER/OFFICER,
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS,
MANAGER P&amp;S DEPARTMENT,
COMPLIANCE OFFICER
FROM:
General Counsel’s Office
SUBJECT:
Rule Filing-SR-NSCC-2007-03— (Changes to RECAPs Procedures)
NSCC has made a rule filing (SR-NSCC-2007-03) for immediate effectiveness with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) to make technical and updating changes to NSCC’s procedures regarding its Reconfirmation and Pricing Service (“RECAPS”) (Procedure II, Section G).
NSCC’s RECAPS service is a mandated service for all full-service Members that reconfirms and reprices Members’ aged fails in RECAP-eligible securities that represent positions that are currently failing outside of NSCC (i.e. non-CNS items). It thus provides a mechanism for reducing outstanding non-CNS member fails. The proposed revisions to the procedures reflect enhancements to the service, conforming processing changes with current regular way processes, and deletion of obsolete reports. These changes are briefly explained below, and more fully outlined in Important Notice A#6323 P&amp;S#5893 dated October 26, 2006.
The RECAPS service is currently offered quarterly, with a processing schedule as follows:
-On Tuesday, the first day of the processing cycle, Members submit CUSIP files for certain securities designated for processing through the service. The data on these files is used to obtain current prices for the designated securities.
-On Friday, Members submit eligible aged fails to NSCC up until a designated cut-off time.
-On Saturday, NSCC distributes RECAPS contract sheets, RECAPS CNS and Non-CNS Compared Trade Summaries, Balance Orders (for matched transactions in Balance Order securities), and a CNS RECAPS Projection Report and an Advisory Listing.
-On Monday, Members take action on unmatched items, and
-On Tuesday, the last day of the RECAPS cycle, all matched fails are scheduled to settle.
The process enhancements eliminate the need for early submission of securities CUSIP files, as current price information can be obtained on Friday when Members submit their aged fails for
reconfirmation and pricing. In addition, the process enhancements enable the distribution of reports at an earlier time on Saturday, and fails will settle on the next Settlement Day after they match (i.e. fails that are matched on Friday will settle on Monday (as opposed to Tuesday in the current schedule), and those that match on Monday will settle on Tuesday).
The CNS RECAPS Projection report is being eliminated because the relevant information will be provided on the existing CNS Projection Report. Similarly, to conform to current trade processing practices where NSCC has eliminated print image Balance Order and Receive and Deliver tickets--such information instead being shown on the Consolidated Trade Summaries, RECAPS Balance orders and RECAPS Trade-for-Trade Receive and Deliver Orders will now be evidenced by the information contained on the RECAPS Non-CNS Compared Trade Summary.
Finally, the RECAPS Procedure is being revised to clarify that reconfirmed fails in securities where the original fail price was less than one penny per share will settle on a trade-for-trade basis as a “Special Trade” with the RECAPS value being the original comparison value (as opposed to the system-generated price of one cent per share). Clarifying language is also being added to distinguish between information that appears on the RECAPS CNS Compared Trade Summary and information on the RECAPS Non-CNS Compared Trade Summary.
The full text of the rule change (SR-NSCC-2007-03) may be obtained by visiting our web site at www.nscc.com. Written comments on the proposed rule filing may be addressed to Lisa T. Siebold, Assistant Secretary, National Securities Clearing Corporation, 55 Water Street, New York, New York 10041, and your comments will be forwarded to the SEC. You may also address your written comments to the Secretary of the Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington D.C. 20549-1090. We request that you provide NSCC with a copy of your comments.
Questions regarding this Important Notice should be directed to Ed Fanning, Director Product Management at (212) 855-7623, or the undersigned at (212) 855-3208.
Merrie Witkin
Vice President and Deputy General Counsel
2</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think I like the looks of this at all.</p>
<p>&#8220;NSCC’s RECAPS service is a mandated service for all full-service Members that reconfirms and reprices Members’ aged fails in RECAP-eligible securities that represent positions that are currently failing outside of NSCC (i.e. non-CNS items). It thus provides a mechanism for reducing outstanding non-CNS member fails&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2007/nscc/a6389.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.dtcc.com/downloads/legal/imp_notices/2007/nscc/a6389.pdf</a></p>
<p>DATE:<br />
January 30, 2007<br />
TO:<br />
ALL PARTICIPANTS<br />
ATTENTION:<br />
MANAGING PARTNER/OFFICER,<br />
OPERATIONS PARTNER/OFFICER,<br />
DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS,<br />
MANAGER P&amp;S DEPARTMENT,<br />
COMPLIANCE OFFICER<br />
FROM:<br />
General Counsel’s Office<br />
SUBJECT:<br />
Rule Filing-SR-NSCC-2007-03— (Changes to RECAPs Procedures)<br />
NSCC has made a rule filing (SR-NSCC-2007-03) for immediate effectiveness with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) to make technical and updating changes to NSCC’s procedures regarding its Reconfirmation and Pricing Service (“RECAPS”) (Procedure II, Section G).<br />
