| | Register
Who is Bob O'Brien?
Sanity Check Archive
Click Here to see Bob's Old Sanity Check articles.
About our Blogs

Blogs found on this website represent the opinion of the author. For more information please visit our terms of use.
Funny Bunny
Looking for something a little lighter?
Catch Bob's more irreverent and amusing pieces in his Funny Bunny Blog.

DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?"

Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog    
Posted by:   bobo 8/31/2006 7:18 AM

The DTCC just released a beautifully crafted piece which highlights the problems with that privately held company.

What is stunning is that whoever put this together was oblivious to the irony it contains.

You can view it here:

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060831005438&newsLang=en

The piece starts off by saying that it is unable to find any data that corroborates "many" of the facts and statistics used in the recent Forbes article.

Now, first off, Liz Moyer's first rev of her article had one innacuracy, in terms of the trading price. That was only up for an hour or two, that I can recall. In an email to her, she indicated that there was some garbled info from the transfer agent and the company, where something got lost in the back and forth messages.

It changed nothing about the veracity of the story, nor the point of it - incredibly high levels of fails in a company - 27 million fails in a stock with 1.1 million shares issued and outstanding.

The error was corrected almost as soon as the article appeared.

That is the only data that the DTCC is unable to corroborate, yet it makes a point of devoting 1/5 of the piece to the quickly fixed stock price error, and further sets the tone of the release with it.

Would that the DTCC corrected their errors in anywhere nearly that sort of timely fashion. The Global Links fiasco is still unfixed, a year and a half after Senator Bennett demanded and investigation.

The DTCC makes the dollar value of the "error" in the system's handling of the Global Links shares the point of the story. The problem with that is that they fail to acknowledge that the reverse split cut the number of shares by 350. Thus, a share that was trading at, say, 0.02, should have been trading at $7 post split. But more importantly, by not correcting the number of shares trading, the occurrence in Global Links effectively slashed its market cap by 99.7%.

Now, the DTCC apparently feels that slashing a company's market cap by 99.7% is OK. No big deal. It happens. Gotta break some eggs to make an omelet. No need to fix it within a year or two of it happening. Whatever.

What it doesn't say is more important.

It doesn't say that the mistake in re-pricing and re-numbering the Global Links shares, if error it was, should have been corrected within a few days, if not hours, of it taking place. It doesn't say that the market cap of the company was destroyed, diluted down to nothing. It doesn't explain why the SEC didn't immediately stop trading. It doesn't explain why the participants who made the "error" get to keep the money, while the investors and the company lose. It doesn't discuss the windfall profits made by anyone with a huge short position in the stock - possibly the same market makers who traded it as a "mistake."

No, instead it trivializes the issue by using sleight of hand calculations.

But here's the best part. It also shows its true colors with this statement regarding reverse splits:

"However, among sub-penny stocks, these activities may occur more often to try and artificially raise the stock's price."

Huh. "Artificially" increase the price? You mean by reducing the number of shares, thereby legitimately increasing the per share value? That is artificial? Huh. How is it artificial? The market cap stays the same. The share count is reduced, but the price is adjusted to reflect each ownership unit having 350 times more value.

Doesn't it seem that is kind of like trying to blame the victim for doing a split? What is the difference between this statement, and the statement, "However, among hussies and women of loose morals, short skirts are often worn to stir the passions of innocent men" - when explaining a rape?

Does everyone get that this is a private company, owned by the same participants who benefit financially from these sorts of errors, issuing press releases to blame the victim?

And to smear the messenger? Forbes is riddled with inaccuracies, the company is up to shenanigans due to its treatment of its stock. And if you use our math, it's no big deal.

I love these sorts of releases. They underscore how self-serving and one sided this privately-owned entity is, and how uninterested they are in protecting issuers. The message is clearly that, you can reduce the market cap of a company by 99.7%, make short sellers rich in the process, but that's all good. In the scheme of things, it's just another day at the office for the DTCC.

Note no explanation of why 18 months later, nothing has been done to make the company or the investors whole. Note no remorse over it. Note nothing but arrogance and dismissal, and attack.

Anyone surprised? That it took a week is almost as funny as the content of the piece. In addition to being glacial in fixing actions that destroy issuers' market caps, they are not particularly nimble in the PR department, either.

 
Copyright ©2006 Bob O'Brien
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (68)
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By JR on 8/31/2006 9:24 AM
I surely hope Liz will fire back with something. The privately held Fed and DTCC need to be dismantled...until then, business as usual.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By gregcable2002 on 8/31/2006 9:32 AM
The DTCC think they are above the law,we'll see about that,I think they are getting a little nervous,I would be,because Grandpa and Grandma are going to be apart of the jury someday.TIC TOC TIC TOC
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By SteveM on 8/31/2006 9:38 AM
Isn't 27 million shares at $.015 (the lowest value of the shares) equal to a value of $405,000?

