Comments on Proposed Rule:
Selective Disclosure and Insider Trading
Release Nos. 33-7787, 34-42259, IC-24209, File No. S7-31-99
Author: Brian Adair at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:05 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
This issue is important to me as an individual investor.
I have read some of the public comments of April 6, 2000, by The Ad
Hoc Working Group on Proposed Regulation FD and the Legal and
Compliance Division of the Securities Industry Association ("SIA").
It seems to me the SIA argues that individual investors are not
intelligent enough to make their own decisions about the value of
securities and need Wall Street's analysts to hear and interpret
important information first.
I whole heartedly disagree with this assessment.
I do not feel maintaining the current system is in my own interests and
support the proposed rule (Proposed Regulation FD) by the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding the fair disclosure of
information by publicly traded companies to the public.
Regards,
Brian Adair
Author: Andrew Andryco at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:00 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am opposed to the Proposition. Why don"t you give the individual
invester an even break?
Author: Rod Baer at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:04 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Level Playing Field/File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am only an individual investor but would like to address my support for
full public disclosure. Analysts' reputations should be built on superior
education and analytic skills, not receiving information first. Seeing as
how its OUR money, neither should I nor my peers be subject to anymore
"stratified" restrictions of information than absolutely necessary. There is
no way in the world that the current regulations do not cultivate an air of
distrust and an over-riding suspicion of favoritism towards larger
institutional investors and those on the inside track. This in turn creates
a huge schism of unspoken animosity which feeds all sorts of political and
social friction. That is not good for business or Wall Street.
While regulations may be in place to muzzle companies what prevents favored
clients of analysts and any other number of incidental individuals once
removed, from catching soon-to-be-released sell or buy recommendations
before they hit the press?
When ever I hear anyone (such as defenders of the current system) speak of
how they wish to prevent me from hurting myself (Supposedly because I am
incapable of digesting news without their assistance) I know immediately
that someone has their hand in my pocket and is bristling at the notion that
they are not entitled to keep it there. This is classic elitism, essentially
demonizing the democratic notion of free access to information and
individual responsibility.
I say let the analyst forewarn and interpret all they wish but I strenuously
object to the notion that they have either the facts or right to determine
my level of intelligence and comprehension. In my own investing experience
I've done far better ignoring consensus opinions than following and perhaps
if they were forced to work with the same info as the rest of us they could
come to be viewed for their service as practitioners of independent
viewpoints rather than the unofficial spokespeople they appear to be now.
One look at the number of stocks recommended vs. those ranked as sells
against the resultant overall advancers vs. decliners shows that the current
system is overwhelmingly and inaccurately skewed towards the promotion of
buying under-performing stocks. A fairer system should and would be more
objective. That is impossible if the analysts "edge" requires the pampering
of privilege from the very company they are supposed to be objectively
evaluating. The argument that companies may be less willing to reveal
"negatives" if discussions are no longer 'private and confidential" are
silly, as those who attempt to hide will only risk greater punishment and
tarnished reputations. If the negatives aren't critical then why should one
set of individuals outside of the company be "in the know" and not others?
It looks to me like the choice to leave the current system unchallenged is
nothing more than a desire to maintain a hierarchy of privileged
information. We invest our money in good faith and already have to ferret
the intentions and futures of the company, fight bid-ask spreads, accept
market maker shenanigans, pay commissions, be disqualified from the
lucrative private placements of wealthier individuals, accept extreme option
packages for employees and officers that further dilute our holdings,
passively allow ourselves to be pushed and pulled by all manner of federal
and political shifts, such as money supply and interest rate changes, plus
withstand various fires fanned by popular press and brace against all the
normal unknowns- which all work to diminish our returns yet we are somehow
expected to invest trustingly so that in the end we ideally receive a modest
profit for our trouble and willingness to lend money. Are we also supposed
to accept the idea of restricted information interpreted for us as well?
These are supposed to be PUBLIC Companies, right? I mean I never read a
prospectus that defined the business as a publicly held company constructed
with a secondary circle of power entrusted to analysts.
Its not an accident that the strength of the current economy goes hand in
hand with the renewed public willingness to invest. While some may decry the
volatility of public over-reaction, it is equally true that the level of
interest and understanding in all manner of American business is at an all
time high. It is the democratization of this process through the internet
and information access which has spurred this renaissance and it will be an
ill advised desire to dampen that spirit by attempting to leash it back
under the control of a privileged few which will destroy it. Progress
depends on moving forward with the times over the objections of the
entrenched few that are always more than happy to keep things as they are.
