Gary Weiss discards own identity, reborn “Tom Sykes” the bumbling sockpuppet

Apparently aware of the ruin that is his own reputation, Gary Weiss has taken to battling in favor of illegal stock market manipulation as “Tom Sykes”.

weiss-090727thApparently aware of the ruin that is his own reputation, Gary Weiss has taken to battling in favor of illegal stock market manipulation on political blog aggregator, under the pseudonym “Tom Sykes”.

Weiss has a rich history of abusive sockpuppeting, mostly for the purpose of attacking those who advocate ending  illegal naked short selling. At one time, Weiss did this on behalf of the DTCC. Now, exactly who’s paying him is unknown, though it must be someone because the fellow has otherwise been unemployed since 2004 (apart from his less-than-lethargic book sales, the pittance in ad revenue generated by his all-but-mothballed blog, and his tiny handful of ostensibly paid pieces for Portfolio Magazine – a publication whose final coffin nail Weiss personally helped to drive).

And the trend continues up to this very day, with Weiss as Tom Sykes.

To anybody who has followed Weiss for any period of time and come to recognize his overly-ripe writing style, that he and Tom Sykes are one in the same is beyond obvious.

But the Deep Capture team adheres to a higher standard when making such claims with certainty, and so I shall now explain how I can do so now.

Among the many flaws on the Yahoo message boards is one which makes it possible, under specific circumstances, to embed any html code, up to and including javascript, on the site. This, in turn, makes it possible not only to capture the IP address from which a user is accessing the site, but also their Yahoo username.

In other words, one can tie a Yahoo username to a specific IP address, sans ambiguity.

Gary Weiss lives in Greenwich Village, NY, but in August of 2008 he bought a second home upstate (tellingly financed by the property owner, not a bank) in the tiny Sullivan County hamlet of Callicoon Center.

A few months ago, using the above-referenced method, I was able to determine that the Yahoo account belonging to user [email protected] was accessing the web via IP address, which maps to within a few miles of Callicoon Center. Given the tininess of Callicoon Center, this is what one would expect of an instance of Weiss being online at his second home.

(Hint: remember that IP address, for we shall return to it shortly.)

We know that [email protected] belongs to our Gary Weiss thanks to emails we’ve acquired between Weiss and kindred stock manipulator Floyd Schneider.

With the 15-part series on Dendreon recently completed, and our self-imposed hiatus from posting anything else ended, I decided it was time to prove once and for all that Gary Weiss and Tom Sykes are the same person.

It took a few short hours to hit paydirt.

In short, email sent to [email protected] (the address Tom Sykes lists as his own on induced the recipient to visit the Yahoo message boards in such a way as to reveal his IP address to me.

The result:

This IP address has been conclusively linked to [email protected], which in turn has been conclusively linked to Gary R. Weiss, the bumbling sockpuppeteer and defender of illegal naked short selling.

But wait, there’s more.

Among Weiss’s most notable accomplishments has been epic sockpuppeting on Wikipedia in order to cover-up evidence of the damaging impact of illegal naked short selling. Once this finally came to light, Weiss and his home IP address range, which is well known, were unambiguously banned from editing Wikipedia.

But what about Weiss’s new IP address, tied to his new, second home?

Well, as we’d expect, realizing that it was unknown by Wikipedia administrators, Weiss used it, on two occasions, to remove references to Mark Mitchell’s Dendreon-related reporting on, which had been previously added to the Wikipedia article on Michael Milken.  To see these edits for yourself, follow this link, which will show you the only two contributions made by IP address To see the substance of the edits, click on the links that say “diff”. What you’ll then see is a before and after comparison, with the text in yellow being what (Weiss) removed.

What could possibly be motivating Weiss to carry on in this manner?

I see one of two possibilities: either he’s like the 80-year-old Japanese soldier living in the jungles of Guam who refuses to accept that his “side” lost the war, or – as I suspect – he remains in active contact with his “side,” which remains mobilized and intent on subverting all that we’ve accomplished.

So what next?

Well, obviously, the editorial staff at will want to know that they’ve given forum to a deeply conflicted contributor who – beyond simply using a pseudonym – is actively pretending not to be Gary Weiss by referring to Weiss in the third person and linking to his own blog as though it were actually really relevant. You can let them know what we’ve discovered about Mr. Sykes by going here.

In addition, any active Wikipedians among you will probably want to make it known there that is in fact the dread sockpuppet Mantanmoreland/Gary Weiss.

Finally, I’d simply suggest the Deep Capture community understand that there are many who are actively working – usually anonymously – to discredit the market reform movement. I encourage you to seek out and bring instances of such to our attention, so that we can investigate further when warranted, in order to better understand their real motives.

And as a postscript, I wish to thank Gary Weiss for being so very predictable. His consistently reptilian-brain-based responses to my occasional prodding has made this aspect of my job not only productive, but very enjoyable, as well.

UPDATE: Both Tom Sykes and Gary Weiss are “separately” expressing outrage at this situation tonight. I encourage each of you to make use of “their” blogs’ comment functions to let “them” know what you think about how “they” have been lying to you.

  1. i wonder how it is that weisshole can still show its face in public knowing that everything he ever wrote against naked short selling was flat out lies. lets see how he will spin this one.
    he should be imbarassed and ashamed for being complicit in a crime that stole Americas wealth.

    makes ya wonder who in the hell would hire this guy?

    thank you judd for a fine piece of journalism


  2. Judd,

    Seriously this Sykes err.. Weiss character is WAY outa his league. He hurls random insults. You provide proof of his misdeads. Weiss conducts his “business” in an ethics-free-zone. Another great post. Too bad Weiss doesn’t know when to accept defeat. It makes himself look even more pathetic…



  3. A little off topic but you would think this guy would want to stay out of the spotlight, but NO he is out there front and center talking healthcare reform and ON CNBC(Criminals Never Be Caught) network. And the man maybe a criminal genius but he does not come across as very intelligent to me. I hope the DOJ can explain to the wrongful death plaintiffs why they acted so slowly putting this guy in jail back where he belongs. Philanthropist with other peoples stolen blood money!!!

  4. Hilarious article!!

    On that note: “Stock Shock” is a movie that explains how the whole naked short selling thing works–and how NSS nearly took us into a second Depression. This movie is worth the watch if you are an investor. Amazon has it or

    Investors losing money and frustrated with the SEC inaction sent copies of the new movie: “Stock Shock” to their offices and demanded action.

  5. Judd,

    Having to resort to a sock puppet shows that Weiss knows he has been discredited and secondly, the stable of co-opted parties is depleted. In the past, one of the cabal would pick up the baton to make it look like there was wide support for their efforts. Wiki world doesn’t get it.. After the last go-round, when Weiss was banned, they had no way of keeping him from posting from another address, be it from Callicoon Center or Medchal, India.

  6. This is so amusing. After looking at Sykes/Weiss response on Kos, it couldn’t be more obvious. Writing styles are identical. Thank you for making my day.

    Hope the Bunny the see this as it’ll make his day too, imo.