Did someone move a decimal?

And, I really could be wrong!!!
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Niel Storts on 8/31/2006 9:39 AM
Bob. It's all just dazzle paint. A blind man can see that the markets are being manipulated. The only thing the miscreants are doing with the outpouring of bull shit such as this is merely deflect anyone attention from the single underlying fact that must be covered up at all costs. To wit: That the street is nothing more than a collection of felons. Geared totally to their own enrichment at the expense of everyone else. They must keep intact their reputation though. In order to keep the supply of new money coming in to satisfy their greed. Beings so many of the political "powers" in this country are sleeping with the miscreants, there will also be massive efforts put into play from that quarter to keep the truth under wraps. Power is after all power. That is what we are fighting against. Power. Our enemies will not give up. They never will. They must be distroyed. This is only the current battle of the same war that just folks have been fighting since the dawn of history. The quest to achieve a little freedom. That will never be granted. We must take it. Hope you are able to open up enough eyes to provide the mass necessary to beat back those ruining our lives. Merely beating them back will leave the job unfinished though. This time we must declare total war. If we are lucky enough to get the upper hand......... This time we must distroy the enemy. Elsewise the powers of enslavement will rise again more quickly then they will without a total victory in our little part of this war. Good luck.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By davidn on 8/31/2006 3:03 PM
This article reeks of DTCC arrogance:

"However, among sub-penny stocks, these activities may occur more often to try and artificially raise the stock's price. "

Doesn't that seem like a slanderous comment? How do they know what the intent was? Maybe they were trying to trade at many dollars so the DTCC wouldn't put out press releases slamming them as a penny stock. I can never understand why the share price is so much more important to the exchanges and depositories than the market cap.

"Whatever the actual cause of the delivery failure, the total value of the 27 million in failed trades described in the media report was less than $38,000, which hardly constitutes the threat to the capital markets that the article implied."

Does that mean the DTCC has someone lined up to cross stock at current prices? How would they know what it is going to cost to cover the short unless they know they have buyers lined up and at what price?

And where the hell is the apology that they f_cked up. They have one job to do and they FAILED at that job. Then they lied about failing, forcing Dave to find FOIA proof that they were lying.

It's time to completely get rid of the LYING FOR PROFIT DTCC and market maker / specialist system and replace it with a transparent non profit computerized trading system.

I for one am sick and tired of these arrogant thieves.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By davidn on 8/31/2006 3:13 PM
More on the corrupt, lying privately held DTCC.

I can't find any information on Cede & Co., except that it is a privately held partnership that has existed at least since the early 1970's and is the actual registered owner of your shares.

http://www.cfoss.com/wall.html
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Richard M. Rosenthal on 8/31/2006 3:17 PM
Hey, bt-- Thanks for your comment, but I have absolutely no illusions about any of these guys since 1998 when sleazy scribes Wirth, Eisenberg, Weiss, Apert & gang abetted an Asensio, Loeb (Mr. Pink), Schechter, Griffin, Langhardt, Wilkens, Paulson, Rocker, Avalon Boca-offshore naked short assault that decimated a certain company and the lives of several hundred investors of which I was one.
I just didn't think calling Norris a sleazy lying motherfker (even if true) was the best way to get my comments past the censors and onto his screen.
Best,
R
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By bob13013powers on 8/31/2006 3:28 PM
What makes this a threat to the capital market is that people own 25,000% of this company. What do you do if one person owns 101% of this company and someone has to buy that one share from him. He names any price he wants. It will probably end in court. Sounds to me like a broken capitol market.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By scum on 8/31/2006 3:34 PM
These crooks need to be taken down a notch.

There are 350 million people in this country and maybe 1000 scumbags. That means that that when this scam becomes widely known, there will be 350,000 angry Americans after each one scumbag.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By gjw46 on 8/31/2006 5:34 PM
Bobo, please remove my earlier post. Obviously, I upset someone who was truly in touch with their own bloodlust. Measure twice...cut once.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Little Bo peep on 8/31/2006 5:41 PM
IntheKnow says: _______
You are right. They are as low as a living human could be.
However, that is an awful word. *smack*
I have used it too. But my sheep tell me it is not nice. *smile*

The thugs didn't expect this fight from the poor Americans to dumb to vote. Did they?

Surprise, surprise are you ready for your surprise?

Your playground Secrets out.
It has not made it to main street America yet.

The lockheed martin video has gone to 50k is a short time.
word can travel fast when one wants it to....huh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qd3VV8Za04g

Did that Mr John Mack know anyone at LMT?
The part about the communication technology is interesting.
Keeps turning up doesn't it?