Public companies should report to the public without intervention of
intermediaries. Let individuals and analysts find out all the facts together
at the same time and then in the light of day let the chips fall where they
may. Unlike the patronizing attitudes of brokers, I have a great deal of
trust in the ability of the common man to sort things out for a better
future.
Thank you for listening to my opinion.
Rod Baer
rodbaer@earthlink.net
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:04 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD; File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To whom it may concern:
I would encourage you to change rules that currently allow companies to give
important information to Wall Street analysts without giving the news to the
general public at the same time.
Increased access to information makes us all better investors. Let analysts
keep their job as analysts, but don't make them gatekeepers to information we
can use and interpret for ourselves.
Linda Benson
104 Brown Ave.
Kingwood, WV 26537
Author: Dorian Breuer at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:05 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
CC: simon breuer at Internet
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please enact the above regulation. It is imperative
that disclosure of all relevant company financial
information be available to the public. There is no
credible arguement to the contrary.
Dorian Breuer
Chicago, Il
Author: "Downtown777" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:37 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Work for Bill Clinton, don't you?
Took the money and lie, lie, lie.
Without basic information I have no way to judge a company and must pay a flunky
that bribed the SEC to get stock information.
Call them "Lobbyist" if you want, sound better that bribers.
"I am from the government, I am here to help you!"
David F. Brown
Author: "Leonard Brubaker" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:45 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I would like to register the comment that as a private investor, I am supportive
of the above Proposed Regulation. It is unfair to investors like me that there
is selective disclosure by companies to selected individuals. Such disclosures
should be totally public, as called for in the Proposed Regulation. Leonard H.
Brubaker, 2230 Overton Road, Augusta, GA 30904. No affiliation (retired).
Author: "Matt Cauthorn" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please continue with the fair disclosure plan. Individual investors
deserve to have access to the same information as Wall Street!
Sincerely,
Matt Cauthorn
Author: Josh Chou at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:00 AM
Normal
Receipt Requested
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I totally support this and believe its necessary in promoting an efficient
market.
Joshua Chou
Sequoia Softworks
520 Broadway, Suite 370
310.576.2727
Author: B G Cocanougher at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:28 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD;File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sir;
I find it unbelievable that the public is not given the sme information
as a few analyst. Everyone should have the same information at the same
time. I encourage you to let this take place.
B G Cocanougher, President
Cocan LLC
402 E Main, Decatur, Tx. 76234.
Author: Mike Craig at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:18 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sir,
Your proposed rule is welcome.
Don't let the Wall Street crowd continue their unfair monopoly on
information.
Mike Craig
mcraig@ieee.org
(permanent address)
Author: "Harry Crigger" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:25 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File no. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please require all information to be public.
Author: "Tom Currie" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:30 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC:
Re: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-
Please stop selective disclosure.
Respectfully,
Thomas H. Currie
Author: User@nslsilus.ORG at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:39 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: FIle No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Vote no. Individual investors--the real owners of the U.S.--demand and deserve
full disclosure of financial information.
This is unreal and against everything in our Constitution that there not be two
classes of citizens.
Rhea Dawson
Author: "John Dimeglio" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:08 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor I think this information should be disclosed to
everyone at the same time. Large institutions and analysts should have no
special privileges.
John DiMeglio
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:13 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: file number s7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
i would prefer to see full disclosure to all parties simultaneously, not to
analysts first to intrepret. analysts have a conflict with there respective
employers to disclose all date objectively. private citizens are capable of
analyzing and reaching conclusions if given the data. respectively, jack
durliat
Author: "Fred M. Dycus" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:51 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: PROPOSED REG FD: FILE NO. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
It was a shock to discover that the disclosure of corporate information is
selective. This policy has the stench of "insider" information that
benefits a select few.
All information that is provided should be provided to all.
Author: Geoffrey Elmore at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:33 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Uncle Sam:
I'm a small investor (under $250,000) in the US stock markets, and I think
that what goes on at the high-roller level is a pile of bullshit. I
subscribe to numerous financial publications, have a college degree and
read prospectuses for all of the companies I invest in. While I'm
interested in what the Market Makers think about a given offering, I want
access to the same information that they have in order to form my own
opinions. I also don't like the conflict of interest that the Analysts
have due to their own company holdings.
Give the American public access to the same information as the Market
Makers and give it to us at the same time and let us use it as we will.