  7. Judd, I would respectfully submit that for all the incredible merit to be found in your writing, as well as Mark’s, you knock yourself down a peg every time you employ invective. Describing Weiss as ‘reptilian-brained’ or Milken-loving mischief makers as ‘beady-eyed’ just don’t enhance your journalistic bona fides very much. It only gives those who would attempt to discredit you more ammunition when you stoop to their level with the name calling.

    I know it’s tough to write all this stuff and strive to keep it interesting without getting lost in the weeds, but personally I feel it’s plenty compelling, enough to keep reading even without the colorful prose.

    Thanks again for all your hard work.

    1. Redwood, you’re probably correct. My intent was to say that Weiss consistently responds in a visceral fashion to prodings on certain subjects, particularly when it relates to Patrick Byrne. “Reptilian-brained” was probably an inelegant way to make that point.

  8. Well this makes an awful lot of sense.

    I didn’t notice it before but Tom Sykes took issue with a post I put up on Kos about Jim Chanos and hedge funds

    Sykes wrote: “I was nodding along until I saw the passage about Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne and “his team of journalists at Deep Capture.” Isn’t that the nutter who is famous for blaming his company’s troubles on the “Sith Lord”? I don’t know this Chanos, but accusing him of illegal trading is a serious charge, and it’s irresponsible to parrot what some CEO says on his pet website without being able to prove it. Why don’t you summarize for us what the evidence is that he engaged in illegal trading. I don’t need another link to Deep Capture, by the way. Give us a summary of the evidence.”

    He then later talked some shit about me in a post dedicated to smearing Patrick.

    Screw contacting Kos, Mr. Weiss is going to hear from me.

  9. Judd, thanks for the response. I certainly can’t blame you for falling into such an easy trap, and it’s one I have to admit having found clamped onto my own paw plenty of times. But you are doing very important work here and I’d like to see it given all the acclaim and credit it deserves. Moreover, I’d love to see the subjects of these tales taken down and the order of law reasserted in our markets!

    I appreciate your receptiveness to my concerns.


  10. We have won a small battle for now:

    SEC Takes Steps to Curtail Abusive Short Sales and Increase Market Transparency
    Washington, D.C., July 27, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced several actions that would protect against abusive short sales and make more short sale information available to the public.

    “Today’s actions demonstrate the Commission’s determination to address short selling abuses while at the same time increasing public disclosure of short selling activities that affect our markets,” said SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro.

    First, the Commission made permanent an interim final temporary rule, Rule 204T, that seeks to reduce the potential for abusive “naked” short selling in the securities market. The new rule, Rule 204, requires broker-dealers to promptly purchase or borrow securities to deliver on a short sale. The temporary rule, approved by the SEC in the fall of 2008, was set to expire on July 31.

  11. I have to say I have a new found respect for Roddy least he was man enough to comme on the blog and state his case (albeit a sad statement) I doubt Weiss would ever come here and confront Judd!!! Not man enough I guess huh Weiss? LOL!!!

  12. “[I] wish to thank Gary Weiss for being so very predictable. His consistently reptilian-brain-based responses to my occasional prodding has made this aspect of my job not only productive, but very enjoyable, as well.”

    That’s hilarious, Judd! Great IT detective work as usual! I will definitely comment on Tom Sykes/Gary Weiss’ blog and also contact Daily Kos as well.

  13. Re: Our plight. You the Senator Kaufman reads our website?? I do!!

    Senator Ted speaks out again

    Kaufman Demands Level Playing Field for Investors

    Says we have unequal markets, which the SEC must restore: “Protecting investors is too important to the nation, to the integrity of our financial markets, and to our economic recovery.”

    July 28, 2009

    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-DE) went to the Senate floor today to implore the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to address a range of issues that include “flash orders,” naked short selling and the “uptick rule” in his continued effort to restore investor confidence in the stock markets.

    “We have an unfair playing field that leaves us with, in effect, two markets: one for powerful insiders and another for the average investor,” said Sen. Kaufman. “One market for huge volume, high-speed players, who can take advantage of every loophole for profit, and another market for retail investors, who must play by the rules and whose orders are filled without any special priority. This situation simply cannot continue. It is the financial equivalent of ‘separate and unequal.'”

    “To use a baseball metaphor, flash orders allow some batters to pay to see the catcher’s signals to the pitcher, while the rest of us don’t see them,” Sen. Kaufman continued. “Markets that permit a privileged few to have special access to information cannot maintain their credibility.”

    Excerpts from his speech today:

    Flash orders, the uptick rule, and naked short selling are not just a list of complaints, I believe they are interconnected. They are interconnected by an unsupported faith in the religion of self-regulation and liquidity. That religion believes that no price is too high for deeper liquidity – maximizing the volume and frequency of transactions — because it reveals the greatest amount of information about stock values. And there is one more article of faith – that innovation by market players is always beneficial.

    Since I began speaking out against naked short selling, I have heard from some of the biggest companies in America, who are concerned about the effects of naked short selling. But they do not want to speak out, because they fear that any hint of vulnerability they admit even privately to public officials will leak out and make them the target of predatory raiders.

    I have also heard from investors around the country. They have complained that large broker-dealers are somehow permitted to trade ahead of most investors. These average and even sophisticated investors relate that, in their experience, they never seem to be able to execute trades at the best available published bid or asking price. They complain that large orders always seem to get a priority over their smaller orders. Until now, I never really knew what to make of these claims.

    In the New York Times this past Friday, on investor blogs for weeks now, and in a comment letter filed by the New York Stock Exchange on May 28, commentators have begun to explain how flash orders work to – quite literally – “pick the pockets” of the average investor. In essence, these traders get a very quick look at all pending orders in advance and, through technology, can trade ahead of those orders.

    I call again for the SEC to act quickly to protect investors in four critical areas.

    First, we need to implement a rule that provides the substantive protections removed when the Uptick Rule was rescinded in 2007.

    Second, the SEC must end naked short selling: no one should be able to short a stock unless they have located specified shares of stock and obtained a contractual claim to borrow the stock in time for delivery. The SEC’s announcement yesterday of plans for more discussion does not accomplish this. We need concrete action soon by the SEC.

    Third, the SEC must prohibit the use of flash orders: no one should be permitted to use information asymmetry that permits high-speed computer trading to have an advantage over average investors.

    Finally, the SEC should establish disclosure and transparency equality: the disclosure requirements that apply to pooled funds worth greater than $100 million should apply uniformly to all, including hedge funds, for both long and short positions. And the level of transparency for order flows should be the same for all.

    In closing, I implore the SEC once again to act urgently to fulfill its core mission: protecting investors. The reason protecting investors is so important is that by doing so the SEC ensures the credibility of the financial markets. If the SEC refuses to restore a level playing field, to rebuild investor confidence in our markets, then we in Congress will have to step in and do it ourselves. Protecting investors is too important to the nation, to the integrity of our financial markets, and to our economic recovery.

    Link to PR and full text:

  14. Is this a good idea on how to deal with “naked shorting”?

    A former Wall Street Community Compliance Officer urges the SEC to allow the public to adopt the MM and broker/dealer’s covertly rigged and protected practices. A game he describes as one the authorities quietly permit by ignoring regulations and without the requirement for disclosure.