I think there is much more going on behind the curtain
than can be made public yet. You don't think somebody
is still trying to blow smoke up their bosses ass do you?

See if you do not educate the American public about issues.
Then you can buy whatever it is that you want to be passed or not passed in our government. Those lobby boys and girls just throw the nickels at what they want.
So, the politician takes the money and runs.
Why does he/she care if the American public have no clue of what the policy is or how it would affect their life?

You wonder why such a low % of the American public vote?
Maybe because they are not educated about the issues.
There is a difference in ignorance and stupidity.
The American public is not stupid.
Middle class and poor does not make one stupid.

The only time you hear anything about politicians is when they are out ass kissing trying to win an election.
What other time do you hear or see from them?
That goes from local up.

Are they working for the sake of the American public?
When the honest ones and
I do think at least 5% are, get the teeth in this, which some have already. Thank you to those that are busting their ass.

We will win this battle.

What a tangled web of FRAUD.

march onward.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By clearthinker on 8/31/2006 6:01 PM
Wall St...an industry that thrives on playing upon the emotions of people. How far we have slipped.

In my father's day, people bought stock because they believed in a vision, a dream and wanted to be a part of a great company, and a great country.

None of what I just described is true to any significant extent today. Stock prices are manipulated upward by people who twist the truth to make junk companies seem like they're just about to shot to the moon, or by TV pundits (funny how the prices often end lower on the day after a Mad Money reco) - or they are manipulated downward by analysts serving their hedge fund masters....
Today we have small investors crying out for transparency and a level playing field...and all we see is denial, spin, stall, diversion and refusal to investigate.

If we are going to be successful, it will likely involve the dismantling of the SEC, DTCC and a far more transparent system than we have ever known before. Anything less is a recipe for a repeat of this debacle at some future time....

What a disgrace...
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By InTheKnow on 8/31/2006 6:02 PM
Your sheep are right.
However, we must emphasize how pathetic this garbage that call themselves officials really are!

Thse self serving scumbags are the lowest of the low and a plauge on society. We are mad as hell and are not going to take their bullshit anymore!
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Sean on 8/31/2006 6:18 PM
A little Off Topic.

15 Sep 2005 23:35 GMT 4th UPDATE: SEC Judge Orders Raymond James Fined $6.9 Million


Copyright © 2006, Dow Jones Newswires


(Adds comment from SEC enforcement lawyer in 16th paragraph.)


By Siobhan Hughes
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- A Securities and Exchange Commission administrative law judge on Thursday ordered Raymond James Financial Inc.'s (RJF) financial-services unit to pay a $6.9 million civil penalty for failing to supervise an employee who allegedly bilked investors out of $16.5 million.

But in a setback to the agency, SEC Chief Administrative Law Judge Brenda Murray rejected allegations that the Raymond James unit had violated email retention rules. She ruled that the charges were unfair given the actions of top SEC officials, including Annette Nazareth, who was previously the director of the SEC's market regulation division and is now a commissioner.

"It would be patently unfair and unacceptable in view of the senior staff's actions and representations to find that Raymond James did not take steps to comply" with the e-mail rule, Murray wrote. "My ruling does not violate the well settled principle that individual commission staff members cannot speak for the commission."

SEC spokesman John Nester declined to comment on whether the agency would appeal the decision. Asked to comment, Nazareth declined to speak about the case and noted that she wouldn't participate if the judge's initial decision were appealed to the commission.

However, Nazareth said that "it's appropriate and reasonable for prosecutors to use their discretion, particularly when the legal standards are under review for possible change. E-mail evidence has formed the evidentiary record for many SEC enforcement actions in recent years, made possible largely because our regulations require broker dealers to keep certain required records."

Testimony by a witness for Raymond James had shown that in 2001, Nazareth had called the New York Stock Exchange and asked the exchange's regulatory arm to stop reporting email retention violations to the NYSE's enforcement division and to withdraw referrals that had already been made.

At the time, the SEC was in discussions with Wall Street over changes to email rules, which the industry criticized as being too broad. Because of those discussions, Nazareth felt it would be unreasonable to bring enforcement actions, according to Salvatore Pallante, a former regulator for the NYSE. Lori Richards, the director of the SEC's office of compliance, inspections and examinations, agreed with that approach, he said.

The judge's ruling on email retention may give a boost to some in the brokerage industry, who privately grumble that the SEC isn't justified in taking an aggressive approach now to email retention deficiencies of earlier years, when talks were ongoing about relaxing the rules. The Securities Industry Association, the trade group for Wall Street, had sought to restrict the internal e-mails that firms would have to retain.

