Bud Burrell's Front and Center

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

Thank you, Bud, for sticking with it. How can I help?

Reply: Get the message out to as many of your friends as possible. Best, Bud.

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

Bud, I thought you might find this article interesting...

http://www.evolvinggold.com/images/Bill%20Majcher%20article%20Sept07.pdf

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

the plan seems to be to remove all real and verifiable transactions into the unreal realm of electronic entry only.
The computers ate your portfolio.
No real person or trading company can be held liabel for the fact that the total numbers of real shares in real companys is no where near the total number of stock 'entitlements ' sold by the system.
If the public decides to demand one stock share, one sale ,one vote then oop's the system crashed no one owns anything now.
HOW GREAT FOR THE MANIPULATOR'S IS THIS!
But no one see's it coming and anyone who does is a loon.
After all a all electronic system is for the good of the investor ,right?
How easy it all will be ,no problems with instant trading ,no problems with those inconvienent stock certificates, just trust the system to take care of your money and your property FOR YOU.
DON'T YOU TRUST THE SYSTEM TO TAKE GOOD CARE OF YOU?
If not then be ready to be branded a antisocial ,uninformed loon.
Shoot they are probably looking for a way to call anyone who objects a enemy combatant.
You freedom, your fortune, and your sacred honor are all the property of the manipulators now.
Welcome to the slave state.
We now officially are allowed to OWN nothing.

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

Bud, what firm did you work for as a trader?

Was there naked shorting back then?

Keep up your good work Bud.

Reply: I worked as a sales trader and trader at Bache, EF Hutton, First Boston, and Dean Witter. Back then (ending in the mid 1980's), stock had to be in house to be shorted, and could only come from margin accounts. There were naked shorters in oil patch from the late 1970's on, but nothing to match the scale of today's markets.

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

Bud as sure as the sunrise the general American public will be to mentally lazy to foresee the pending slaughter. We are a reactionaty society guided by the self imposed PC crowd and therefore we will turn into a active society after it is too late. I hate to sound cynical but I can not hide what I see and hear with my own eyes and ears. God help us, we will need it.

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

Bud, I think the big boys already know what's coming down the pike..

Larry Ellison, the CEO of Oracle has been selling 1 million shares of ORCL a day since Sept 25th 2007 for a whopping total of 580 Million dollars and has informed the SEC of his sales. He still has 1.2 billion shares of stock in his name.

Carmine Mezilo (sp) has been sued by Countrywide Shareholders for selling his company stock just before its decline.

Sound like scenes from Damages all over again just that the shareholders won't win a damn thing.

Here's the link for your perusal..

https://www.etrade.wallst.com/v1/stocks/news/news_story.asp?docKey=354-N30132193-585J3UODNI5C5LU962BMQG35VV&DMSourceID=RTRIDS&Source=Reuters&docDate=2007-10-30 19:09:59&headline=Countrywide%20shareholders%20sue%20CEO%20Mozilo%2C%20board&refSymbols=|US;CFC|

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

Bud..
I have been told I do not understand what is real and that this whole concept of theft of the american peoples money by the counterfieting of securitys in the stock market is a internet induced illiusion.
Just relax and don't worry everthing is fine stop telling people to read for themselfs the sanity ckeck it is all wrong and just shows how gullible and stupid you are seems to be the line I am hearing from many sources.
Is there any truth to the veiwpoint all is fine?
Am I 'deluded by a internet fantasy?
Do you think the views I have posted here are delusional?
Or do you personally think I have the facts right?
What I feel is that the market is largely counterfieted and if and when brokerages are allowed to go all electrinic no one will be able to prove the grand theft going on or indeed have a trail to follow of where the money they paid into the system went.
Is my take on this incorrect?
Thank you

Reply: All Markets are suffering from this problem, not just stocks. I strongly disagree everything is just fine. Someone either has their head buried in the sand, or they are in beds with the crooks. There have been too many admissions that counterfeiting is bad for the credibility of the markets from senior regulatory officials. Stick to your guns.

Re: Have Regulators Shown Their Hand? It is game, set and match for conventional exchanges.

CELLAR BOXING


There's a form of the securities fraud known as naked short
selling that is becoming very popular and lucrative to the market
makers that practice it. It is known as "Cellar boxing" and it has
to do with the fact that the NASD and the SEC had to arbitrarily set
a minimum level at which a stock can trade. This level was set at
$.0001 or one-one hundredth of a penny. This level is appropriately
referred to as "the cellar". This $.0001 level can be used as
a "backstop" for all kinds of market maker and naked short selling
manipulations.

