Anti-Investigative Reporter Joe Nocera and The Newspaper of Non-Record (New York Times)

Joe Nocera has a problem.

Nocera’s problem is not what Apple CEO Steve Jobs thinks of him (“Steve Jobs Doesn’t Have Cancer, Calls NYT Columnist a ‘Slime Bucket’“).

No, Joe’s problem is that the naked short selling issue went mainstream this summer. In the last 6 weeks there have been literally hundreds of articles that describe the reality of this crime, its effects on individual companies, the risk it poses to firms at the core of our financial system, the extraordinary steps the SEC has taken to protect them from that risk, the demands of a former SEC Chairman to take draconian steps to rid our markets of the practice, the promises of the current SEC Chairman to do so, and so on and so forth.

The problem this presents for Joe Nocera is not simply that he is on record as maintaining that “most people who understand the issue or have looked into it think it’s pretty bogus” (New York Times, June 10, 2006). Joe’s problem is that he went so far as to discourage other journalists from digging into the subject.

I possess a secretly-recorded tape of a talk Joe Nocera gave two years ago to SABEW, the Society of Business Editors & Writers, wherein Joe preached the virtue of being an anti-investigative journalist. In it, Joe says, “…naked short selling… makes my eyes glaze over…So I asked Patrick Byrne exactly this question…I said, ‘Well why do you…why are you in this naked shorting fight since it’s not really what you are litigating?’ And he said, ‘Well, it’s like supporting education; it’s a good thing to do.'” The other journalists in the audience, that “herd of independent minds,” readily agreed with a knowing yuck-yuck-yuck to an assertion about which they had no knowledge whatsoever. (Consider their yuck-yucking in the context of the fact that I have, in fact, sunk what most would consider a fair bit of change into private scholarships and education reform in the US, and built 19 schools across Africa and Central Asia that educate about 6,000 kids).

New York Times’ Joe Nocera continues, “So it’s hard to take [Patrick] seriously on that issue when you hear him say something like that. Having said that, you know, I think it probably would be worth somebody’s time to say, Is there something to naked shorting or not? What is naked shorting? What does it mean? What is the problem here? But, you know, life’s too short. I don’t want to do it.”

So Joe’s problem is not that he is on record as ignoring (though he did that too), not just derisively dismissing (though he did that as well), but discouraging journalists from investigating something that has turned into a crisis for our financial system. Joe dismissed it as “pretty bogus”, with no argument, simply asking his audience to rely upon his authority instead. He turned out to be wrong. One might just put it down to honest error, but philosophically Joe keeps close company with various hedge funds whose names turn up wherever naked short selling becomes an issue, and he has had (as you will see) a curious relationship with Gary Weiss (whose involvement in a cover-up on behalf of the DTCC has been amply demonstrated within DeepCapture).

I believe this constellation of facts is meaningful,  that Joe Nocera took part in the cover-up of a financial scandal, and the New York Times was used in that cover-up.

I’m going to share some email correspondence with Joe Nocera, correspondence which will, I believe, shed light on this bold claim. As you will see, I have given Joe ample opportunity to request that this be off-the-record, or clarify his position one way or another in that regard, and he has failed to do so. Thus freed of any duty to keep them private, I publish them now, organized into flurries of back-and-forths, with minimal editorial explanation in bold italic font.


Here is an exchange from one year ago that establishes the tone of my communications with Joe Nocera. Note that his replies are oblique, if not unresponsive altogether.


On 9/12/07, Patrick Byrne wrote:

Dear Mr. Nocera,

I’d like to ask for your comment on Dr. Angel’s Reg SHO comment letter.

I’d prefer your comment be on-the-record, but let me know and I will respect your decision either way.


Patrick Byrne

From: Joe Nocera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 10:34 AM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: Jim Angel’s Reg SHO Comment Letter

If I come back at Reg SHO, I’ll do it in my column. but thanks for asking.

–On 9/12/07, Patrick Byrne wrote:

Thanks. May I safely assume that your response was on-the-record?

From: Joe Nocera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:44 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: Jim Angel’s Reg SHO Comment Letter

i’m in the middle of a magazine story right now, and simply don’t have time to dive into this issue. if you want to use that fact to blast me, etc etc., not much I can do about it.

On 9/12/07, Patrick Byrne wrote:

Not interested in “blasting” anyone, Joe: I am just a seeker of truth.

You would have saved time with a simple “yes” or “no” but, that said, best of luck on your magazine story.



In anticipation of wider readership of Mark Mitchell’s exposé of naked short selling on Wall Street, I contacted Joe Nocera for comment on one of Mitchell’s allegations. Including New York Times designated “Readers’ Representative” Clark Hoyt on the email, I wrote:


From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 2:52 PM
To: Joe Nocera
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Comment requested

Dear Joe,

Behold a line from Mark Mitchell’s story on Deep Capture quoting an email from Mr. Gary Weiss.

“Deep Capture has come to possess a great number of emails between various journalists and miscreants. In one, the former BusinessWeek reporter brags to the crooked mortgage broker of influencing the contents of Nocera’s ‘Campaign of Menace’ article in The New York Times. ‘This is totally my doing,’ Gary writes. ‘Yuk. Yuk. Yuk.’ “

I am writing for any comment from you regarding Mr. Weiss’ claim, or, if you wish, regarding the more general claims of Mitchell’s piece, before its more widespread publication.

If you are unwilling to comment, please let me know that too.

Warm personal regards,

Patrick M. Byrne
CEO, & Reporter,

PS I am new to this reporting gig: to be fair, how long does one normally give the subject of a piece to comment before publishing? In the past, you have emailed me in the afternoon hours before deadline and, since I was not on my computer at that precise moment, I missed opportunity to comment on something you wrote about me. I suspect that such treatment was unusual. So please let me know.

From: Joe Nocera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:13 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comment requested

Dear Patrick,

Gary Weiss can write whatever he wants in emails, just as you can write whatever you want in the various forums available to you. Just because he says something in an email doesn’t make it true, just as your various faux-polite rants aren’t true just becuase you make a claim of one sort or another. I don’t know how you find the time to root out us corrupt journalists in addition to the corrupt government officials and the corrupt hedge fund managers! Most CEOs I know believe that running their companies is a full-time job. Anyway, it is always a pleasure corresponding with you, and I look forward to reading your “more-in­ sorrow-than-in-anger” posting about how I didn’t answer your question the way you had hoped.