"The commission engaged in a bit of a bait and switch," said Seth Rodner, a former federal prosecutor now at Fowler White Boggs Banker who defended Raymond James against the email charges. "It directed the exchange to stand down on its email enforcement efforts.. with an eye towards relaxing the email guidelines.

"The judge appears to have found it unfair and unacceptable for the commission now to take the position that no such expectation was being created."

The judge also ordered J. Stephen Putnam, the former president of Raymond James Financial Services, to pay a $200,000 civil penalty for not doing enough to supervise the former broker, Dennis Herula. He was also suspended from serving as a supervisor at a brokerage firm or a mutual fund or hedge fund adviser for 90 days.

"We're disappointed in the result, but we're also pleased that the judge found Mr. Putnam was a man of high integrity and that she credited his testimony," said Jerry Isenberg, an attorney for Putnam.

Almost three years ago, a federal judge ordered Herula to pay more than $19 million in an SEC case charging him with fraud. Formerly with the Raymond James branch in Cranston, R.I., Herula used a side operation known as "Brite Business" to pull in millions from a handful of wealthy investors, and implied that Raymond James was affiliated with it, the SEC alleged.

Between 1999 and 2001, he and others associated with Brite Business misappropriated, transferred, or lost about $20 million in investor funds, the SEC had charged.

The judge fined Raymond James $300,000 apiece for each of 23 pieces of unauthorized correspondence that Herula sent on Raymond James letterhead on connection with his allegedly fraudulent activities.

"I'm very pleased that the judge held Raymond James accountable for the fraud and that victims will receive compensation as a result of the penalty she imposed," said Walter Ricciardi, director of the SEC's Boston District office.

However, she rejected an SEC request that Raymond James be required to give up almost $15.7 million, representing the funds held in the Brite Business account at Raymond James and money paid as a result of Brite Business's purchase of Treasuries on margin. She said that because the money had not gone to Raymond James, the brokerage firm couldn't be required to give it up.

She said that Raymond James should pay $5,866 in disgorgement, representing the money it earned from commissions generated by the Brite Business account.

-By Siobhan Hughes, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6654; Siobhan.Hughes@dowjones.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires

09-15-05 1935ET

Copyright (c) 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.


PGWC - Wow... By Dan Davids on 8/31/2006 6:27 PM
I don't remember the last time I saw a stock tumble so far on ZERO News. The Short Sellers will claim news, some B.S. Motley Fool Report:

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2006/commentary06083012.htm?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y

But the reality is what we all know.... Someone is paying off the writers at Motley Fool to bash PGWC. After all, there has to be some justification for a 35% drop without the SEC looking like a bunch of idiots.

The thing that gets me is that you would think the crooked shorts would be less obvious.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 8:23 PM
There is a NY Times piece out talking about the Pgwc stock.
They destroy Pegasus.

Insider
A Bet Against Those Who Bet Against the Company
Sign In to E-Mail This Print Reprints Save

By JENNY ANDERSON
Published: September 1, 2006
IMAGINE if a company said it would give you a dividend but would make you do cartwheels to get it.

Pegasus Wireless, a technology company in Nevada, announced an unusual plan on Aug. 4 to reward loyal shareholders. For every 10 shares of stock, investors would receive a “property dividend” which the company described as a stock warrant.

But there was a catch. The warrants would be issued only to shareholders whose stock was held in “beneficial name” — in other words, in the name of the shareholder. Pegasus would not issue any warrants to brokerage firms to be passed on to clients, which is what normally happens when dividends are paid.

The warrant, as explained in the Pegasus news release, appeared to suggest that brokers — who can lend out stock they hold in certain client accounts — might have to recall the shares so that investors could prove they were the owners. Such action would require those who sell short to give the stock back to the brokers, pushing the price up and creating a short squeeze.

Pegasus said it was only trying to reward investors, but regulators, back-office officials and traders saw another possible motive — to punish short sellers. (Short sellers bet that a company’s stock price will fall, selling shares, usually borrowed from a brokerage firm, and later buying them back at a lower price and pocketing the difference. If the price rises, the plan backfires.)

“It squeezes the shorts, but it also squeezes the brokers,” said David A. Garcia, a principal at the Nevada-based law firm of Hale Lane.

Although the chief executive of Pegasus, Jasper Knabb, said that short sellers had “attacked” his company — amassing 9 million of the 16.5 million outstanding shares — he says the warrant was not intended as retribution.

“I am not Overstock.com,” Mr. Knabb said, referring to the company whose chief executive recently compared short sellers with Al Qaeda (Overstock.com is among a handful of companies suing hedge funds they believe to be behind a short-selling conspiracy).