Geoffrey Elmore
RedLadder.com
Author: "Ed Emory" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:17 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD:File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Any disclosed information should have to be released to all investors at the
same time. Any other procedure gives some investors an advantage over
others.
Ed Emory
Emory & Rose Fine Art and Publishing LLC
P.O. Box 50785 - Knoxville, TN 37950
423-966-6556 or Toll Free 877-966-6556
www.serenarose.com
Author: Richard Engdahl at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Hello,
I am writing to support the SEC's proposal to put an end to selective
disclosure (Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99). In the interest of
fairness in the open market and respect for the public, it makes little
sense to oppose this proposal.
I have read arguments that analysts, who currently have privileged access to
corporate information, serve to stabilize the market by filtering this
information and preventing an uneducated, emotional response from individual
investors. This is both offensive and untrue. To assume that individual
investors are the cause of market volatility is to deny the fact that most
individual investors, and indeed the most successful investors, are those who
put their money behind strong companies and leave it there throughout the
peaks and valleys of day-to-day activity. I would argue, rather, that it is
the Wall Street analyst, whose market "predictions" and "trends" and
"buy/sell ratings" are quoted in the evening news, who are responsible for
volatility.
Individual investors who have full access to corporate information, the
ability to research their areas of corporate interest, and a strong interest
in the results of their investment dollars are going to be far more loyal to
their investments than the institutions who rely on professional analysts.
This loyalty will translate into stability for companies who withstand
public scrutiny.
I often watch political debates and speeches. On network news stations,
these events are inevitably followed by "expert analysis" of what's been
said. Though occasionally these recaps provide some context and explanation
for the original speech, they are most often irritatingly simplistic and
shortsighted. This is analogous to the situation at hand. As a voting
citizen, I am better informed and more demanding of my representatives in
government if I hear their words directly. As an individual investor, I am
better informed and more demanding of my investment if I have equal access
to corporate information. A fair analyst may help to contextualize this
information, but without the source data, I have no way of verifying (and
cannot trust) these opinions.
Thank you for reading my opinion in this matter. Please support the SEC's
proposal for equal disclosure of corporate information.
* richard engdahl
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:57 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
It is my opinion that information related to company information currently
provided to only a select few on Wall Street should be open information to
everyone interested in such.
This is too important an issue to leave in the hands of a few Wall Street
insiders to work with on behalf of the millions of stock market investors.
I am in support of making this information available to everyone who wants it
given the easier ability electronically to access such.
Thank You.
Tom Fanning
President
Maximum Impact LLC
Author: Dale Freeman at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:02 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs,
I am writing to express my support of Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99. You have undoubtedly received numerous emails in support of this
proposed changed from other individual investors, who like me deserve to have
the same information everyone else has on PUBLIC companies AT THE SAME TIME
everyone else gets it. Whether I analyze the information myself, or employ a
professional analyst to do it for me, it is only fair that nobody gets it
earlier than the rest in what is tantamount to INSIDER TRADING.
Dale Freeman
Austin, TX
Author: Joel Gochberg at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:14 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support an end to the selective disclosure rules that currently permit
Wall Street analysts access to company information that is not in the public
domain.
Joel S. Gochberg
Director of Business Development
MedicaLogic, Inc.
503.579.5231 office phone and voice mail
888.211.9321 toll-free fax
http://www.medicalogic.com
http://www.98point6.com
Author: "slmerrill" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:15 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulations FD File No S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
NOW is the time for change. Business financial information should be available
not only to Wall Street, but the private investor as well.
Louis Gossner
P.O. Box 867
Mt. Vernon
WA 98327
(360) 293-4021
Author: Eric Gunnerson at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:48 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I am writing to express my report for changing the selective disclosure
rules so that companies must make public disclosure, rather than disclosure
to select groups of analysts.
SEC rules currently regulate insider trading within a company, but the
current rules allow the equivalent by those analysts who have access to
information withheld from the rest of the market. This places them at a
distinct advantage compared to other investers.
Author: "deertick" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:54 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Add my name to the list of those who favor fair rules of disclosure of
information by publicly traded companies to the public. The profit of analysts
must not come at the expense of the people who they are supposed to be helping.
John Haeberle, MD
Author: "Hamilton; Beth" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:27 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File # S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support the proposed regulation requiring new fair disclosure rules.
Beth Hamilton
Elizabeth P. Hamilton, CPA
Author: "Hampton; Gary C." at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:38 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Simply, please move forward with your efforts to end selective disclosure.
Individual investors have every right to the same information that is
provided to institutional investors.