All best,

Joe Nocera


The churlishness of Joe’s reply (“faux-polite”?) took me aback, and Joe was wrong about something (he had answered the question just as I’d hoped, though we professionals are not swayed by soft concerns). But what struck me most odd about Joe’s reply was that he had constructed it in a way that he did not have to answer the question: If I say “Gary asserts X” and Joe says, “Gary can say anything he wants”, then Joe is not really saying whether or not X is true. So I decided to dig a bit.


From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:19 PM
To: Joe Nocera
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Comment requested

Dear Joe,

You write:

“Just because [Gary Weiss] says something in an email doesn’t make it true”.

Are you claiming that it is false?

Again, with warmest personal regards,


–Original Message–
From: Joe Nocera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:21 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: Comment requested

You are such a dogged reporter! You have a future in this business.

Yes, my answer is that his claim is false.

From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:26 PM
To: Joe Nocera
Subject: RE: Comment requested

Dear Joe,

Thank you so much for the courtesy of your response.

Now the follow-ons:

1) Did you claim that you did not communicate with Mr. Weiss about the subject of that piece before its publication?

2) Do you have any explanation as to why Mr. Weiss would be “Yuck yuck yuck[ing]” about its appearance being “totally [his] doing”?

I look forward to your promt reply. Until then, I remain,

Yours truly,

Patrick M. Byrne

From: Joe Nocera [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 3:30 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: Comment requested

Patrick, as you must surely know, since you’re a reporter and all, I just can’t talk about who I talk to when i write my column. As for question number 2, I have truly no idea.

Good luck.

Joe Nocera


So to relate this to current events and findings documented within Deep Capture: there is a financial crime called “naked short selling”, against which this summer the SEC took emergency action to prevent the center of our financial system from Chernobyling. For several years evidence had developed regarding the existence of this problem and its locus in a corporation called, “DTCC”. Since January 2006 pseudo-reporter Gary Weiss has worked full-time to downplay, deny, and deride that evidence, but has been exposed doing so from within the DTCC (that is, the corporation at the heart of the scandal). In 2006 Joe Nocera wrote a column that hewed tightly to Gary’s (now discredited) party line regarding this crime, and Gary Weiss yuck-yuck-yucked to a friend about Joe’s column being “totally my doing”.

If only there were a pattern….

And the best explanation for this constellation of facts that Joe Nocera can muster is, “I have truly no idea.”

Clever answer, that, capable of throwing all but the most dogged reporters off the scent.


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Nocera
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 1:31 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: that Weiss email

Dear Patrick, Did your or Mr. Miller (sic) ever post anything about Gary Weiss’ email regarding me? The one you asked me about a few weeks ago? If you could send me the URL I would appreciate it. Also, could you please tell me how you got a hold of it?


Joe Nocera

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Nocera
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:22 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: that gary weiss email

Patrick, I spent some time today at Deep Capture and Antisocial Media looking to see if you had posted anything about the email you had asked me about from Gary Weiss. Never did find anything. I’d like to reiterate my request that if you’ve posted could you point me to the URL? I’d be grateful. Also, have been to Deep Capture, of course, I know now how you got the emails, so no need to answer that. Thanks.

all best,

Joe Nocera

From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:26 PM
To: Joe Nocera
Subject: RE: that Weiss email

Dear Joe,

As you have apparently learned, I obtained a computer containing the correspondence (i.e., 8,000 emails) of a number of New York financial journalists, hedge funds, paid bashers, convicted stock swindlers, lawyers, and even a private eye or two. Interesting reading. We call that computer The Enigma (after the WWII story), and I personally take full responsibility for having come into its possession (though credit for the investigative journalism that led to that moment is all Judd Bagley’s). And the answer to the question you are asking yourself is: yes.

The place to start reading is Mark Mitchell’s piece here. Just search for your name (skip the time it appears associated with a recording we made of you, unless that interests you too). Then if you read around in Deep Capture you will see that we have started to dribble out the content of these emails in blogs that elucidate their full meaning.

How did we get this material? Within DeepCapture you will see that we have recently been revealing more about the circumstances by which I obtained these emails. Beyond what you see there, however…You know that as a journalist I cannot reveal my sources or methods.

Best regards,


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JoeNocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 5:53 AM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

Patrick- here’s another question- do you think there is anything wrong with mining Mr. Schneider’s hard drive to extract personal emails and other personal information?

all best,

Joe Nocera


This is where it started to get interesting: Joe was now asking a vaguely-worded question (which “Mr. Schneider”?) based on a false assumption (that information I had extracted from a corporate computer, given to me by the owner of that corporation, was in fact someone else’s “personal information”). In any case, I thought it was time to press Joe about his early “I have truly no idea” response, simply by sharing Gary’s email about Joe, with Joe.


From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:46 PM
To: Joe Nocera
Subject: RE: that gary weiss email

Dear Joe,

It seems we are both working late. So as long as you are up…

I am attaching an email that Gary Weiss wrote to a crony.

Two weeks ago I told you, “I am writing for any comment from you regarding Mr. Weiss’ claim, or, if you wish, regarding the more general claims of Mitchell’s piece, before its more widespread publication.”

To this, your response was: “Just because [Gary Weiss] says something in an email doesn’t make it true”.

I then asked, “Are you claiming that it is false?”

To which you responded, “Yes, my answer is that his claim is false.”

I then asked, “Do you have any explanation as to why Mr. Weiss would be ‘Yuck yuckyuck[ing]‘ about its appearance being ‘totally [his] doing’?

To which you responded, “I have truly no idea.”

Would you like to revisit any of these answers?

Fond regards always,


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JoeNocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 6:00 AM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: that Weiss email

Patrick, thanks for your response.. I might be writing about this next week; if I decide to do so, I’ll be in touch on Wednesday. I know you prefer email, but I think a phone conversation might be in order, if you’re willing. The fluidity of a conversation works, with the ability to ask new questions based on your answers, better for me than a series of emails etc. I did ask you a question in another email this a.m. about the ethics of mining this computer for its emails-something, frankly, no journalist would do. I hope that you will give me the courtesy of a response.