Mr. Knabb said the board issued the warrant in an effort to get an accurate snapshot of shareholders. He was concerned, he said, that someone had created phantom or fake stock — upward of 22 million shares — and was trading them in the marketplace. One British shareholder, he said, had documentation of a private placement that the company never conducted, evidence that fake shares had materialized in the market.

Whatever the goal of the warrant, the impact was clear. Pegasus’s stock rose almost 30 percent after the warrant was announced, reaching a high of $7.60 on Aug. 22 — bad news for any short seller who expected shares to fall. The stock since has fallen again and closed yesterday at $3.43.

Yesterday, the stock fell 33 percent on volume of 4.6 million. The company usually trades about 130,000 shares a day.

Whatever the reason it was released, such a warrant is highly unusual. Lawyers at the Securities and Exchange Commission could not recall any other such warrant. “It’s an odd situation,” Mr. Garcia said. “Ultimately with the logistics they’ve proposed, a refusal by the company to issue the distribution to a stockholder of record of the company could be problematic under Nevada law.”

John Courtade, a Texas lawyer advising Pegasus, said: “I don’t see how it prejudices any shareholders. The goal was to reward shareholders of Pegasus who have seen their value shredded by short manipulation.”

Mr. Knabb said he was working with regulators, including Nasdaq, on the mysterious share imbalance. But regulators seem more focused on the legality of the warrant.

“Nasdaq is working with other regulators to ensure that securities laws are being appropriately applied,” a Nasdaq spokeswoman, Silvia Davi, said. “This is a process that is independent of the company.” The S.E.C. is also examining the issue, said one person briefed on the inquiry.

As to the fake stock, Mr. Knabb says he believes he has evidence that it exists — proof provided by the Depository Trust Clearing Corporation, which holds in custody about 85 percent of all shares in the marketplace.

Mr. Knabb said after the announcement of the warrant, the clearinghouse reported Pegasus had 16.5 million shares. He said it later reported 38 million outstanding shares, which it detailed in a one-page report sent to Mr. Knabb.

“We have a bunch of phantom stock,” Mr. Knabb said.

But Steven Letzler, director of corporate communications for the clearinghouse, said the second report was an internal document — one that Mr. Knabb should not have seen — that reflects all of the Pegasus shares the clearinghouse holds, including shares in custodial space rented by brokerage houses. The first report, Mr. Letzler said, accurately reflects the number of outstanding shares, that being 16.5 million.


Attacking short sellers is in vogue these days. Several companies, including Overstock.com, have sued short sellers, accusing them of market manipulation and conspiracy. Pegasus’s warrant seems to be a more innovative attempt to hurt those who bet against the company.

Mr. Knabb says Pegasus has a “stellar” record of performance. Company filing and extensive conversations with Mr. Knabb reveal a confusing corporate structure created through repeated reverse mergers with shell companies that have involved businesses ranging from water treatment technology to software development.

For shareholders, it seems a no-win situation. If there is indeed phantom stock, Pegasus will have difficulty ending the problem. If there is not, Mr. Knabb may have to explain to shareholders why he has spent so much time bestowing such rewards upon them and less time running his company.

Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 8:41 PM
What does this mean? clearinghouse holds?!?

internal document — one that Mr. Knabb should not have seen — that reflects all of the Pegasus shares the clearinghouse holds, including shares in custodial space rented by brokerage houses.

As to the fake stock, Mr. Knabb says he believes he has evidence that it exists — proof provided by the Depository Trust Clearing Corporation, which holds in custody about 85 percent of all shares in the marketplace.

Mr. Knabb said after the announcement of the warrant, the clearinghouse reported Pegasus had 16.5 million shares. He said it later reported 38 million outstanding shares, which it detailed in a one-page report sent to Mr. Knabb.

“We have a bunch of phantom stock,” Mr. Knabb said.

But Steven Letzler, director of corporate communications for the clearinghouse, said the second report was an internal document — one that Mr. Knabb should not have seen — that reflects all of the Pegasus shares the clearinghouse holds, including shares in custodial space rented by brokerage houses. The first report, Mr. Letzler said, accurately reflects the number of outstanding shares, that being 16.5 million.



Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 8:48 PM
Another choice quote.

"Mr. Knabb said he was working with regulators, including Nasdaq, on the mysterious share imbalance. But regulators seem more focused on the legality of the warrant.

“Nasdaq is working with other regulators to ensure that securities laws are being appropriately applied,” a Nasdaq spokeswoman, Silvia Davi, said. “This is a process that is independent of the company.” The S.E.C. is also examining the issue, said one person briefed on the inquiry. "

This guy is in over his head. he wants to talk about Naked shares and both Nasdaq and the SEC are only focused on the legality of the warrant dividend he wanted to give shareholders.