NSCC’s RECAPS service is a mandated service for all full-service Members that reconfirms and reprices Members’ aged fails in RECAP-eligible securities that represent positions that are currently failing outside of NSCC (i.e. non-CNS items). It thus provides a mechanism for reducing outstanding non-CNS member fails. The proposed revisions to the procedures reflect enhancements to the service, conforming processing changes with current regular way processes, and deletion of obsolete reports. These changes are briefly explained below, and more fully outlined in Important Notice A#6323 P&amp;S#5893 dated October 26, 2006.<br />
The RECAPS service is currently offered quarterly, with a processing schedule as follows:<br />
-On Tuesday, the first day of the processing cycle, Members submit CUSIP files for certain securities designated for processing through the service. The data on these files is used to obtain current prices for the designated securities.<br />
-On Friday, Members submit eligible aged fails to NSCC up until a designated cut-off time.<br />
-On Saturday, NSCC distributes RECAPS contract sheets, RECAPS CNS and Non-CNS Compared Trade Summaries, Balance Orders (for matched transactions in Balance Order securities), and a CNS RECAPS Projection Report and an Advisory Listing.<br />
-On Monday, Members take action on unmatched items, and<br />
-On Tuesday, the last day of the RECAPS cycle, all matched fails are scheduled to settle.<br />
The process enhancements eliminate the need for early submission of securities CUSIP files, as current price information can be obtained on Friday when Members submit their aged fails for<br />
reconfirmation and pricing. In addition, the process enhancements enable the distribution of reports at an earlier time on Saturday, and fails will settle on the next Settlement Day after they match (i.e. fails that are matched on Friday will settle on Monday (as opposed to Tuesday in the current schedule), and those that match on Monday will settle on Tuesday).<br />
The CNS RECAPS Projection report is being eliminated because the relevant information will be provided on the existing CNS Projection Report. Similarly, to conform to current trade processing practices where NSCC has eliminated print image Balance Order and Receive and Deliver tickets&#8211;such information instead being shown on the Consolidated Trade Summaries, RECAPS Balance orders and RECAPS Trade-for-Trade Receive and Deliver Orders will now be evidenced by the information contained on the RECAPS Non-CNS Compared Trade Summary.<br />
Finally, the RECAPS Procedure is being revised to clarify that reconfirmed fails in securities where the original fail price was less than one penny per share will settle on a trade-for-trade basis as a “Special Trade” with the RECAPS value being the original comparison value (as opposed to the system-generated price of one cent per share). Clarifying language is also being added to distinguish between information that appears on the RECAPS CNS Compared Trade Summary and information on the RECAPS Non-CNS Compared Trade Summary.<br />
The full text of the rule change (SR-NSCC-2007-03) may be obtained by visiting our web site at <a href="http://www.nscc.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.nscc.com</a>. Written comments on the proposed rule filing may be addressed to Lisa T. Siebold, Assistant Secretary, National Securities Clearing Corporation, 55 Water Street, New York, New York 10041, and your comments will be forwarded to the SEC. You may also address your written comments to the Secretary of the Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE, Washington D.C. 20549-1090. We request that you provide NSCC with a copy of your comments.<br />
Questions regarding this Important Notice should be directed to Ed Fanning, Director Product Management at (212) 855-7623, or the undersigned at (212) 855-3208.<br />
Merrie Witkin<br />
Vice President and Deputy General Counsel<br />
2</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: unreal</title>
		<link>http://www.deepcapture.com/well-isnt-that-special/comment-page-1/#comment-149777</link>
		<dc:creator>unreal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:09:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deepcapture.com/?p=598#comment-149777</guid>
		<description>Please tell me this isn&#039;t what I think it is.

&quot;The RECAPS learning track introduces the National Securities Clearing Corporation&#039;s (NSCC) Reconfirmation and Pricing Service, which facilitates the settlement of aged fails.&quot;

http://www.dtcc.com/products/training/courses/recaps.php

Isn&#039;t the only way to bring about &quot;the settlement of aged fails&quot; by delivering that which you sold?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please tell me this isn&#8217;t what I think it is.</p>
<p>&#8220;The RECAPS learning track introduces the National Securities Clearing Corporation&#8217;s (NSCC) Reconfirmation and Pricing Service, which facilitates the settlement of aged fails.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dtcc.com/products/training/courses/recaps.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.dtcc.com/products/training/courses/recaps.php</a></p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t the only way to bring about &#8220;the settlement of aged fails&#8221; by delivering that which you sold?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