From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:05 AM
To: Joe Nocera
Subject: RE: that gary weiss email

Dear Joe,

Does the “you” in your question refer to “Patrick Byrne” or “anyone on the Deep Capture team”?



PS In the future, I think that all you have to do is go to DeepCapture and search for “Nocera” to find anything about you.

From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:29 AM
To: Joe Nocera
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: that gary weiss email

Dear Joe,

Given our history, I respectfully request more precision in your questions. You write for the New York Times, and that is something of which you should be capable.

In this case, as you know, there are two Mr. Schneider’s at issue. The owner of the hard drive, Roger Schneider, gave it to me with instructions to mine it and turn my findings over to the authorities. I think that my doing so was, therefore, not unethical, but good citizenship.

Given your history of obfuscating such salient details with a consistency that seems determined, I thought it best to cc: several of your editors on this conversation, purely as a prophylactic measure. I do not know Mr. Okrent’s email, but would be obliged if you would supply it.

Very respectfully,


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Nocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:30 AM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

really, I’m asking whether you, Patrick Byrne, think there is anything wrong with taking a computer and mining it for Floyd’s personal emails? The computer, as i understand it, also contains personal mortgage data for customers of XXXXX, so there is a data theft issue here. So I would also like to know whether you view the possession of this computer, which contains private data of mortgage customers, a form of data theft? Thanks for your consideration.

Joe Nocera

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf OfJoe Nocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:28 AM
To: Patrick ByrneCc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Lawrence Ingrassia;Bruce Headlam
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

Dear Patrick,

As you know, I am perfectly happy to have you send our exchanges to anyone you want, including my editors. My boss is Larry Ingrassia ([email protected]), and my direct editor is Bruce Headlam ([email protected].) I have attached this series of emails to them so that you don’t have to do so. Also the public editor is currently Clark Hoyt. However, sending an email to him at [email protected] will get this exchange to him.

For the record I disagree that I have distorted any of our conversations or other exchanges. And yes, I understand that the computer belonged to Roger Schneider. However, the material on the computer belonged to two entities, it seems to me: Floyd Schneider, whose private emails you have now exhumed, and XXXXX, which has private data about their mortgage customers and potential mortgage customers. You have given me an explanation why you believe exhuming Floyd Schneider’s emails is not data theft. However, you have not explained how being in possession of this private mortgage data does not constitute data theft.

Thanks for your consideration.

all best,

Joe Nocera

From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:45 AM
To: Joe Nocera
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; XXXXX; XXX
Subject: RE: that gary weiss email

Dear Joe,

Again, simply as a prophylactic measure of unknown worth, I am cc:’ing some charged with providing adult supervision at your fine newspaper in my response.

The facts regarding how we can into possession of 8,000 emails of traffic among various convicted stock swindlers, paid message board bashers, hedge fund patrons, and financial journalists is fully and accurately described The Enigma.

For examples of the kinds of information we have pulled off of it, you might also familiarize yourself with these posts:

The Final Word on Gary Weiss and Wikipedia

Gary Weiss and his Yahoo Gnomes

Gary Weiss doesn’t like Liz Moyer

Gary Weiss, Usenet Troll

Gary Weiss: his DTCC Ties and Lies

For just one, small instance of how this material concerns you, please see “The Story of Deep Capture” by Mark Mitchell, and search for the word, “yuk”. There is other material on The Enigma that very directly concerns you. Thus, in any sane world you would not be allowed to use the New York Times to cover your tracks, but I’m not making any bets on that.

I have heard from the CEO of XXXXX regarding the wildly false claims you made to him regarding XXXXX customer data. Therefore, I will clear up here your (once again, seemingly deliberate) misapprehensions:

• The computer in question belonged to Roger Schneider, who owns a small home mortgage operation in New Jersey, and who employed his brother, Floyd Schneider, until he caught Floyd involved in dubious financial transactions.

• We did not contact Roger. Roger contacted us.

• Roger deleted all XXXXX customer information from the computer before turning it over to me, so that it just contained Floyd’s emails. I instructed Judd that he was to verify that it contained no customer information as a first step (and quarantine any if it did): Judd verified that it contained no such information.

• Roger gave (not “sold”) me this computer he owned, with the request that I mine it for evidence of illegal activity and turn it over to the authorities.

• DeepCapture quickly culled through the material and provided the results of that first pass to XXXX with a complete briefing on the origins of the material.

I think these were the laudable acts of a concerned citizen. If you believe there is something wrong with these acts (or simply if, given the fact that naked short selling has been implicated in the current systemic crisis in our financial system, precisely as I predicted and you did everything possible to obfuscate, you regret such statements you have made as this), then you ought to rethink the difference between being an investigative journalist, and an anti-investigative journalist.

Most respectfully,

Patrick M. Byrne

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] OnBehalf Of Joe Nocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:01 AM
To: Patrick Byrne
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; XXXXX; XXX
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

Patrick- thanks for your response. Just so you understand, there was nothing “deliberate” about my “misapprehensions.” I had heard something that I was trying to track down. That is why I called Paul at XXXXX, and why I emailed you. You have now given me your answer. You will note that nothing has been published. But to find out things, I journalist has to ask questions and try to get answers. That is how it works. I will try to call you next week.

all best,

Joe Nocera

From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:17 AM
To: Joe Nocera Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];Lawrence Ingrassia; Bruce Headlam; XXXXX; XXXXX
Subject: RE: that gary weiss email

Dear Joe,

Thank you for sending me the names and emails of those who supervise you: given that you have previously dropped cc:’s from our traffic, I was unsure how squeamish you were about their inclusion in our communication.

For the benefit of Messieurs Ingrassia and Headlam I am resending my email of moments ago, responding to your false allegation about private mortgage data. I am also cc:ing the CEO of XXXXX, and Roger himself.

In addition, I have five questions for you, although any of your colleagues are welcome to respond:

1) In one email to Floyd Schneider (enclosed), Gary Weiss takes credit for one of Joe’s columns, saying “This is totally my doing! Yuk yuk yuk.” Do you have any explanation as to why Mr. Weiss would do this?