"Cellar boxing" has been one of the security frauds du jour since
1999 when the market went to a "decimalization" basis. In the pre-
decimalization days the minimum market spread for most stocks was
set at 1/8th of a dollar and the market makers were guaranteed a
healthy "spread". Since decimalization came into effect, those one-
eighth of a dollar spreads now are often only a penny as you can see
in Microsoft's quote throughout the day. Where did the unscrupulous
MMs go to make up for all of this lost income? They headed "south"
to the OTCBB and Pink Sheets where the protective effects from naked
short selling like Rule 10-a, and NASD Rules 3350, 3360, and 3370
are nonexistent.

The unique aspect of needing an arbitrary "cellar" level is that the
lowest possible incremental gain above this cellar level represents
a 100% spread available to MMs making a market in these securities.
When compared to the typical spread in Microsoft of perhaps four-
tenths of 1%, this is pretty tempting territory. In fact, when the
market is no bid to $.0001 offer there is theoretically an infinite
spread.

In order to participate in "cellar boxing", the MMs first need to
pummel the price per share down to these levels. The lower they can
force the share price, the larger are the percentage spreads to feed
off of. This is easily done via garden variety naked short selling.
In fact if the MM is large enough and has enough visibility of buy
and sell orders as well as order flow, he can simultaneously be
acting as the conduit for the sale of nonexistent shares through
Canadian co-conspiring broker/dealers and their associates with his
right hand at the same time that his left hand is naked short
selling into every buy order that appears through its own
proprietary accounts. The key here is to be a dominant enough of a
MM to have visibility of these buy orders. This is referred to
as "broker/dealer internalization" or naked short selling
via "desking" which refers to the market makers trading desk. While
the right hand is busy flooding the victim company's market
with "counterfeit" shares that can be sold at any instant in time
the left hand is nullifying any upward pressure in share price by
neutralizing the demand for the securities. The net effect becomes
no demonstrable demand for shares and a huge oversupply of shares
which induces a downward spiral in share price.

In fact, until the "beefed up" version of Rule 3370 (Affirmative
determination in writing of "borrowability" by settlement date)
becomes effective, U.S. MMs have been "legally" processing naked
short sale orders out of Canada and other offshore locations even
though they and the clearing firms involved knew by history that
these shares were in no way going to be delivered. The question that
then begs to be asked is how "the system" can allow these obviously
bogus sell orders to clear and settle. To find the answer to this
one need look no further than to Addendum "C" to the Rules and
Regulations of the NSCC subdivision of the DTCC. This gaping
loophole allows the DTCC, which is basically the 11,000 b/ds and
banks that we refer to as "Wall Street", to borrow shares from those
investors naive enough to hold these shares in "street name" at
their brokerage firm. This amounts to about 95% of us.
Theoretically, this "borrow" was designed to allow trades to clear
and settle that involved LEGITIMATE 1 OR 2 DAY delays in delivery.
This "borrow" is done unbeknownst to the investor that purchased the
shares in question and amounts to probably the largest "conflict of
interest" known to mankind. The question becomes would these
investors knowingly loan, without compensation, their shares to
those whose intent is to bankrupt their investment if they knew that
the loan process was the key mechanism needed for the naked short
sellers to effect their goal? Another question that arises is should
the investor's b/d who just earned a commission and therefore owes
its client a fiduciary duty of care, be acting as the intermediary
in this loan process keeping in mind that this b/d is being paid the
cash value of the shares being loaned as a means of collateralizing
the loan, all unbeknownst to his client the purchaser.

An interesting phenomenon occurs at these "cellar" levels. Since
NASD Rule 3370 allows MMs to legally naked short sell into markets
characterized by a plethora of buy orders at a time when few sell
orders are in existence, a MM can theoretically "legally" sit at the
$.0001 level and sell nonexistent shares all day long because at no
bid and $.0001 ask there is obviously a huge disparity between buy
orders and sell orders. What tends to happen is that every time the
share price tries to get off of the cellar floor and onto the first
step of the stairway at $.0001 there is somebody there to step on
the hands of the victim corporation' s market.

Once a given micro cap corporation is "boxed in the cellar" it
doesn't have a whole lot of options to climb its way out of the
cellar. One obvious option would be for it to reverse split its way
out of the cellar but history has shown that these are counter-
productive as the market capitalization typically gets hammered and
the post split share price level starts heading back to its original
pre-split level.

Another option would be to organize a sustained buying effort and
muscle your way out of the cellar but typically there will, as if by
magic, be a naked short sell order there to meet each and every buy
order. Sometimes the shareholder base can muster up enough buying
pressure to put the market at $.0001 bid and $.0002 offer for a
limited amount of time. Later the market makers will typically pound
the $.0001 bids with a blitzkrieg of selling to wipe out all of the
bids and the market goes back to no bid and $.0001 offer. When the
weak-kneed shareholders see this a few times they usually make up
their mind to sell their shares the next time that a $.0001 bid
appears and to get the heck out of Dodge. This phenomenon is
referred to as "shaking the tree" for weak-kneed investors and it is
very effective.