Many thanks,
Gary Hampton
Author: "Clay Hatten" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:56 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Vote yes to allow equal access to information.
Clay Hatten
Author: _Alexander Honcharik~ at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:34 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No.
S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
I am greatly in favor of the proposed rule banning the practice of
selective disclosure.
Particularly in today's market where many investors, like myself, rely
on their own resources to make investment decisions, having only a
select group of analysts privy
to important information is a great disservice. True, analysts may
provide valuable
insight by filtering the information and providing their opinions, but
their opinions are
just that: opinions. I may reach different conclusions from the same
data - but only if I'm
provided with the data. Analysts may still provide their services to
their clients, but they
should not have any exclusive access to material facts. Otherwise I am
denied the opportunity to analyze the facts myself and reach my own
conclusions - which may or may not take into account an analysts opinion
regarding the same data.
Alexander Honcharik
3842 S. Sage Ct.
Chandler AZ 85248
Author: "Carl Jacobson" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:01 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To Whom It May Concern,
The time has come to give individual investors the same opportunities
large brokerages have had for years. Do the right thing and end selective
disclosure.
Best Regards,
Carl Jacobson
Gamecraft Inc.
714-374-1308
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 1:04 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Information should be available to all.
Peggy J. Johnson
Author: "Keier; Gregory R" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:28 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Stop selective disclosure! I am for stopping companies from providing
important information to Wall Street Analysts without simultaneously giving
the news to the public at large.
Gregory R. Keier
Tyco Electronics
Tyco International LTD
grkeier@tycoelectronics.com
Author: David Keith at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:01 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please treat analyst disclosure the same way other insider investment
information is treated. Make it COMPLETELY public!
Author: "Knaffla; Terence" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:56 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sirs-
As an individual investor, I think it's criminal that a small group of analysts
get privileged access to company information. As a shareholder in several
companies, I feel that I should have equal access to the same information so
that I can make my own interpretation of the information without having it
filtered through some analyst, who may have another agenda besides fair and full
disclosure.
I don't believe that this will cause market volatility. To the contrary. How
often does a stock move strongly right before some important piece of
information comes out. It's pretty obvious that someone besides the individual
investor has access to the information. This leads to speculation and people
trading stocks based on the stock's movement, with the assumption of some big
piece of news. Thus, investors trade on little or no information or at best
rumors. This cannot be healthy for the overall market.
I am also insulted that the Wall Street establishment does not believe that I am
qualified to analyze this information myself. I am a buy-and-hold investor, and
I have done quite well over these last few years by finding good companies,
often when the analysts are nearly unanimously against a company, and holding on
to them. I am not a day trader, but an investor who has learned to read a
balance sheet and understand something about business, both by investing in
several and frankly, working for one.
Given the nature of information distribution, it is now feasible for a company
to release information to analysts as well as the "average" shareholder at the
same time. Some of the companies I invest in, like Checkfree corporation, open
their conference calls live to all investors as well as the analysts. I am proud
that some companies are heading in the right direction. Please encourage all of
them to do the same.
Thank you,
Terence Knaffla
5829 France Ave S
Edina MN 55410
Author: "Dianne Koble" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:15 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I support the proposed Financial Disclosure legislation.
Dan Koble
Author: "Arun Kumar" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 10:25 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
No selective disclosures
Arun
Author: John Lee at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:20 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Everyone should have the same information to base their investment decisions on.
It makes no sense whatsoever to only disclose information to Wall Street.
-
Wall Street is often biased in their recommendations making them somewhat
unreliable.
-
Please change these regulations.
-
Thank You,
John
*********************************************
iWon.com www.iwon.com why wouldn't you?
*********************************************
Author: "mmariani" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:04 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
This would be a good thing.
anthony m mariani
Author: "William R. Martin" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:29 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
In today's fast-moving information environment, a level playing field is
long overdue. I don't care if the SIA argues that individual investors are
not intelligent enough to make their own decisions about the value of
securities and need Wall Street's analysts to hear and interpret important
information first. The SIA and full service brokerages need to go the way
of the blacksmith and get out of everyone's way.
Sincerely,
William R. Martin
Author: Chris Mause at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:08 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Gentlemen,
Please count me among the individual investors who wholeheartedly support
this regulation. It is absurd that a chosen segment of our society should be
privy to investment information that is not available to all.
Thank you.
Chris Mause
Author: Shane McCarty at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:22 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
End selective disclosure.