    If you disagree with this proposal, petition Congress to stop this NAKED SHORTING nonsense by having the SEC investigated for doing as little as possible to stop it …

    Date: 01/31/2000 6:21 PM
    Subject: Subject: File No. S7-24-99 Comments
    To Whom It May Concern:

    I am a retired member of the Wall Street Community after spending years in the Operation & Compliance (as both a senior member and director of both departments) sides of NASD member firms. This included the oversight of the trading activities of numerous branches, registered representatives, and the actual Trading Departments of the last two firms I worked for. As part of these activities I have spent numerous hours reviewing trading operations and compliance as well as immeasurable amounts of contact with both NASD and SEC regulatory officials.

    I am writing this to you regarding the above referenced matter as I feel compelled to offer my comments on the subject at hand.

    It is my persona belief that it is of the utmost importance to maintain, and strive for, the concept of “fair markets”. To that extent I believe that it is absolutely necessary that you level the playing field for the investing public with regard to the trading strategy of short selling.

    It is time to create, and enforce, a single set of short-selling rules which will apply to specialists, market makers, broker/dealers, and the investing public. As such, I urge you to remove what I believe to be the inequitable and discriminatory regulations that restrict the public investor’s ability to short-sell stocks, while providing preferential treatment only for the market makers and broker/dealers.

    While I understand that most novice investors do not understand, or appreciate, the critical check-and-balance afforded by the action of short selling in the exercise of free markets. Since the industry itself makes no effort whatsoever to educate the public with regard to short selling (this is one of the more sophisticated investing strategies that they fail on, much less the proper use of margin and/or the trading of options), the public is left to draw the erroneous conclusion that it is short sellers who should be blamed when a stock goes down in price.

    Regrettably, this lack of understanding applies most directly to the new generation of “do-it-yourself” investors spawned by the proliferation of access to information and gossip enabled by the internet. Many treat the internet as a tool to generate “momentum” for stocks as though it is a football game. Rapid runups are easily fabricated for reasons having nothing whatever to do with the value of the underlying security. Furthermore, as I know the SEC actively is monitoring “chat rooms” on various internet investing websites this should be quite apparent to regulatory officials. It is extremely disheartening when you see this in those rooms dedicated to the trading (loosely defined in some occasions) of stocks that trade on the NASDAQ Small Cap and/or OTCBB markets. In these cases the promoters, and/or the issuers paid posters who hype the stock, use the specter of short sellers to soothe the long stock holders who are being materially damaged when the insiders in these stocks liquidate their shares into the buying of the unsuspecting public. For example, most OTCBB investors on these sites are completely unaware that, in the US, you cannot short sell an OTCBB stock, yet this blaming of the short sellers routinely occurs. A better educated public would not be so susceptible to this tactic.

    However, on the flip side, market makers and broker/dealers have rigged the game so they can play by a different set of rules than the general public and, to date, this ha been protected by the regulatory bodies. These market makers and broker/dealers have done this for no other reason than to line their own pockets, under the sham of maintaining “fairness” in the market. Every day, market pros short sell IPO’s, short sell on downticks, and short sell without regard to the availability of certificates, all things done at the expense of individual investors, who do not have the right to do the same. They do it quietly, without regulation, and without a requirement for disclosure; often in direct contradiction to the public “recommendations” of analysts from the very same firms which I believe is another area that the regulatory bodies should be aware of (for example look at the recent action in AMZN where outlandish price targets were placed on the stock creating a price run right before the stock pre-announced a financial warning). The public will be best served by administering the markets so that every investor wishing to place their own money in an “at-risk” trade be allowed to do so under the same rules.

    Therefore, I urge you to eliminate current restrictions on short selling, and allow the public to sell short by the same rules as market makers.

    I thank you for your time and consideration and would be more than happy to discuss this with anyone on your staff.




    “Instead of proposing action today to deal with the problem, the SEC apparently is content to let potential solutions sit on the shelf for another two months”

    July 27, 2009

    WASHINGTON, DC – Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-DE) released the following statement today in response to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) announcement of actions to address abusive short selling:

    “When it comes to the problems of abusive short selling, investors need to see concrete steps. I am pleased that the SEC has announced some new transparency measures and a roundtable on September 30 on the agenda to curb the abuses of naked short selling. I am hopeful the SEC indeed will take additional action. But until the SEC actually toughens its rules so that abusive short selling can be stopped effectively with enforceable standards, I am concerned that the abuses that took place last year that hastened the demise of Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns could happen again.”

    “The SEC could have proposed alternative solutions in a rule today: either a pre-borrow requirement or the DTCC proposal of a centralized “hard locate” system, which was the subject of a bipartisan letter by seven Senators to the SEC last week. Instead of proposing action today to deal with the problem, the SEC apparently is content to let potential solutions sit on the shelf for another two months. Given the dangers of abusive short selling, if the market were to decline precipitously again and the banks propped up by taxpayer funds were to become vulnerable again, that is not an insignificant risk.”

  16. Judd,
    I recommend purchasing full page ads in the Sullivan County Democrat <> and printing an abbreviated version of “Gary Weiss, Psychopath & Scaramouch” for the rest of the summer.

  17. Judd,
    Good work in outing the hack. I have contacted KOS with my concerns. I suspect once Tom/Gary has been paid off, er, I mean, has done some more “research”, he will come out with some grand statement about why naked shorting isn’t so bad after all.

  18. Just looking at Gary shows,

    shilling for the criminals weighs HEAVILY on him.

    Caution: Viewing before breakfast will reduce appetite

  19. “Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, owner of the DailyKos website, now admits that he spent six months in the employ of the US Central Intelligence Agency in 2001,” writes Holland. “In a one-hour interview on June 2, 2006 at the Commonwealth Club, Moulitsas, also known as ‘Kos,’ admitted that he was a CIA employee and would have ‘no problem working for them’ in the present.”

  20. Judd, are you aware of Janice Shell, the famed “fraudbuster” who operates along the same lines as Gary Weiss? She’s the “art historian”, who hasn’t published a book in about 15 years (which is obviously not her primary means of support). She haunts IHUB under her own name, and is the “moderator” of their CMKX board (CMKX having been revoked for 5 years mysteriously warranting an inordinate amount of her time – which is another whole story somewhat covered by Author, now CMKM Diamonds (CMKX) CEO, Mark Faulk.)

    She’s obviously tight with Matthew Brown, the IHUB operator, who was recently indicted for running, not one, but FOUR different pump and dumps, as she is named with him as co-defendants in some court documents. The joke is that this infamous scambuster couldn’t find her own buddy running all those P&D’s right under her nose.

    She seems to be tight with some of the other major miscreants you cover, as she testified FAVORABLY at the Tony “Nine Fingers” Elgindy sentencing in an apparent effort to mitigate his punishment. What a gal! I’m sure she’ll pop up on your radar soon if she hasn’t already.