2) In another email (not enclosed) Weiss makes it clear that he is familiar with the substance, sentiment and timing of at least one of your columns before it is published. How might Weiss have come to posses this information?

3) Are you (or anyone at the New York times) at all concerned that someone with foreknowledge of a column critical of a public company might use it to trade ahead of its publication?

4) What does the Times’ code of ethics say with respect to this kind of situation?

5) Given the national media’s breakthrough understanding of “naked short selling” being implicating in our current systemic crisis, what are your feelings now about this 50 second statement you made at a SABEW conference?

The following question is for either Mr. Ingrassia or Mr. Headlam:

Some time ago I was told by an employee of the New York Times, “Patrick, I do not want to get into the newsroom politics too much, but I want to tell you that the word we use around here regarding Nocera’s writing on you is ‘surreal’. We say that it is ‘surreal’ that the New YorkTimes has published what Joe Nocera has written about you.”

Please comment.

Joe, Earlier today you suggested that you would prefer a telephone conversation to email. When would you like to have that call?

Most respectfully,


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JoeNocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:31 AM
To: Patrick Byrne
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];Lawrence Ingrassia; Bruce Headlam; Paul Lamparillo; XXX
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

Dear Patrick, everybody drops CC:s from time to time, by hitting reply instead of reply all by mistake. very few people would view that action as darkly as you do. as for your questions, as I have said I have no idea why Mr. Weiss would make those claims, nor has he ever had any “inside information” about any of my columns. I don’t give out such information.

all best,

Joe Nocera

From: Patrick Byrne
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:57 PM
To: Joe Nocera
Cc: [email protected];[email protected]; Lawrence Ingrassia; Bruce Headlam
Subject: RE: that gary weiss email

Dear Joe,

Boundless is my relief at your assurance that the fine standards of our “newspaper of record” remain upheld. One question thus remains:

Given the national media’s breakthrough understanding of “naked short selling” being implicating in our current systemic crisis, what are your feelings now about this 50 second statement you made at a SABEW conference?

Warmest regards,


From: [email protected][mailto:[email protected]] On BehalfOf Joe Nocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:05 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

They haven’t changed.

From: [email protected][mailto:[email protected]] On BehalfOf Joe Nocera
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:06 PM
To: Patrick ByrneCc: [email protected];[email protected]; Lawrence Ingrassia; Bruce Headlam
Subject: Re: that gary weiss email

just realized that I hadn’t send previous email to all the cc:s. I wrote; “They haven’t changed.”


OK…. So concerning an issue that has been implicated in the near-collapse of our financial system, and drawn furious demands for reform from Wall Street bankers, The US Chamber of Commerce, the American Bankers Association, dozens of Senators and Congressional representatives, and a former and the sitting SEC Chairmen, Joe Nocera stands by his statement from two years ago discouraging other journalists from investigating this issue. His stands by his statement claim that “most people who understand the issue or have looked into it think it’s pretty bogus.”

This, dear reader, is why I say that Joe Nocera is an anti-investigative journalist.

Surely those charged with providing supervision to Joe might be troubled by his counseling journalists not to investigate a crime that has since been implicated in the most severe financial crisis of our lifetime, I thought. So I decided to write them and see. Unfortunately, I discovered that Joe Nocera is not the only New York Times employee capable of oblique response.


From: Patrick Byrne [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:04 PM
To: Lawrence Ingrassia; Bruce HeadlamCc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: request for comment
Importance: High

Dear Messieurs Ingrassia and Headlam:

1) Given the national media’s breakthrough understanding of “naked short selling”being implicating in our current systemic crisis, what are your feelings now about this 50 second statement made by Mr. Nocera at a SABEW conference two years ago?

2) Some months ago a widely-known and well-respected journalist at the New York Times, “Patrick, I do not want to get into the newsroom politics too much, but I want to tell you that the word we use around here regarding Nocera’s writing on you is ‘surreal’. We say that it is ‘surreal’ that the New York Times has published what Joe Nocera has written about you.” Do you have any comment on this?

With true respect,

Patrick M. Byrne

From: Lawrence Ingrassia [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 2:24 PM
To: Patrick Byrne
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; ‘Bruce Headlam’
Subject: RE: request for comment

Mr. Byrne,

Regarding your first point, Joe Nocera is a columnist. As a columnist, he is allowed a point of view.

Regarding your second point, Mr. Nocera is a very widely-known and very well-respected columnist. Moreover, he is an award-winning columnist, having won both a Loeb Award for commentary and a Sabew best columnist award this year, and having been a finalist for a Pulitzer Price for commentary in 2007. The journalistic honors awarded for his work speak volumes.

Yours sincerely,

Larry Ingrassia

Business editor

The New York Times


When a nation’s central bank has to open its windows to recapitalize its banking sector while regulators construct an emergency levee around the trading in 19 firms at the heart of its financial system, I think it is safe to call that “a crisis”. Much blame for this crisis can be laid at the doorstep of our indolent and incurious New York financial press, the output of which is typified by Mr. Ingrassia’s response. Regarding his own columnist deriding, and discouraging other journalists from investigating, a crime that has since been implicated in the deepest financial crisis of our lifetime, the New York Times business editor can muster no more defense than, “Joe Nocera is a columnist. As a columnist, he is allowed a point of view.”

Actually, Mr. Ingrassia, Joe Nocera is “allowed” a point of view whether or not he is a columnist. The question is whether Joe Nocera will be “allowed” to use the New York Times to shill for crooked hedge funds by spewing apologetics for a crime that may have come close to toppling the US financial system, or whether the editorial staff of the New York Times is able to provide adult supervision.

The free press are the white blood cells of the body politic. When they fail, that body’s other systems remain in equilibrium only so long. That principle is well-illustrated by this situation.

Mr. Ingrassia says one thing with which I agree. “The journalistic honors awarded for [Nocera’s] work speak volumes.” Those awards were all given to Joe by colleagues in the industry of financial journalism. I agree, this does in fact “speak volumes.” And that such awards would be made to an anti-investigative journalist like Joe Nocera (listen to him again) goes along way towards explaining the predicament in which our nation currently finds itself.