At times the market will go to $.0001 bid and $.0003 offer. This
sets up a juicy 200% spread for the MMs and tends to dissuade any
buyers from reaching up to the "lofty" level of $.0003. If a $.0002
bid should appear from a MM not "playing ball" with the unscrupulous
MMs, it will be hit so quickly that Level 2 will never reveal the
existence of the bid. The $.0001 bid at $.0003 offer market sets up
a "stalemate" wherein market makers can leisurely enjoy the huge
spreads while the victim company slowly dilutes itself to death by
paying the monthly bills with "real" shares sold at incredibly low
levels. Since all of these development- stage corporations have to
pay their monthly bills, time becomes on the side of the naked short
sellers.

At times it almost seems that the unscrupulous market makers are not
actively trying to kill the victim corporation but instead want to
milk the situation for as long of a period of time as possible and
let the corporation die a slow death by dilution. The reality is
that it is extremely easy to strip away 99% of a victim company's
share price or market cap and to keep the victim corporation "boxed"
in the cellar, but it really is difficult to kill a corporation
especially after management and the shareholder base have figured
out the game that is being played at their expense.

As the weeks and months go by the market makers make a fortune with
these huge percentage spreads but the net aggregate naked short
positions become astronomical from all of this activity. This leads
to some apprehension amongst the co-conspiring MMs. The predicament
they find themselves in is that they can't even stop naked short
selling into every buy order that appears because if they do the
share price will gap and this will put tremendous pressures on net
capital reserves for the MMs and margin maintenance requirements for
the co-conspiring hedge funds and others operating out of the more
than 13,000 naked short selling margin accounts set up in Canada.
And of course covering the naked short position is out of the
question since they can't even stop the day-to-day naked short
selling in the first place and you can't be covering at the same
time you continue to naked short sell.

What typically happens in these situations is that the victim
company has to massively dilute its share structure from the
constant paying of the monthly burn rate with money received from
the selling of "real" shares at artificially low levels. Then the
goal of the naked short sellers is to point out to the investors,
usually via paid "Internet bashers", that with the, let's say, 50
billion shares currently issued and outstanding, that this lousy
company is not worth the $5 million market cap it is trading at,
especially if it is just a shell company whose primary business plan
was wiped out by the naked short sellers' tortuous interference
earlier on.

The truth of the matter is that the single biggest asset of these
victim companies often becomes the astronomically large aggregate
naked short position that has accumulated throughout the
initial "bear raid" and also during the "cellar boxing" phase. The
goal of the victim company now becomes to avoid the 3 main goals of
the naked short sellers, namely: bankruptcy, a reverse split, or the
forced signing of a death spiral convertible debenture out of
desperation. As long as the victim company can continue to pay the
monthly burn rate, then the game plan becomes to make some of the
strategic moves that hundreds of victim companies have been forced
into doing which includes name changes, CUSIP # changes,
cancel/reissue procedures, dividend distributions, amending of by-
laws and Articles of Corporation, etc. Nevada domiciled companies
usually cancel all of their shares in the system, both real and
fake, and force shareholders and their b/ds to PROVE the ownership
of the old "real" shares before they get a new "real" share. Many
also file their civil suits at this time also. This indirect forcing
of hundreds of U.S. micro cap corporations to go through all of
these extraneous hoops and hurdles as a means to survive, whether it
be due to regulatory apathy or lack of resources, is probably one of
the biggest black eyes the U.S. financial systems have ever
sustained. In a perfect world it would be the regulators that
periodically audit the "C" and "D" sub-accounts at the DTCC, the
proprietary accounts of the MMs, clearing firms, and Canadian b/ds,
and force the buy-in of counterfeit shares, many of which are hiding
behind altered CUSIP #s, that are detected above the Rule 11830
guidelines for allowable "failed deliveries" of one half of 1% of
the shares issued. U.S. micro cap corporations should not have to
periodically "purge" their share structure of counterfeit electronic
book entries but if the regulators will not do it then management
has a fiduciary duty to do it.

A lot of management teams become overwhelmed with grief and guilt in
regards to the huge increase in the number of shares issued and
outstanding that have accumulated during their "watch". The truth
however is that as long as management made the proper corporate
governance moves throughout this ordeal then a huge number of
resultant shares issued and outstanding is unavoidable and often
indicative of an astronomically high naked short position and is
nothing to be ashamed of. These massive naked short positions need
to be looked upon as huge assets that need to be developed.
Hopefully the regulators will come to grips with the reality of
naked short selling and tactics like "Cellar boxing" and quickly
address this fraud that has decimated thousands of U.S. micro cap
corporations and the tens of millions of U.S. investors therein