  21. The following is a good example of the abuse that “Naked Short Selling” can extend to the stockholders of public corporations and this abuse never be realized by those public stockholders.

    Daleco Resources Corporation (Wall Street Equities Inc. ?) sold approximately 7,000,000 of Daleco’s common shares “NAKED SHORT” IN 1996 & 1997 and covered these “NAKED SHORT” sales three years later (Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000) while “DLOV” & “DLVO” had been listed only on the Pink Sheets. Daleco finessed the regulatory system by effecting two 1 for 10 reverse splits in Feb. of 1998 (FEB 24, 1998 FILED WITH THE SEC & FEB. 17, 1998 NOT MADE PUBLIC)! Daleco then comes back while on the Pink Sheets in the spring of 2000 and covers approximately 7,000,000 Naked Short Sales three years earlier with approximately 70,000 actual shares traded and the addition of two zeros (see WALL STREET EQUITIES, INC. NEW YORK BROKER?) added to this staged trading of Daleco Resources Corporation from Feb. 28, 2000 to Aug. 1, 2000.

    Date Open High Low Close Volume Adj Close*
    8-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 – 250,000 – 0.45
    7-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 -1,600,000 – 0.37
    6-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.38 0.38 – 300,000 – 0.32
    5-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 – 0 – 0.37
    2-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 – 0 – 0.37
    1-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 – 700,000 – 0.37
    31-May-00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31- 460,000- 0.26
    30-May-00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31- 0- 0.26
    26-May-00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31- 50,000- 0.26
    25-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0- 0.21
    24-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0 -0.21
    23-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0 -0.21
    22-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0- 0.21
    19-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0- 0.21
    18-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0- 0.21
    17-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0- 0.21
    16-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25- 0 -0.21
    15-May-00 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.25- 1,070,000- 0.21
    12-May-00 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62- 100,000 -0.53
    11-May-00 0.62 0.62 0.25 0.25- 1,260,000- 0.21
    10-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0 -0.17
    9-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0 -0.17
    8-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0 -0.17
    5-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    4-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    3-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    2-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    1-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    28-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    27-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 50,000- 0.17
    26-Apr-00 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62- 280,000- 0.53
    25-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0 -0.17
    24-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    20-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    19-Apr-00 0.62 0.62 0.20 0.20- 230,000- 0.17
    18-Apr-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 0- 0.16
    17-Apr-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 100,000- 0.16
    14-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    13-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    12-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    11-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    10-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 40,000- 0.17
    7-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 0- 0.17
    6-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 40,000- 0.17
    5-Apr-00 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69- 140,000- 0.58
    4-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20- 100,000- 0.17
    3-Apr-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 20,000- 0.16
    31-Mar-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 0 -0.16
    30-Mar-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 0- 0.16
    29-Mar-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 0- 0.16
    28-Mar-00 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19- 10,000- 0.16
    27-Mar-00 0.19 0.75 0.19 0.75- 130,000 -0.63
    24-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0- 0.13
    23-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0 -0.13
    22-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0 -0.13
    21-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0- 0.13
    20-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0- 0.13
    17-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0- 0.13
    16-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0- 0.13
    15-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 0- 0.13
    14-Mar-00 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16- 230,000 -0.13
    13-Mar-00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75- 200,000- 0.63
    10-Mar-00 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12- 0- 0.11
    9-Mar-00 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12- 30,000- 0.11
    8-Mar-00 0.12 0.75 0.12 0.12- 2,620,000- 0.11
    7-Mar-00 0.12 0.50 0.12 0.12- 230,000- 0.11
    * Close price adjusted for dividends and splits.


    Historical Prices Get Historical Prices for:

    Start Date: JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Eg. Jan 1, 2003
    End Date: JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
    Dividends Only

    First | Prev | Next | Last


    Date Open High Low Close Volume Adj Close*
    1-Aug-00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 2,000 0.42
    31-Jul-00 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0 0.40
    28-Jul-00 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0 0.40
    27-Jul-00 0.55 0.55 0.47 0.47 380,000 0.40
    26-Jul-00 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0 0.40
    25-Jul-00 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 20,000 0.40
    24-Jul-00 0.55 0.55 0.47 0.47 80,000 0.40
    21-Jul-00 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0 0.46
    20-Jul-00 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0 0.46
    19-Jul-00 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 90,000 0.46
    18-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    17-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    14-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    13-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    12-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    11-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    10-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    7-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    6-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    5-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.38
    3-Jul-00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 100,000 0.38
    30-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0 0.32
    29-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0 0.32
    28-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 50,000 0.32
    27-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0 0.45
    26-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 390,000 0.45
    23-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0 0.45
    22-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 190,000 0.45
    21-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 260,000 0.45
    20-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 1,200,000 0.45
    19-Jun-00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 50,000 0.42
    16-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0 0.32
    15-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0 0.32
    14-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0 0.32
    13-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 250,000 0.32
    12-Jun-00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 100,000 0.32
    9-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.38 0.38 1,050,000 0.32
    8-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 250,000 0.45
    7-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 1,600,000 0.37
    6-Jun-00 0.53 0.53 0.38 0.38 300,000 0.32
    5-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0 0.37
    2-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0 0.37
    1-Jun-00 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 700,000 0.37
    31-May-00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 460,000 0.26
    30-May-00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0 0.26
    26-May-00 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 50,000 0.26
    25-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    24-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    23-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    22-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    19-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    18-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    17-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    16-May-00 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0 0.21
    15-May-00 0.50 0.50 0.25 0.25 1,070,000 0.21
    12-May-00 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 100,000 0.53
    11-May-00 0.62 0.62 0.25 0.25 1,260,000 0.21
    10-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    9-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    8-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    5-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    4-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    3-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    2-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    1-May-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    28-Apr-00 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 0.17
    * Close price adjusted for dividends and splits.

    First | Prev | Next | Last


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

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


  22. Off this subject but I need to know since I think someone here referenced this woman once in relation to NSS and other market manipulation. She apparently worked in the Bush administraion early on but resigned.

    Could anyone here tell me what they know about Catherine Austin Fitts? TIA

  23. A little off topic but you have to appreciate the IRONY here

    God does not sleep!!

    Hartford Courant: Dodd Diagnosed With Early-Stage Prostate Cancer,0,3879555.story
    Hartford Courant Exclusive
    Dodd Diagnosed With Early-Stage Prostate Cancer

    The Hartford Courant

    12:52 PM EDT, July 31, 2009

    U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd has been diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer.

    Dodd is scheduled to undergo surgery during the Senate’s August recess and said he expects to be back at work after a “brief recuperation” at home.

    “It’s something that’s very common among men my age,” said Dodd, who is 65 and the father of two young daughters. “In fact, one in six men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer at some point during their life.”

    Dodd, a Democrat, said he feels fine and intends to run for re-election in November 2010. “As you have probably noticed, I’m working some long and hard hours lately,” he said. “And that will continue.”

    As the ranking Democrat on the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, Dodd is one of the key players in the effort to overhaul the nation’s healthcare system. It is a role he took on because the committee’s chairman and Dodd’s close friend, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, is facing his own battle with malignant brain cancer.

    Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers among men. The American Cancer Society estimates that about 192,280 new cases of prostate cancer will be diagnosed in the United States in 2009. Survivors include Sen. John Kerry, former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and UConn men’s basketball coach Jim Calhoun.

    Dodd is scheduled to hold a press conference this afternoon at 2 p.m. at his Hartford office

      1. I would not consider her a whack job. She offers a unique voice and perspective; I have watched some of her videos online and think she is fairly grounded, at least as some of these alternative voices go. She acknowledges the shortcomings in her depopulation argument – this is not something a zealot would do.

        That said, from what I can tell she was greatly affected by her experiences in Washington and Wall Street, and it subsequently changed many of her views. In such cases sometimes such changes can bring wholesale change in a myriad of values and views, and not all of them have the same depth.

        While she is a worthwhile read; do your homework on everything, and draw from a range of different views.

  24. Does anyone know how to find out if multiple id’s on yahoo message board are of a same poster? May be you can direct me to a site that explains how you can find out IP address of a poster using multiple id’s.


  25. I am currently reading the book “Den of Thieves” by James Stewart and all I can say is that the same characters that ravaged and stole from the stock market and its investors are doing it again.. the same way but now they are being assisted by our regulators and government officials!! History has officially repeated itself!!

  26. Mark, Judd, Patrick,

    Someone on the MEDX board has just noticed that Cramer is in favor of BMY buying MEDX. The following link was given where there is a video interview with Cramer’s Stephanie Link, director of research for Cramer’s Action Alerts PLUS portfolio:

    “Buy Health Care Stocks
    NEW YORK (TheStreet) — Stephanie Link, director of research for Cramer’s Action Alerts PLUS portfolio, reveals four health care stocks the portfolio is buying.”

    This quote would seem to imply that Cramer is in favor of the BMY and MEDX merger.

    ( )


    I WONDER………………….

    Does this indicate that all the Hedge Funds involved in Naked Counterfeit Selling of MEDX Stock like this merger deal BECAUSE BMY is willing to BUY all their Counterfeit Shares of MEDX without asking any questions?

    BMY has offered a VERY LOW $16/shr cash deal – only 90% over the closing price the day before the offer. The MEDX Board decided to sell MEDX to BMY only months BEFORE the ipi phrase III results are know and in spite of the fact that MEDX has over $300 Million dollars with new income streams which will add directly to its bottom line. In other words, MEDX does NOT need to sell itself since it has money in hand for 2 more years of research and development.

    FYI – There are now at least 8 class action lawsuits filed – 1 Federal and 7 State suits.


    Mark, in you series about DNDN you indicated that Hedge Funds own a majority of DNDN and that their purpose for owning all these share is not know.

    Could it be? That the Hedge Funds involved in Naked Counterfeit Short Selling DNDN are looking for a similar deal BMY is offering MEDX – a LOW BALL cash per share dollar figure in exchange for the buying company buying all the Counterfeit Shares of DNDN without asking any questions?

    The original MEDX message is here:

  27. One correction:


    The MEDX Board decided to sell MEDX to BMY only months BEFORE the ipi phrase III results are know and in spite of the fact that MEDX has over $300 Million dollars TODAY ALONG with new income streams FROM THREE NEWLY APPROVED DRUGS BY PARTNERS which will add directly to its bottom line. In other words, MEDX does NOT need to sell itself since it has money in hand for 2 more years of research and development.

  28. Patrick _ does this answer the question?

    What’s Behind High-Frequency Trading


    High-frequency trading, long an obscure corner of the market, has leapt into the spotlight this year. Wildly successful in 2008, high-frequency traders are the talk of Wall Street, attracting big bucks and some unwanted attention. Concerns that some traders are taking advantage of less fleet-footed investors has drawn the attention of regulators and members of Congress. The following is an explanation of the core issues, based on interviews with industry participants and regulators.

    Q: What is high-frequency trading?

    A: Definitions differ, but at its most basic, high-frequency trading implies speed: Using supercomputers, firms make trades in a matter of microseconds, or one-millionth of a second. Goals vary. Some trading firms try to catch fleeting moves in everything from stocks to currencies to commodities. They hunt for “signals,” such as the movement of interest rates, that indicate which way parts of the market may move in short periods. Some try to find ways to take advantage of subtle quirks in the infrastructure of trading.

    Other firms are “market makers,” providing securities on each side of a buy and sell order. Some firms trade on signals and make markets.

    Q: How do players make money in high-frequency trades?

    A: Many high-frequency traders collect tiny gains, often measured in pennies, on short-term market gyrations. They hunt for temporary “inefficiencies” in the market and trade in ways that can make them money before the brief distortions go away.

    Market-making, high-frequency firms hope to make money on the difference between how much investors are willing to buy and sell a stock, or the “bid-ask spread.” They do this by selling and buying on both sides of the trade. Many exchanges offer “rebates” of about one-third of a penny a share to outfits that are willing to step up and provide shares when needed.

    Q: Who are the big players in high frequency?

    A: They range from well- to lesser-known firms. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Chicago hedge fund Citadel Investment Group LLC have high-frequency operations. An innovator in superfast trading strategies is hedge-fund firm Renaissance Technologies LLC.

    Privately held Getco LLC, a Chicago high-frequency firm founded in 1999, is a registered market maker with operations in markets around the world. Other high-frequency outfits include firms such as Jane Street Capital LLC, Hudson River Trading LLC, Wolverine Trading LLC and Jump Trading LLC.

    Q: Why is everyone talking about high-frequency trading?

    A: In the trading community, high-frequency has drawn interest because it was a wildly successful strategy last year. More recently, it made headlines when a former Goldman Sachs employee was charged by federal prosecutors with stealing trade secrets from the firm’s high-frequency platform.

    Also grabbing attention are the volume numbers. High-frequency trading now accounts for more than half of all stock-trading volume in the U.S. It also generates more revenue for exchanges. NYSE Euronext, owner of the New York Stock Exchange, is building a data center to cater to high-speed traders.

    Q: What are “flash orders,” and what is the controversy surrounding them?

    A: Typically on trades, exchanges pay rebates to traders who post shares to buy or sell and charge fees to traders who respond to those offers. This setup creates an incentive to earn rebates. That is one place where flash orders come in.

    With a flash order, a trading firm can keep its order on a certain exchange for up to half a second without matching an existing buy or sell order on another exchange, a move that puts it in a position of poster, rather than responder. The hope is that another trader who needs to buy or sell quickly steps in on the other side of the trade. This dynamic boosts the chance the flash-order trader will complete the trade on the exchange and get the rebate. Exchanges offer flash orders to keep market share.

    Regulators worry that certain unscrupulous participants in the market with ultrafast computer technology could game these orders, trading ahead of them and affecting the price of the security.

    Q: Who will be hurt if flash orders are banned?

    A: A ban on flash orders, under consideration by the Securities and Exchange Commission, could hurt the profits of high-frequency traders who use flash extensively. Some flash-order advocates said a ban could cause trading volume to drop on the exchanges as traders look for better execution in alternative, less-transparent venues.