This is too funny. i knew the SEC was going to investigate. That is the way it goes.

If a CEO ever mentions shorts the

1- media pounces and attacks the stock
2- Stock goes on REG SHO
3- And then the coup de grace they get investigated by the sec.
4- PPS drops and then they get a delisting notice.

Like i said kinda funny... but not really I feel very bad for the long shareholders and the company. But did you see how the CEO was like "i am not overstock" that made me angry and made me lose a little sympathy for the CEO.

I used to like the NY TIMES NOw i see it is just another worthless rag.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 8:54 PM
Notice how in all of these articles lambasting Pegasus they never mention anything good about the stock at all?

They never mention how PGWC

1-They have increasing revenue
2-They are profitable
3-They just retired 13mil shares
4-The Ceo and some senior managers just acquired some shares in lieu of cash compensation
5-The Ceo and senior managers hold an enormous amount of company stock that they bought off of the street at a higher pps than pgwc is currently trading at
6-There is a small float
7-They were trying to get shareholders a dividend
8-They were trying to clean up the problem they were having with counterfeit shares

No one mentions the positives they make it seem like this company is an unprofitable shell that has 6 billion shares outstanding.

Now I see that the NYTIMES is no different than the Motley Fool.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 9:04 PM
Another quote this one is really bad.

To me it reads You will never get rid of counterfeit shares this problem will never go away.

And since you tried you got what you deserved we will kill this company.

Let this be a lesson to all CEO’s mention naked shorts or try to fight us and we will kill your company.

Very ominous i am actually a little scared.


"For shareholders, it seems a no-win situation. If there is indeed phantom stock, Pegasus will have difficulty ending the problem. If there is not, Mr. Knabb may have to explain to shareholders why he has spent so much time bestowing such rewards upon them and less time running his company."
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 9:38 PM
If you want to recruit new people go to the pgwc yahoo board.

Some people there thought they had a good scoop. They thought the press was going to step in and expose the rigged system. They thought they were going to get justice and kill the naked shorts.

They thought the NYTIMES was going to write a responsible piece about pgwc and reg sho and how counterfeit shorts illegally attacked and destroyed this company.

They have been on REG SHO 11 days in a row now. They lost almost 200 mil in market cap in one day. The times also did not mention how the company just retired 13mil shares.

The NYtimes did not mention any of those facts.

All they got was a typical smear job which knocked the companies past.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By InTheKnow on 9/1/2006 1:06 AM
If we ever saw blatant stock manipulation then we just saw it now. It's time for someone tp step up to the plate and investigate the SEC, DTCC and Wall Street!

We are mad as hell and are not going to take this bullshit anymore!
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By BadDays on 9/1/2006 4:29 AM
The NY Tmes article was neutral, did not investigate the issue, but just state the factors surrounding te issue.

I am not sure about the bashing part, other than the mergers paragraph.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By gregcable2002 on 9/1/2006 5:09 AM
apparently Wall street has accumulated much of our resourses now and it's to the point where they think they can do and say whatever they want,that sucks.We all need to stop trading for a couple of days.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By virakiller on 9/1/2006 5:29 AM
get the "bats" children-
these anti American bankers are DESTROYING America

read a piece from Sen Carl Levin yesterday about UBS, CSFB, Weismeinster,
laden berg, Laidlaw, Pershing, DLJ and that bogus stock firm in 2WTC that
was aug 16, 2001
AND
Dr Herbert Batliner anyone ever heard of this criminal that is IN BED with
American banks and money launderers

HOW THE F%$#K can we allow this
they are robbing America of its life

in closing I say= "get the bat"
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 9/1/2006 6:06 AM
baddays,

How can it be neutral? Does the NY times mention any positive items in the article? I did not see any.

I do see real negatives items though.

I also see negative innuendo but no positive innuendo.

Did they mention that PGWC has been on REG SHO for 11 consecutive trading days?
Nope they don’t mention that at all.

So lets take count. Negative items yes positive items no.