If this article concerns you, and you wish to help, then:

1) Let the New York Times know how you feel about their columnist by writing Business Editor Lawrence Ingrassia ([email protected]), Media Editor Bruce Headlam (headlam@nytimes), and [email protected] (post copies in the comment section here!);

2) email it to a dozen friends;

2) go here for additional suggestions: “So You Say You Want a Revolution?

  1. Hi Patrick,
    Great article. Interesting response from Joe Nocera’s editor but not something new from the New York Times. They covered up the Ukrainian Famine in 1932-1933, so there’s a history there. Tradition.

    And a ring of familiarity when one visits Wikipedia. The opening paragraph relegating it to a natural disaster reminded me of the first time I read the Wiki article about naked short-selling. Whitewash.

    Sorry Wiki editors. My parents fleeing the Soviet Union with accounts of people committing suicide rather than being forcibly repatriated, and my wife’s aunt’s recollection of how the Soviets confiscated food to create the Great Famine (Holodomor) carries more weight than the nimble strokes of your light fingers upon the keyboard of your imagination. Unencumbered by conscience.

    Ditto for Patrick. Am I going to believe him, or the NY Times and Wiki.


  2. Patrick,

    The NYT is not simply allowing Nocera to use its pages to advance the interests of Wall Street’s miscreants. The NYT is itself the tool of those miscreants. This demonstrates another instance of the institutions of democratic/republican society being captured by the powerful pecuniary interests that operate on Wall Street and from Stamford and other venues. They own the Federal Reserve and ply its boardrooms as insiders. The SEC is their captive, as is Treasury under Paulson. The CFTC is no better, if not even more disabled by their influence in Congress, giving us gasoline prices triple what the free market would dictate without manipulation.

    WSJ, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, WaPo, USA Today and other primary elements of the “mainstream media” are just as captured as the NYT. Even if NYT were to bounce Nocera on his ear for his doings, it would be only as a deceptive move to conceal role of the newspaper itself.

  3. The recent report by the SEC’s Inspector General, and independant agency responsible for investigating the SEC (now where have we heard that before?) reports that he is reopening the inquiry into Pequot and John Mack.

    Now, isn’t an SEC investigation of the CEO of Morgan Stanley, and a multi – billion dollar hedge fund news? Espcially a thwarted investigation that is being REOPENED?

    Not if you’re Judy Burns of the WSJ, or Fortune, or Joe or Floyd, or Roddy, or I guess anybody.

    The crux of the above blog is therefore reinforced as valididated.

  4. Patrick is in there doing the blocking and tackling that needs to be done in order to expose this corruption which borders on total. I don’t think people will have a tough time believing this, given all the recent Wall Street Scandals.

  5. Well Ken, it’ certainly is getting better.

    I spoke to a corporate officer at a very small company around 2001. He had been way up on the corporate ladder, and well rewarded b ut was here because he wanted to be.

    The company was naked shorted to death, and I asked one day, “XXXXXX, when you speak of this, I mean, you’re somebody, what kind of response do you get?”

    He replied he had just had lund with five friends from his previous life, and they thought he was crazy.

    See how far we’ve come? It’s been a horrible eight years, and it is taking the collapse of the system to bring us to the forefront. I suppose the drunk had to hit bottom, but he did.

  6. When is enough..enough????

    Recs: 0 Patch to the Regulators – they know
    Subject: UAL manipulated by Short Sellers?
    Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:48:21 -0400

    Who benefits from such a false rumor? How does such old news mistakenly reappear on the internet and capable of sending a market into a bear raid? With the stock down 99% before the stock halt the short sellers in UAL could benefit tremendously. Not only those short sellers already short the market but those using loopholes in pre-existing short sale regulations where the “day trading” short sellers will flip trades using the same locate over and over and over. Executing a bear raid on false negative news.

    What damage to our US economy would the destruction of UAL pose? What impact does the manipulation of UAL’s market cap have on their ability to raise the necessary capital to survive in the future?

    If history proves itself, the SEC will be late to the game in enforcement and if anything is done it will be a slap on the wrist to those who engaged in taking down a public company. The market cap lost by these investors (those who bailed out in a panicked frenzy) will never be recovered from those who initiated this false rumor. It will be interesting to understand whether the short sellers in UAL are common to the short sellers in Bear Stearns and Lehman, each time benefitting from the dissemination of false rumors.

    Finally, we can all wonder what would have happened to the UAL market had the SEC not been sitting on short sale reforms these past years and had the prior Emergency Order extended to all stocks and extended permanently. Maybe the SEC’s OEA could conduct a micro investigation into the bear raid that was UAL.


    Dave Patch

    UAL says bankruptcy rumor is completely untrue
    By Christopher Hinton
    Last update: 11:24 a.m. EDT Sept. 8, 2008
    Comments: 7
    NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — UAL Corp. (UAUA:
    ual corp com new

    Sponsored by:

    UAUA 0.01, -12.29, -99.9%) shares were halted Monday following rumors that the airline holding company was filing for bankruptcy, a rumor UAL said was completely untrue. An old news item on United Airlines seeking bankruptcy inadvertently resurfaced on a Web site, triggering a sell-off that wiped out 99% of the company’s share price, CNBC reported. Shares of UAL last traded at a penny a share, down 99.9%.

  7. OT alittle..
    same ole same ole, have Joe investigate this instead of playing footsie with his buddies.

    Did Lehman fall on inside information of failed Korean investment?
    Posted Sep 9th 2008 11:20AM by Peter Cohan
    Filed under: Major movement, Lehman Br Holdings (LEH)

    On Monday, Lehman Brothers Holdings (NYSE: LEH) fell 13% after announcing a management restructuring. Some speculated that investors were disappointed because the management changes suggested that Lehman’s well-publicized talks to sell a stake to Korean financial interests had failed. CNNMoney confirms this morning that those talks have ended.

    CNNMoney interviewed the chairman of Korean Development Bank (KDB), which “sent a proposal to Lehman to buy 25% of [Lehman] for as much as $5.3 billion,” who confirmed that talks had ended but did not make it clear why. (Such a deal would have been a 116% premium to its current market value). As CNNMoney wrote, “The two companies have been discussing the possibility of KDB taking a stake in Lehman but Korean regulators had been cautious about the deal. Jun told Dow Jones Newswires that the talks were now over, but he declined to say what conclusions, if any, had been reached.”