    Q: What is “naked access,” and why the controversy around it?

    A: Many brokers allow high-frequency outfits to trade directly on an exchange using a broker’s computer-access code. Most brokers closely monitor the activity, but some allow the traders to interact with the exchange largely unchecked, according to regulators such as the SEC. In the industry, this is known as “naked access.” Critics worry that a rogue firm’s system could destabilize parts of the market, even leading to a broad-based market selloff, without proper oversight and risk controls.

    Q: How does it impact mom-and-pop investors?

    A: Proponents said high-frequency provides a constant, ever-ready flow of securities when investors need them, making trading cheaper for everyone. When a mutual fund wants to buy 10,000 shares of Google Inc., odds are a high-frequency shop will be ready to provide the shares.

    Critics worry that traders could use quick-draw capabilities to drive up prices, selling them back to investors at an inflated level. Another concern are rebates that exchanges pay to high-frequency traders, as the costs could be passed on to investors.

    Q: Am I a high-frequency trader without realizing it?

    A: Most online brokers that cater to individual investors and nearly all full-service brokers have servers at the stock-trading platforms to cut buying and selling speed down to milliseconds. This ensures orders are disposed of quickly and efficiently at high speeds. However, brokers generally don’t use the highly sophisticated strategies plied by dedicated high-frequency traders, such as trading off of obscure signals in the market.

    Write to Scott Patterson at [email protected] and Geoffrey Rogow at [email protected]

  29. particularly this/;

    Q: What is “naked access,” and why the controversy around it?

    A: Many brokers allow high-frequency outfits to trade directly on an exchange using a broker’s computer-access code. Most brokers closely monitor the activity, but some allow the traders to interact with the exchange largely unchecked, according to regulators such as the SEC. In the industry, this is known as “naked access.” Critics worry that a rogue firm’s system could destabilize parts of the market, even leading to a broad-based market selloff, without proper oversight and risk controls

  30. High frequency trading

    The article above appeared to be written by two Wall Street Journal writers. But there was no date shown. Whan was it?

    The post did not mention a practice mentioned in the NY Times article a couple of weeks ago. That article mentions that some traders, for a fee, can get access to bids/offers 30 milliseconds ahead of the public market (non-fee paying tragers). Does anyone know more about this? How does someone get this advantage? Who is allowed to do it?

  31. Those responsible for ANSS may just have destroyed themselves according to this article. Now, the big question remaining is will we the tax payers be forced once again by the Obama/Paulson/Geitner/Bernake cartel to buy them out of their CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY ?

  32. I am the anon wikipedia editor from (posted via a Charter Communications cable account).

    The Wikipedia edits on Michael Milken were carefully crafted to invoke this response as well as update other readers to the fact that this is an ongoing “war” in a sense. I’m glad the anonymous edit paid off and indeed was reverted by a character I expected.

    This won’t be the end of the story.

  33. Off topic but related to our cause!!

    Even With New Rules, Naked-Short Violations Hard To Enforce
    from dow jones–

    NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–Recent experience suggests the Securities and Exchange Commission’s new short-selling rules will do little to punish violators of the “naked-short selling” provisions.

    In a short sale, an investor seeks to profit from a decline in the price of a stock by borrowing shares, selling them and then buying them back later, hopefully at a lower price. During the market rout last autumn, short sellers came under criticism, and short sales of some financial institutions were temporarily halted at one point.

    The rules, which are considered by the industry to be a “middle ground” between defenders and critics of short selling, make permanent a temporary rule that traders must close a short sale within four days. In other words, a short-selling trader who performs a “naked” sale – or borrows a stock without physically locating shares within four days – will have violated the rule.

    Before last September, a trader had 13 days to locate shares. While naked-short selling has been lowered dramatically since the temporary rule was put in place, there is still a lot of it going on and few, if any, cases of penalties for offenders. Most short-selling is done by hedge funds.

    If the history of enforcing naked-shorting rules is any indication, there is little deterrent in the new rules for violations by brokers who clear the trades for short-selling hedge-fund managers or other investors.

    While SEC data have shown that the temporary version of the four-day rule has dramatically curbed the practice of not physically locating borrowed shares, actual sanctions of violators who have done so are still extremely rare. In fact, the SEC doesn’t spell out exactly what the penalties are for naked shorting.

    An SEC spokesman said the commission has no cases against naked short-sellers on file, but that self-regulatory organizations such as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority would also be responsible for bringing such cases. A spokesman for Finra, which regulates the broker-dealers responsible for clearing traders’ short sales, told Dow Jones Newswires that, in the 10 months of the temporary four-day rule, there have been no naked-shorting cases.

  34. I just thought I’d share with everybody tonight something I left over at Gary’s main blog. It is still awaiting moderation and I somehow doubt it will ever see the light of day. But I wonder when this man will realize just what a huge failure he is? I seem to remember a time when the forces of Evil really had their sh_t together and people like him would be instantly fed to the piranhas for making as many mistakes as he has. If I were his handler…

    So, here’s the comment I left for our dear friend and incompetent wannabe spook, Gary Weiss:

    You do understand that your employers just destroyed the entire world, right? The old world is GONE FOREVER and you people are still partying like it’s 1999 and you’ve got all the time in the world to continue to profit from your absurd machinations.

    I still don’t understand why the DTCC didn’t hire professionals for all the astroturfing they were doing, or why YOU didn’t hire some decent consultants to help you cover your computerized tracks. But you didn’t. And you FAILED. Have you run a Google search on your own name lately, Gary? Have you ever heard of search engine optimization or is this yet another aspect of the Web 2.0 environment that you are incapable of dealing with? News flash: Byrne’s people OWN YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE LOST. GIVE UP.

    People like you think you are oh-so-funny when you sink entire economies and put tens of millions of your fellow countrymen out of work. Do you have ANY IDEA what this country is going to be like in six months? A year? Great, sprawling tent cities full of newly disenfranchised yuppies, all looking for someone to blame. Fuel shortages, food shortages, hyperinflation, marauding gangs of former military and law enforcement personnel as the only remaining vestiges of order. And all the hyperinflated money in the world won’t buy you things that simply aren’t available. Complete social breakdown. This will make Mad Max look like the Wizard of Oz, Gary.

    And aren’t you oh-so-proud of yourself for helping to make all this happen? Maybe Goldman Sachs and the DTCC should give you some kind of medal for original thinking before it all goes up in flames, they’re handing out obscene bonuses to the people who inflicted this financial holocaust on all of us so maybe they should reward your incompetence as well. Wannabe spooks who can’t even be bothered to cover their computer traces don’t impress me, sir. You don’t impress me. In the words of Gordon Gekko, “The new law on Wall Street seems to be survival of the unfittest. Well in my book, you do it right or you get eliminated.” Please tell me that your drug fogged mind at least remembers Gekko’s “Greed is Good” speech, Gary.

    If you are capable of clearing the bong smoke out of your room long enough for your brain to start working again, assuming you even have a brain left, I would strongly suggest that you take whatever assets you have left and convert them to gold and then catch the next flight to the European Union. And then change your name, because the name Gary Weiss is RUINED.