Well that is not 50-50 so it is not a neutral article.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By bbhindyou on 9/1/2006 7:10 AM
Order your certs.Make the D.T.C.hurt.Our only hope is to drain the D.T.C.C. of all certs .Then they won't have anything to 'lend'.Can we get every american mad enough to do it? This could be the biggest 'war' front in the world I think it would also have international appeal.The robbery IS having a effect on everyone if you don't own stock then this is also effecting the companys you work at or with.People have to see how big this is and how much it costs.It has to stop. Lets drain the D.T.C.C. One drop at a time. Order your certs.Make sure YOU own a peice of reality .Stop the counterfitting.Now.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By troydian on 9/1/2006 7:29 AM
I have a word: “The first shall be last!” Those who have ruled by deception, by secrecy, by conspiracy, by greed, by force, by intimidation, by violence, by treason, by cover-up, by scapegoating, by smearing, by perverting justice, and by the sheer arrogance of egocentric pride: your day is passing quickly into history. The last shall soon be first; and the shift will be obvious.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By mondo on 9/1/2006 7:45 AM
I have a question for anyone out there. I ran into a situation a number of years ago.
( I did get my share certificates at the end of it...not without extreme difficulty).
What does the DTC mean when they tell a brokerage there is a "chill" on the stock
and this is why they will not release the company certificates? Anyone have an answer as to what they mean, and how they are able to do this?
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 9/1/2006 7:46 AM
bbhindyou,

PGWC tried to get thier shareholders to order their certs and because they did they lost 75% of their market cap in a few days.

The message is crystal clear.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By bbhindyou on 9/1/2006 8:19 AM
If we could get the heat on with a cert pull by the masses do you think they will make demanding your certs a crime? We could have a lawer make up forms downloadable from this site demanding that your broker put your stocks in your name only,this can be done even with retirement accounts, then get the word out and see what happens. I wonder how ,if this took off, the D.T.C.C. could jusify denial of our property we have already paid for.They would have to deny someone the shares they paid for there just aren't enuogh in the system to cover.How would they stop it?
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By searrows on 9/1/2006 8:53 AM
bbhindyou,

If enough people asked for certs the SEC would pass a rule disallowing paper cartificates saying it was high time that this anachronism passed into history. They would give everyone who currently holds paper certificates a deadline..."dematerialize them or lose em" either way they are gone...When I got mine ,Ameritrade called me twice to see if I would change my mind. I got a new Broker to handle the transfer Of course my new broker said the only people who do this are Grandmas.
What a mess this is. The only thing I see that gives me hope is the number of fronts that have been opened against them. Are there any markets in the world that are fairly operated? I see the DTCC is wiggling their way into a lot of other countries markets and that the US exchanges are snooping around and trying to buy others. So this scam is on the march worldwide. How long do you give Liz and Forbes before they are stifled ? I wish we could illegally short some of these media outlets? You know the only way to stop this is for everyone to start doing it.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Sroy on 9/1/2006 9:50 AM
Wanted to make sure you saw another example of how the press portrays companies with serious fraudulent stock issues as "small and poorly run" :
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/01/business/01insider.html?adxnnl=1&dlbk=&adxnnlx=1157131183-2TtK6wNaZtd/Phg+4oNq/A
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By virakiller on 9/1/2006 10:11 AM
get the bats children

go to pgwc and see today's announcement
jason knabb ceo of pegasus is throwning our first pitch at A's and Red Sox's
game tonight
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By clearthinker on 9/1/2006 10:46 AM
The A's are playing the Orioles tonight. He threw the first pitch out 4 days ago.....
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By InTheKnow on 9/1/2006 11:22 AM
A chill means they DO NOT HAVE any Certs!
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By InTheKnow on 9/1/2006 12:35 PM
With all the thousands of newsworthy FINANCIAL stories why would the NY Times (the NY Times of all papers) feature a little company and a dividend and make a big deal?

BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT and more BULLSHIT!
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Bobo on 9/1/2006 5:41 PM
You know it is funny. I was watching CNN and saw a bit on Mexico's contested election, and furious Mexicans taking to the streets and the capital over alleged voting fraud - their claim is that the current regime rigged the vote to favor their pro-business buddy, rather than allowing a fair vote.

What struck me is the outrage over a system that they perceive as corrupt - the indignation that the rich and powerful could just declare their choagie to be the winner, having gamed the situation.

And yet we have here in the US a system far more biased and rigged, that literally attacks its critics and abuses its power, while allowing illegality to flourish, and there is no national outrage, no taking to the streets, no mass protests.

Have we really become so inured to corruption as status quo that Latin America is now more of a moral barometer than we are?

Think long and hard about that.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By short seller on 9/2/2006 6:29 AM
etrade would not let me buy GLCC all week initially they said the company restricted its stock
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By InTheKnow on 9/2/2006 3:03 PM
The SEC claims to be worried about causing short squeezes if trades get settled. The term "short squeeze" describes a dynamic that occurs with legal, non-manipulative short postitions that are forced to cover. It cannot be applied to naked shorts, because a key component, legitimately borrowed shares is missing. I suggest we coin a new term to describe what might happen if naked shorts were bought in.

Naked
Upwardly
Driven
Indemnity
Evaluation

or NUDIE.