    CNNMoney also reports that no other Korean financial institutions wanted to join KDB. It reported that “all major financial institutions in South Korea – Kookmin Bank, Woori Finance Holdings, Shinhan Financial Group and Hana Financial Holdings – said that they weren’t interested in joining a consortium to invest in Lehman due to economic uncertainties on the local front.”

    But yesterday, the failure of those talks had not been announced yet. They were only inferred. Did someone trade on the knowledge that the talks had failed? It might be worth investigating.

    Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in the securities mentioned.

  8. The next Millberg and Weiss…????

    Signalife Sues Vianale & Vianale and Twelve Brokerage Houses for Injunctive Relief Against Naked Short Selling and Market Manipulation

    LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, Sep 03, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) — Signalife, Inc. (AMEX: SGN) has sued Kenneth and Julie Vianale, as well as twelve of the nation’s largest brokerage houses (State of California Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC397448), for conspiracy to knowingly violate the federal securities laws. The Securities and Exchange Commission has released data that the April selling of Signalife securities was not “a sell off” (as claimed by certain of the defendants) but a planned naked bear attack determined to coincide with a web cast at which the bona fides of the device were not discussed at all. In addition to the alleged unlawful taking of stock of Signalife’s corporate treasury in connection with naked shorting, the illegal actions have also resulted in injuries caused to persons who have not been given access to the Companies’ revolutionary technologies as a consequence of the adverse impact on the company resulting from those actions. The lawsuit also alleges that, nonetheless, numerous lives have been saved through the use of the Company’s Fidelity 100 given the work that the Company has been able to do – notwithstanding the unlawful naked shortselling. The lawsuit is subject to no conditions precedent, injunctive relief is planned, and the suit will be expanded to include families who were victimized by the injurious conduct of the defendants and their leaders as alleged in the complaint.
    About Signalife

    Signalife, Inc. is a life sciences company focused on the monitoring, detection and prevention of disease through continuous biomedical signal monitoring. Signalife uses its patented signal technology to design and develop medical devices, therapies and/or technologies that simplify and reduce the costs of cardiovascular disease.

    Signalife, Inc. is traded on the American Stock Exchange under the symbol SGN. More information is located at Clear Data. Trusted Results.

    Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    Statements in this release that are not strictly historical are “forward- looking” statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, which may cause the companies’ actual results in the future to differ materially from expected results. There is no guarantee that Signalife will win these lawsuits, and lawsuits involve risks. These risks are qualified in their entirety by cautionary language and risk factors set forth and to be further described in Signalife’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    Law office of Joseph C. Maher
    Joseph C. Maher II, Esq.
    Litigation Counsel to Signalife
    (310) 204-1910

  9. Thanks for the info, and another excuse NOT to read the New York Times for anything other than the Sunday Arts and Leisure

    Good luck to all Longs everywhere,
    advice to all those naked shorts- get into therapy soon, the market will rebound- SEC will turn around under McCain and you will be hunted down like the dogs you are.

    Why is it some people are perennial nay sayers and only enjoy tearing things down instead of building things up?

  10. Thanks for sending me your link – I had no idea before this morning that you were involved in things outside the running of the business – and until now, Overstock had been not much more than a faceless entity.

    Coming on the heels of this morning’s headline that the SEC had finally halted the shorting of stocks, it seems to me so completely fool hardy to think that those who short stocks were not making their “investments” based on their analysis of future business prospects, but rather, their own ability to influence the negative news that would cause the masses to dump the stock in a panic.

    That such laws existed to undermine the integrity of companies critical to the economic infrastructure of the United States of America, and they be permitted to be played like some Mississippi third world casino bet, is truly a question of the time, well deserving of an answer beyond “Well…. we don’t allow it anymore!”

    Thank you for the enlightening information you have gathered and shared with your customers and now the rest of America.

  11. Did anyone ever consider that we are all responsible, before Almighty God, for every word – written, spoken or thought – and that we will ALL be called to account for such? Obviously, there are those who are drunk on their own imaginations of power and control. When all is said and done, we will all view the Center of control, power and justice. I would just hope these kindergarten brats would wake up and turn around before they have “no more time!”

  12. Wow- just jumped from being a great place to find a great deal, to being the place I go to find the truth about what is going on with this country’s current financial crisis. And to think I was on the verge of un-subscribing from their email notices. No way! Now I plan to get my news here too. Way to go, Patrick Byrne.

  13. The scariest aspect of all these revelations is that people who do not subscribe to Overstock will never see this. Please, Patrick you need to get on a national tv show to share with the public. Too many people read one paper a day and think they are well informed.

  14. This is all very interesting. Patrick, you did a great job. Maybe you should make sure your company can’t be hacked? Our current financial crisis will come back to bite those who created this fiendish and complex state of affairs. And methinks there is more doom and gloom on the financial markets ahead.

  15. Wow…I had no idea I’d be reading such an informative piece when I opened up Overstock this morning…excellent. Don Imus has been railing against the NY Times for years due to their shoddy journalism and complete lack of concern for facts. Their company motto must be: Do Not Let Facts Get In The Way Of Your Predisposed Article. Apparently, they are exempt from any penalty for perjury since they continue to get away with it.

  16. yesterday, two Times reporters said that John Mack told Vikrim Pandit he could not survive without a merger. First, who would have a conversation like that within earshot of anyone? Second, when MS complained, the two reporters admitted they never checked with Morgan. Third, Billions in market value was wiped out, and investors were slaughtered.

    Who pays for such incompetance? And, is it criminal neglegance. I think the NYTimes needs to be investigated.


  18. Thank you Overstock and you, Dr. Byrne, for putting your life at risk (literally) to help expose the greatest financial crime the nation has ever seen.

    Shame on the NY Times and the rest of the NY financial media cabal. It just goes to reinforce the now apparently correct view that they are nothing more than the public relations arm of the Wall Street gang. And by the way, I note the outrage of John Mack (himself the subject of an insider trading investigation by the SEC’s Gary Aguirre who was fired for that inquiry) against the short sellers. What arrogant gall of the bum. He said nothing about naked shorting while he and his cohorts were pillaging other companies. Now that they’re on the receiving end, they whine. And their whine falls on receptive ears of course, as Sec. Paulson is from the same bunch of hoods on Wall St.