    -Jay Randall,

    And yes, if you visit my website my analytics are capable of telling me exactly where you are viewing me from. You might try using proxy servers to create your sock puppets with, but apparently you, like everyone else around here, simply can’t be bothered to do a good job. It’s a sad day indeed when even the bad guys can’t conduct a conspiracy properly. What would Ernst Blofeldt do with you, Gary? I seem to remember that he at least had a pool of piranhas waiting for the failures in his ranks, unlike Goldman Sachs and the DTCC. GIVE UP.

  35. Jay Randall, after reading your post..nothing else needs to be said here. I think you have spoken eloquently for us all!!Thank you for this.

  36. Well, it seems that Gary Weiss still refuses to let any posts be made to his blog that are even slightly critical of him or his actions. How professional of him….

  37. You think Goldman is sweating right about now?/LOL!! This is how Miliken went down the first time at the hands (and mouth) of Boesky making a plea deal!! “There is no honor amongst thieves”

    What does he have as leverage?
    Give me 5 years and I’ll save you the cost of a trial?
    Let me walk and I’ll prove GS was front running trades?

    Ex-Goldman Programmer in Plea Talks With Prosecutors (Update1)

    Share | Email | Print | A A A

    By Bob Van Voris

    Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) — Sergey Aleynikov, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. computer programmer charged last month with stealing sophisticated trading software, is in talks with prosecutors to resolve the case, according to court papers.

    Prosecutors and Aleynikov, 39, have agreed to delay the deadline for filing an indictment against him, to allow plea negotiations to go forward, Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Facciponti said in an affirmation filed with the U.S. District Court in Manhattan yesterday.

    The government requested a 14-day extension “to determine whether a disposition is possible prior to indictment,” Facciponti said in the court filing.

    Aleynikov was arrested July 3 and charged the next day with theft of trade secrets and transportation of stolen property in foreign commerce. At Aleynikov’s July 4 arraignment, Facciponti said that the alleged theft is the “most substantial” that Goldman Sachs can recall. Aleynikov is free on $750,000 bond.

    The proprietary code, worth millions of dollars, lets the firm do “sophisticated, high-speed and high-volume trades on various stock and commodities markets,” prosecutors said in court documents. Facciponti said a person misusing the code might be able to “manipulate markets.”

    In yesterday’s filing, Facciponti said that he and Aleynikov’s lawyer, Sabrina Shroff, began discussing a possible plea deal on July 7, the day after Aleynikov was released on bail.

    “The negotiations have not been completed and we plan to continue our discussions,” he said in the court filing.

    The case is U.S. v. Aleynikov, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

  38. I’m getting inundated with questions on the new 242.204 “CLOSE OUT REQUIREMENT” amendment to Reg SHO which became effective 7/31/09. In a nutshell, a Reg SHO T+13 day mandated buy-in for FTDs involving “threshold securities” only has been morphed into either a T+4 or T+6 (for bona fide MMs) mandated “borrow” or “purchase” for FTDs in ALL securities held at a “registered clearing agency” in the name of one of its “participants”. The critical question is will the SEC allow a “faux borrow” from the NSCC’s totally corrupt self-replenishing lending pool of securities known as the “SBP” or “Stock Borrow Program” be allowed to qualify as a “borrow”. If yes, we’ve got major league problems. If no, then the new legislation will be a godsend. It’s that simple.

    What you should expect is “pulse-like” attacks featuring abusive naked short selling on T+0 (trade date), T+1, T+2 and the morning of T+3. This will be followed by a “borrow” or “purchase” on the afternoon of T+3 or in the pre-opening on T+4. These “pulse-like” attacks followed by a “borrow” from the SBP will kill a lot of development stage corporations. An attack followed by a “purchase” won’t be nearly as damaging. Any unconflicted SRO or regulator must put the activities at the SBP under a microscope from this day forward and the SEC needs to immediately rescind its unconscionable approval of this blatant counterfeiting machine. Any company with cash in the coffers might even welcome these attacks as an opportunity to buy back and later cancel shares at ridiculously low share price levels on perhaps T+2 or the morning of T+3 of any given “pulse”. Keep in mind that these attacks will be exacerbated by the current lack of an “uptick rule” or modification thereof. Coincidence? The combination of an SBP “borrow” allowing compliance with 242.204 plus no “uptick rule” in effect is one dirty trick!

  39. Another possible rat (perhaps a small time one, but a rat nonetheless), is James Foytlin aka “InvestmentGuru” aka “InvestmentGuru2001.” He was pumping and dumping JAVA (nee SUNW) prior to about 2003, then, turned around and became a bear raider, issuing endless FUD, libel and in general doing everything possible to help out anyone naked shorting this security. He’s still at it on the Yahoo Financial board. Just saying …

  40. RE: Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) — Sergey Aleynikov, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. computer programmer charged last month with stealing sophisticated trading software, is in talks with prosecutors to resolve the case, according to court papers.

    This means that the Russians have hacked into our trading systems. They’ve dreamed of this for decades.


    In a clearance and settlement system featuring a “firm decrementing pre-borrow” three and a half day “pulse-like” attacks followed by a totally bogus “SBP borrow” like those being anticipated after the 7/31/09 effective date for the new 242.204 legislation are not possible and the NSCC’s “Stock borrow Program” (SBP) cannot be jury-rigged to facilitate these thefts. In an “FDPB” environment FTDs are not allowed to occur as either “long sales” or “short sales” are forbidden UNTIL the securities being sold are in place for a 100% guaranteed timely delivery on or by T+3 as previously contracted to by the buyer and the seller.

    Truly “bona fide” market making activity can be accommodated by utilizing the “98% rule”. This involves mandating that any MM accessing the (universally abused) bona fide MM exemption from making pre-borrows or “locates” label his naked short sale as “short sale exempt” and then place a bid at 98% of the share price at which he is naked short selling for the same amount of shares that he is naked short selling. In other words he needs to PROVE that he is truly acting in a bona fide MM capacity if he is going to access that exemption. A truly bona fide MM would have no problem with this policy but a securities fraudster abusing that exemption can be expected to scream bloody murder in regards to the cost of implementation, the lessening of “liquidity”, less tight “spreads” between the bid and the ask, diminished “pricing efficiency”, the plight of the tse-tse fly, etc. Anything short of a “firm decrementing pre-borrow” will with 100% certainty be abused by those making billions off of intentionally refusing to deliver the securities that they sell.

  42. This is a first!!Please get a copy of this to Gary Wuss/ Weiss please.

    SEC Charges Options Traders and Broker-Dealers for “Naked” Short Sale Rule Violations
    Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today took its first enforcement actions for violations of the Commission’s rules to prevent abusive “naked” short selling, charging two options traders and their broker-dealers with violating the locate and close-out requirements of Regulation SHO. The Commission also charged a supervisor at one of the firms.

