Exactly zero coverage on the UT bill now before the governor for signature.
None. Not one major paper has picked it up, except for the local paper in SLC.
Isn't that odd? A bill that is the single most important step in the history of the naked short selling controversy, and which provides the only effective reporting requirements I've seen, has been passed by the legislature, and is before the governor of the state for signature.
See this article about the enormous pressure he is receiving from Wall Street, and the difficult choice he is facing - do his job and ratify the express wishes of the legislature and the people of his state, or sell out to special interests lobbying for maintaining secrecy for an illegal stock manipulation practice.
My guess is, he’ll do the right thing. They have so far.
Utah is not the kind of place where a bunch of New York bully boys can have their way with the state. The state is known for its pioneering spirit, and for a certain refreshing sense of fairness. And it is not fair to keep investors and companies and regulators in the dark as to who is abusing the law.
That's why I believe that this is a done deal.
What would you do? Sell out your population, public corporations and your lawmakers, and buckle to Wall Street? Effectively allow them to continue to harm the companies that do business in your state - companies like OSTK, SkyWest, and Delta? I mean, here’s a state that prides itself on and educated work force and incubation of new high-tech, strong growth companies that are often targeted for a pounding by illegal short selling. The legislature’s vote is telling—they’re saying, “No more!”
Why would Wall Street be so against any sort of reasonable transparency that they would essentially try to extort the governor of the state into violating his mandate? Doesn't that seem awfully extreme for a little "sunshine" bill?
What does that tell you about the size of the threat that reasonable disclosure on fail to delivers poses to the industry? Think about it. This is a bill that simply requires the brokers to notify interested parties as to who is failing to deliver stock that investors paid for.
Watch this one closely, and I would propose sending him words of encouragement and support. The legislature did their job, with an almost unanimous vote for the bill (1 "no" vote). The governor needs to know he is admired and supported in this. Tell him you’ll vacation in Utah this year. Indeed, as their license plates proclaim, Utah is a “Pretty, Great State.”
Anyone have the Gov’s email address?
---------
I read this with a certain awe that someone else gets it.
Check out this article.
In it is described the manipulations by unscrupulous short sellers who use class action suits they initiate and SEC investigations they lobby for to earn profits on their undisclosed short positions.
Sound familiar?
Email the author if you enjoyed his work, and you might want to propose that he make this a regular topic. Send him here if you think this site could prove interesting.
I differ in opinion in terms of the simple questionnaire from the SEC approach as a solution - it would be too easy to simply structure an arm's length lobbyist or hedge fund who didn't have a position, but was lobbying for the investigation for his undisclosed friends.
Still, the proposed solution is better than the complete absence of any solution, which is what we now have.
Bravo.
-------------------
The OSTK message boards have been a-titter about the posts by IPefreely, which purport to offer evidence that a board basher who has posted over 2000 negative posts on that board, is actually 'lil GW.
I've gotten sucked into it, as it is fascinating theater. The offending poster abruptly disappeared and hasn't been heard from all day, but another poster with a clear agenda appeared instantly, and began accusing me, and the IP character, of attempting to extort or stalk or threaten Lambo or 'lilGW. It is unclear which, as he uses the two interchangeably.
For the record, I don't want anything other than the IP poster to post all his evidence, so I have something to blog about for the next few days. If it is compelling, I say let's see it. No extortion or stalking.
Show us what you got.
Let Lambo refute it, if he can. If not, let's next ask Gary to refute it, if he can. If not, I'd say we have a winner.
Does that seem reasonable?
No demands. No requests. No do this or else. No stalking.
Give us the truth, and let us evaluate it.
Sound fair?