    And now the captured regulator, the SEC, suddenly finds the means to attempt to end this when so many have pointed out the crime in great detail with hard data for years on end!

    The DOJ needs to get involved. Criminal charges should be forthcoming with lengthy prison terms for these crooks…. from the hedge fund heads, to the prime brokers, to the NY media thugs, the regulators, and the rest of the sorry bunch.

    And that’s the PG version.

    AND AGAIN…..
    IT STUCK……..
    AND IT STINKS………..
    SOME MORE………..

  20. Patrick, thank you soooo much!! I can tell by the thread of events that you were motivated by a deep love for truth. If only there were enough “Patricks” our people may have a chance to once again understand and appreciate how we became the greatest nation to ever exist. I am not particularily educated in the ways of high finance, but your diligence and determination to expose this corruption has opened my eyes and motivated me to dig further into the issues. I have been so down heartened for so many years, having to sit by and witness the unbounding control and influence of the corrupt TV and airways media. I’m to a point I will not watch the “news” as it has become at best, a potpourri of sensationalism and misleading sound bites. I know it wouldn’t even begin to level the playing field but don’t you think it’s high time the public stops buying the NY Times and other media sources that are the pawns of greed and corrupiton of the powerful? When will we wake up to smell the coffee?.

  21. Patrick, as a retail investor I thank you for your efforts. One can only hope that shorting is reigned in far more than the current SEC steps – I for one do not believe shorting is needed at all to increase liquidity in the electronic trading age we are in.

    I find it ironic that the SEC removes the short-on-an-up-tick rule saying the markets should be let alone to work, yet shorting manipulates the market by a much greater extent – get rid of shorting altogother and let the market work!

    At the very least, Cox needs to be fired with no severance for gross misconduct and borderline negligence, and the SEC completely restructured into the agency is was supposed to be. He has single-handedly created mistrust in our markets for millions of investors.

    Maybe, just maybe, our markets will get back to being about INVESTMENTS, and let the options market be used for SPECULATION.

  22. Wow! I am doubly impressed…. not only do I get many compliments on the ring I bought from you, but I get to support a muck-raking journalist into the bargain! Keep up the good work on all counts!

  23. Patrick, I had never heard of naked-short-selling until chancing upon your endeavors at the bottom of Overstock’s home page. I have now been schooled by a true American patriot … you sir!
    Interesting that we spend so much energy and assets to incarcerate a known terrorist’s chauffeur for driving his car, only to allow what I now call ‘internal terrorists’ to bring down huge, once vital businesses in America.
    I respect what you are doing sir and remind you that people of such ilk will stop at nothing to cover themselves. Please be a ninja-like in your quest for TRUTH.
    I encourage everyone to use the link at top of page when shopping to help support these endeavors.
    Sample and Hold my friends!

  24. As others has posted, I want to be informed, yet, don’t believe I receive the truth often enough when reading or watching the media. I live paycheck to paycheck with no money available for investment, yet, my money is being invested by the government, insurance premiums, etc. and they should be reliable and protected as the foundation of the whole economy in our nation.

    We expect our government to do everything for us, bail us out in every area of our lives. It has become an entity doing what we used to do individually as fellow human beings, sharing our prosperity and our troubles in times of crisis and to those in need who cannot help themselves.

    When dishonest, self-serving, irresponsible people are put in and allowed to stay in positions that can so readily ruin the lives and well-being of soooooo many countless lives and literally the economy of a nation, then the rest of us, especially those who are in the position to be effective, have to stand up and say “ENOUGH”, and demand the necessary changes. Not a hand-slap, not a token fine, not an appology, not a beat-around-the-bush-we-think-you-outta-maybe-not-do-it-anymore kind of reprimand.

    I continually hear of hard working people who have lost their businesses, homes, retirement, etc. and who is going to say “ENOUGH” and demand accountabillity?

    Thank You for informing me of some of the details I could not have been privy to otherwise.

  25. Thank you for being so brave in your quest for truth. I am so ashamed that congressmen and women we elect to support us and protect us make partisanship a reason to disregard and to overlook corruption as you have described it. Why is it that one party took a five week vacation when our financial strength was crumbling around us? They had to have known of it. Why is it that the other party smugly denounced them and stayed on the job yet were unable to describe the dangers or do anything to stem the tide? Continue, please. We need you.

  26. Wow! Facinating read! I am sending my husband a copy right away and anyone else who is willing to read. Neither of us are financial wiz’s ( although we consider ourselves to be relatively intelligent people). So we have invested our future with “professionals”. We have our entire retirement funds invested in the markets around the world through a major “big name” brokerage house and a financial advisor in their employ who invests for us. We live in one of the most technologically advanced, innovative, and expensive places to live of all, Silicon Valley, in N. California. It’s hard enough to save anything so we won’t be eating dog food in our golden years without continually losing it, or having de-valued! We took a huge hit (almost 1/2 our total) after 9/11, as did so many, and were just starting to re-coop what we lost then. I am so disgusted with the greed of the few effecting and outweighing the investment needs of the many! Keep the flow of investigated information comming!

  27. thank you patrick for the insight into some very strange goings on. me, as an American have been blind the possibility of this type of evil. i was spending time worrying about the threats coming over our borders everyday. now i am very worried about this sign of a major weakness in our system. theft is theft

  28. I’m deeply moved that, not only did you choose to fight this, but did so practically alone; and very pleased that at least another ethical CEO believed in you. As one who is too painfully aware of ‘legal’ corporate dishonesty, I am honored to have been privileged to read your message. I, too, believe, especially after the past few days, you need to go further than Overstock buyers’s eyes. Outside of admiring a most ethical, accomplished contracts and international lawyer on the planet I’ve come to know well, I had a short list of completely ethical person I admire. With worldwide acquaintances, I’d hoped for more. Again, I am greatful you took the time and chances to expose an inexcusable offence.

  29. My take on the NSSers is that they don’t like risk and they have the ability to game the system with the use of corrupt or just downright lazy journalists. The trend is your friend does not apply here, as they can keep selling phantom shares into the marketplace, captured reporters like Nocera promulgate the lie that NSS doesn’t exist, that it’s a smoke screen for poorly run companies…in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.