    Regulation SHO requires broker-dealers to locate a source of borrowable shares prior to selling short, and to deliver securities sold short by a specified date. The SEC alleges that the traders and their firms improperly claimed that they were entitled to an exception to the locate requirement, and engaged in transactions that created the appearance that they were complying with the close-out requirement. In fact, they were not entitled to the exception and were not complying with the close-out requirement.

    The SEC charged New York City-based Hazan Capital Management LLC (HCM) and its principal trader and majority owner, Steven M. Hazan, with Regulation SHO violations, and separately charged Chicago-based TJM Proprietary Trading LLC and one of its traders, Michael R. Benson, with Regulation SHO violations while also charging TJM’s chief operating officer John T. Burke for failing to supervise Benson. The firms and individuals agreed to settle the SEC’s charges without admitting or denying the findings.


    Additional Materials
    Administrative Proceeding Release No. 34-60440 (TJM)
    Administrative Proceeding Release No. 34-60441 (HCM)


    “These traders and their firms engaged in short selling tactics that circumvented regulatory requirements through complex options transactions,” said Scott W. Friestad, Associate Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement and Special Advisor to the Director.

    “Not only did these traders violate short selling rules, but the type of transactions they engaged in caused other market participants to effectively ‘naked’ short,” added Andrew M. Calamari, Associate Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. “HCM essentially loaned large amounts of hard-to-borrow stock to broker-dealers, who then provided locates on those shares to their institutional customers for short selling, which they otherwise might not have been able to do.”

    In the HCM proceeding, the Commission found that HCM engaged in misconduct from January 2005 to October 2007 and received ill-gotten gains of at least $3 million. The Commission ordered HCM to cease and desist from committing or causing, and Hazan to cease and desist from causing, any violations and future violations of Rules 203(b)(1) and 203(b)(3), censured HCM, and barred Hazan from association with any broker-dealer, with the right to reapply for association after five years. The Commission also ordered HCM and Hazan to pay disgorgement in the amount of $3 million, but provided that the payment obligation shall be deemed satisfied by orders of NYSE Amex, LLC and NYSE Arca, Inc. in their related actions directing Hazan and HCM to pay disgorgement in that amount. The Commission acknowledged HCM’s and Hazan’s undertakings to pay fines totaling $1 million in the related SRO actions.

    In the TJM proceeding, the Commission found that TJM engaged in misconduct from January 2007 to July 2007 and ordered TJM to cease and desist from committing or causing, and Benson to cease and desist from causing, any violations and any future violations of Rules 203(b)(1) and 203(b)(3). The Commission also censured TJM, suspended Benson from associating with any broker or dealer for a period of three months, and suspended Burke from acting in a supervisory capacity with a broker or dealer for a period of nine months. The Commission ordered TJM to pay disgorgement in the amount of $541,000, but provided that the payment obligation shall be deemed satisfied by an order of the Chicago Board Options Exchange Inc.’s (CBOE) Business Conduct Committee (BCC) in a related action directing TJM to pay disgorgement in that amount. The Commission acknowledged TJM’s, Benson’s, and Burke’s undertaking to pay, jointly and severally, a $250,000 fine to the CBOE’s BCC in its related action.

    In its continuing effort to address short selling abuses, the SEC last week announced several regulatory actions to further protect investors and the markets from the negative effects of abusive “naked” short sales. The Commission made permanent a temporary rule implemented in 2008 to address concerns about “fails to deliver,” and the SEC’s Office of Economic Analysis has since determined that the number of fails to deliver has declined significantly under the rule. Fails to deliver in all equity securities has decreased by approximately 57 percent since the fall of 2008, and the average daily number of threshold list securities has declined from a high of approximately 582 securities in July 2008 to 63 in March 2009.

    The SEC also is considering other proposed short selling restrictions.

    The Commission acknowledges the assistance of NYSE Regulation, Inc., the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority in these matters.

    The Commission’s investigation into violations of Regulation SHO continues.

    # # #

    For more information (HCM case), contact:

    Andrew M. Calamari
    Associate Director, SEC’s New York Regional Office
    (212) 336-0042

    Leslie Kazon
    Assistant Director, SEC’s New York Regional Office
    (212) 336-0107

    For more information (TJM case), contact:

    Scott W. Friestad
    Associate Director and Special Advisor to the Director, SEC’s Division of Enforcement
    (202) 551-4962

    Robert B. Kaplan
    Assistant Director, SEC’s Division of Enforcement
    (202) 551-4969

  43. This is a FIRST.

    SEC Charges Options Traders and Broker-Dealers for “Naked” Short Sale Rule Violations
    Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today took its first enforcement actions for violations of the Commission’s rules to prevent abusive “naked” short selling, charging two options traders and their broker-dealers with violating the locate and close-out requirements of Regulation SHO. The Commission also charged a supervisor at one of the firms.

  44. Rondoc..

    You can read about Fitts’ experiences at She worked at HUD where she tried to recover more money from properties by putting them up to public auction. This did not go over well with those who were used to getting the properties at 30% and bogus charges against her co. were made. The gov persecuted her, took her computers, her programs and keep the charges against her under wraps. It was a nightmare. The charges were not dropped until the story was made public. I think that you will get a better picture of who she is if you read her story. She is well-respected by honest people. She was too honest to be suited for the cesspool of HUD. Her programs could identify where Federal monies were going and she had work for people in HUD housing to help people lift themselves out of public aid. This, of course, flies in the face of gov. boondoggles. She was not very popular with the status quo of HUD being a piggybank for certain special interests.

  45. sinkult. Good eyes! If you could see it re Sunw aka Java and investment guru/investment guru 2001 don’t cha think the SEC could see it? Yet nada was done. As a result sunw aka became one of many victims. The game they recently played with GE with a signal trade at 12.22 this past May before being front run by the WSJ and taking ge from 13.64 to 10.50 before the recent move up. And here we go again with Oreilly’s continuous political agenda are just a couple of more examples. So the question begs? What’s it going to take to put those who make false statements, spread rumors and libel with the intent of damaging a company and breaking law be put in jail? Until they do: as a line in one of the BEE GEES songs would say. It’s only words. While I’m here, nice squeeze on AIG today. Once again, nice pair of eyes Sinkult.

  46. Gasparino? Another of the so called investigative reporters who could have done something but chose to do so. Yet there he is now as others wanting to pen what took place. HMMM whatever happened to preventing a fire versus reporting about it after the fact? Oh that’s right there’s no STORY in prevention. Gasparino failed to do his job as an investigative reporter. As have many others. The good news? Judd/Mark and many here are doing the invetigative work. THANKS.

    1. Anonymous. RE your post smoke and mirrors. Their problem is those who ARE true investigative journalists have put dye in that smoke and are able to see the truth in the many false images. Thus they can run and try to hide as the next article suggests, the pendulum has changed and you can bet there will be many converts along the way.

  47. I’m really inspired along with your writing abilities and also with the structure in your blog.
    Is this a paid subject matter or did you modify it yourself?
    Either way keep up the excellent high quality writing, it is uncommon to peer a nice weblog like this one today..

Leave a Reply to ginger Cancel 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

Patrick Byrne on New England Cable News

Next Article

The Pendulum Swings

Related Posts