Shane McCarty
Author: Sandra Moeller at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 8:59 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please enact this rule so that the public can have all the information as well
as Wall Street analysts.
Author: Charley Reese at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:30 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I understand that this rule would require, among other things, that
companies no longer engage in the practice of discreetly disclosing
important information to Wall Street analysts without also giving that
information to the public at large. It sounds like a pretty commonsense
rule to me, one that many investors might logically assume must already
BE law, but unfortunately isn't. Pass it.
Charles T. Reese
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:55 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Reg. FD: S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
How can anyone vote against a level playing field between individual
investors and Wall Street. Vote to oppose this injustice to us individual
investors. Wall Street should not know more than we in making judicious
investments.
Dr. Nancy B, Roof
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:27 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear Sir or Madame:
It is essential in a free society that the playing field for financial
decisions be as level as possible. The special interests such as analysts,
etc. should not receive information any earlier than the public. The
Internet has made information more accessible, and the SEC has been at the
forefront to protect the public and the small investor. Certain Wall Street
professionals feel the public and small investors are too dumb to understand
the information, and want to have the information first. This is dangerous
for the markets, and the reasons put forth are self serving to say the least.
The public and small investors are more knowlegeable than at any other time
in our history, and it is important not to put them at a disadvantage as
urged by Wall Street. Wall Street needs to remember that its analysts are
often wrong, and there are currently allegations that some analysts give
their opinions to some of their large customers before rendering their
decisions to the remainder of their customers and the public. This is
reprehensible, and the SEC needs to overcome the possibility of this problem
by making information available to all. I make my own investing decisions
after collecting all the information that I can about a company. I have been
investing since I got out of Vietnam in 1969. I feel I can make good
decisions, but I want the information at the same time as everyone else. Wall
Street professionals who want to get the information first are looking out
for their financial interests, not for the interests of others. Thank you
for your consideration.
Ben Sims
1088 East Brook Circle
Kaysville, UT 84037
801.444.9107
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:51 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Dear SEC,
I urge you to implement rules against selective disclosure by companies. It
is unfair to the owners (shareholders) of companies to have them disclose
information only to security analysts and/or institutional investors.
Information should be made available, at the same time, to the public, small
investors, and the media. I urge you to put into place rules that encourage
public disclosure of company information, not selective disclosure. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
Gary Slack
Author: "unionjack" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:20 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I strongly belive that selective disclosure is wrong and gives investment firms
a tremendous and unfair advantage over individual investors such as myself.
Often I feel that what they say does not match what they do with their own funds
and their own analyst portfolio's,ie promote buying while they sell or promote
selling while they buy. I personally would like to see analyst be required to
state positions personnally held in stocks being upgraded or downgraded so
ordinary investors might look for possible bias in the recommendation. Not
quantity, just held long/short, or not held. Please level the playing field.
Also take a look at the more recent sites promoting whisper numbers, some seem
to be easily manipulated by anyone with a desire to influence stock price either
up or down.
Jack Snyder
Private investor
Author: "Tom Sprunger" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 11:11 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
As an individual investor, I am in favor of ending the unfair advantage of
preferential disclosure by companies to large institutions, or anyone for
that matter. All investors should have equal access to investment
information. This rule is long overdue.
Thomas L. Sprunger
Author: Don Stewart at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:14 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
SEC,
I'm an individual investor and in my opinion, selective disclosure isn't
much different from a Microsoft or AT&T monopoly. Therefore, I think
that any and all company info that is disclosed to Wall Street analysts
should simultaneously be given to the public at large.
Thanks for the opportunity to voice my opinion.
Sincerely,
Don Stewart
Author: at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:10 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
It is extremely important that the public investment community not be held
hostage to the inside information that analysts receive. Though analysts
provide valuable services, all information made available to analysts should
also be made simultaneously available the the general investing public.
Jesse Strom
(703) 631-4054
Fairfax, VA
Individual Investor
Author: "Seth Tator" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 9:04 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Hello,
Please end the practice of selective information distribution!
Please continue the trend of opening the market place to individual
investors.
Thank you.
Seth Tator
Author: "Yen; Joseph [PRI]" at Internet
Date: 04/25/2000 12:40 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I SUPPORT the SEC proposed regulation for fair disclosure of material
corporate information. Given a level playing field, the Wall Street
analysts are going to have to learn how to earn their keep by creating some
sort of value from their analyses, rather than just being the people who get
to hear first what's going on with companies. It's just NOT right to have
"selective disclosure" to them.
http://www.sec.gov/rules/0425b05.htm