Dr. Trimbath is right. The term "short squeeze" is being misapplied to potential for upward price movement if fraudulently unsettled trades are forced to settle.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By InTheKnow on 9/2/2006 3:33 PM
On second thought:

Natural
Upwardly
Driven
Indemnity
Evaluation

NUDIE!
OT: Where is the NCANS comment letter on Reg SHO? By snoozern on 9/3/2006 10:43 AM
Bob,

I've been searching for the NCANS letter and can't find it.

Has it been released, posted, or otherwise published?

If so, where is it?

If not, what is the current status and plan?

TIA,
Rick
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By searrows on 9/3/2006 11:27 AM
We are as a nation, except for this small band of desenters, who are aware of the level corruption at the highest levels of government media, and finance. are tolerating corruption. If we continue to do this we will find ourselves brole and enslaved. Our most dangerous enemy today is indeed our own government.
It's Sunday-where's the funnies? By robelita on 9/3/2006 11:28 AM
bobo-it's time to break out the powerpoint again-a little satirical humor can go far and as for miscreant irritation-it's priceless ;)

HASSENPFEFFER
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By davidn on 8/31/2006 3:13 PM
Woops, wrong link. I meant this one:

http://www.cfoss.com/Wealthbeyondbelief.html
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By davidn on 8/31/2006 3:16 PM
Quote from the last link.

2005-2006

DTCC achieves its goal of becoming “the institution of choice (?) world-wide” for the clearing, settling and electronic storage of all financial and investment instruments.

2006-2012

The prospect of a global economic collapse creates a groundswell of public outrage until Financial Transaction Tax legislation is passed, requiring banks to collect and remit to the nation’s treasury .1% of every transaction. By stages all other taxes are revoked, beginning with a 30% cut in personal income tax. Starting at the municipal level interest-free Constitutional money, issued by our publicly-owned Bank of Canada, incrementally and judiciously replaces our private debt-money system.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By jcline on 8/31/2006 10:00 AM
Yeah, and a little bank robbery here and there is not a threat to the banking industry either... but it still is illegal, a crime, and punishable!

Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 10:17 AM
Would a bank ever dare to mess up your checking account?

Would they ever give a banking client 1 cent extra?!!?

A bank would never ever let a 1 cent mistake stand.

How can they be allowed to be this incompetent?
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Rule 3210 on 8/31/2006 10:27 AM
been reading the NITE Yahoo page. some pretty amazing stuff. According to 1 poster, Nite's volumes are 90% otcbb/pink shhets and 10% nasdaq and listed volumes. Further, that NITE had almost 200 $ US million in customer fails in the first 2 quarters of 06. What's amazing is that their top 10 traded bb and pink sheet stocks don't add up to 10 cents. They were #1 trader in GLLC and Sedona. How much evidence does the SEC need to investigate this firm?
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 10:30 AM
BOBO i smell blood in the water. the DTCC is trying to tell us that a 38,000 dollar mistake is not a big deal!!!

i repeat would your local bank make a 30k mistake? if it did it would apologize and set the account straight.

The dtcc is telling us it is ok to swipe 30k from here and oh maybe 20k from overstock and another 15k from msft.

Yeah they are all small numbers we don’t have to be EXACT when we deal with YOU LOW CLASS PLEBS money.

YOU PLEBS CAN AFFORD TO LOSE 30K after all you are investing with your own free will.

The gall to say its “ONLY A 30K MISTAKE”

BOBO I am peaceful but this is filling me with rage.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By gregcable2002 on 8/31/2006 10:31 AM
DTCC stated that Global Links said it was a simple error and it didn't envolve naked short selling? I would love to see exactly where and when Global links said that!
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Wonder Boy on 8/31/2006 10:36 AM
First, I think the DTCC should check their math.

Second, I don't think we know the true value of the damage until the fails are covered and the certificates properly delivered to the rightful owners.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By gregcable2002 on 8/31/2006 10:38 AM
The DTCC called Liz Moyer a liar.WOW GO GET"EM Liz
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By newspaper on 8/31/2006 10:38 AM
It would seem the DTCC cannot do any math or anything else for that matter.

First they forgot to reverse split.

If they did not forget to R/S they forgot to adjust the share price.

Now they are misrepresenting how much the messed up reverse split cost the company and its shareholders.

Finally if it 30k or 400k they don’t seem to think that either paltry is worthy of an apology or a correction.
Re: DTCC: " A Little Rape is No Big Deal - Why Is Everyone Bent Out of Shape?" By Wonder Boy on 8/31/2006 10:59 AM
It would appear that Liz has a golden opportunity. OK, DTCC, we can accept a mistake (maybe, begrudgingly) but the most important thing to do is correct things and make everyone whole----like it should be.
Re: DTCC: No naked short seling involved