    Kudos to Mark, Patrick, Judd and the rest of the DEEP CAPTURE team.

  30. Like many, I also never knew the depth of Overstock. From now on, my spare time in the evenings will be put to very good use. Reading the above was enlightening to say the least. I have had a great distrust of anything printed in the New York Times, and now this doubt has been vindicated. Thank you for a beacon for America.

  31. Thanks to all of you for the kind words.

    If you want to help, just send links to DeepCapture to friends. It’s funny: there was a time that these folks were full of high ridicule every time I mentioned “naked short selling”. Now they seem afraid to mention me. How odd.

    I feel like Lenin, in a sealed train on my way to Russia.


  32. Thank You for enlightening me and I am sending this E-Mail to all my friends so they can know what is happening with our finances!!! I had no idea that I would find something so interesting in a “O” E-Mail and to think I was going to unsubsribe!!!

  33. Thank you for looking out for the “Average American”. This financial meltdown was covered up by the powers that be and if not for people like you Joe Public would still be in the dark. Be very careful! They do not like whistle blowers!

  34. I’m fascinated as to why anyone at the NYT would participate in an email exchange with you Patrick? Granted, you had info they obviously did not want to get out, but didn’t they know they were feeding the fire? I also find it interesting that you are using your bread and butter business as a platform to explore investigative reporting. Don’t get me wrong, it’s refreshing to have a CEO share authentic views and I truly have a broader respect and appreciation for Patrick Byrne– someone I had never heard of as of an hour ago.

  35. The press HAS lost its ability to be unbiased, especially because of the newspapers own financial state of affairs and really its loss of power and its’ ability to be influenced more than it should. Also, why did many private companies go public, then private rapidly in the past few years? Was this a foreboding of the mess to come? It seemed to me more people knew more information at varying degrees of times to favor outcomes and it would not surprise me in the least if the Times knew in advance more outcomes than not. And I was laughing hysterically when poor Mr. Nocera was grappeling with your decision to use a computer full of “private mortgage data”. How clever of him to employ his ethics for your benefit. While off point of course, How much of my own data has been used illegally? How much has Mellon Bank of New York “accidently” reported lost on it’s way from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh. And who cares? I enjoyed reading your entries. Mary Eddy Baker started the Christan Science Monitor and went to court for Incompetancy and won. William Hearst sent all his reporters to cover it. She won, I believe also her paper won 2 Pulitzers. Obviously you are a man with passion. Perhaps it’s time to bring the truth back to reporting the old fashioned way.

  36. Deb A.,

    Fair question. If it did not sound like such Lefty cant, I’d say, “I suppose I am deconstructing some asymmetric power relationships.” I get the sense that sometime around 10 years ago some journalists “tried to become players, but became pawns,” as we say around DeepCapture. But having stepped onto the playing field, there’s nothing that says they cannot be shoulder-checked.

    Besides, where is the rule book that says, “Reporters get to write CEOs questions, and CEOs answer”? Where is that rule book that everyone assumes exists? And if it does exist, maybe its rule is, “CEOs get to write questions to reporters, and reporters answer.” Or maybe it’s, “People get to write questions to other people, and those other people answer or not, as they see fit.”

    I’ll let you know how it works out.


  37. KOROΧ – office mаrκet, s.r.o. je ԁodávatеľ κompletného ѕpotrebného materiálu pre vаšu
    firmu ale taktiеž široκého spotrebného materіálu
    рrе κanceláriu . Špecіalizujeme sa hlavne na
    κancelársky papieг . Kanсelárske
    potrеby ԁοručíme ku vám
    už do 24 hodín po celοm území Slovenskа.

    KOROΧ – office market, s.r.o. je dodáνateľ κomplеtného sоrtimentu počítačov pre vašu dоmácnosti ale taktiež širokého sortimentu pгe гoԁinu.

    Špecializuϳеme sa hlavnе na kаnсelárѕke potreby .
    kancеlársku tеchniku doručíme ku vám už do 24 hοdín po celom území Ѕlоvenska.

    Νaϳväčšie obchodné inteгnetоѵé сentrum
    v SR – wωω.korox.sκ ρrеvádzkuje ѕpoločnoѕť; KOROX – оffice market, ѕ.
    Na ѕtránkach wwω.koroх.sκ môžete nájsť širokú ponuku a najlaсnejšie osobné počítače ,
    κalkulačky , mobilných tеlefónον, noteboοky ,
    noteboоky produktοv. Idе o soгtiment zahrňujúci vіac ako
    1 000 sѵеtových značiеk.
    Hlаѵnou pгednosťou http://www.κ јe νšak rοzsіаhla pοnuka pridаných ѕlužieb.

    Ρrečo nakupoνať; na http://www.κоroх.
    sk? Sme jeԁnotκa na slοvеnskom trhu v
    kanceláгsky nábytok . Široký sοrtiment – 1 000 sνetových
    značiek a 80 tіsíc položiek tovаru.
    Veľké ѕklаdové zásоbу – rýсhle dοručenie tovaru zákazníkom.

    Poskytujemе rozsiahly systém rozšírených záruκ /
    dokúpenie dlhšej záruky / až 30 dní na vrátenie tovaru
    / expresné νуbaνenie reklamácií v prѵých 30 dňoch
    od nákupu. Výhodné cеny tovаru.
    Najväčšіa kamenná predaϳňa v Banѕkeϳ Βystrici na osobný odber tοvaru.
    Možnosť ѵгáteniа tоvaгu / οdstúpenia od zmluvy aj рre právniсké oѕоby.

  38. Simply desire to say your article is as astonishing.
    The clarity for your put up is simply nice and that
    i could assume you are a professional on this subject. Well with your permission allow
    me to take hold of your feed to stay up to date
    with imminent post. Thanks one million and please continue the gratifying

  39. I really love your site.. Very nice colors & theme. Did
    you create this amazing site yourself? Please reply back as I’m trying to create my own personal website and would like to learn where you got this from or what the theme is called. Thank you!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous Article

Was Dan Loeb's capital allied with David Einhorn's?

Next Article

David Einhorn, Cheryl Strauss, and the "Unavailable" Bethany McLean

Related Posts