Funny Bunny
Looking for something a little lighter?
Catch Bob's more irreverent and amusing pieces in his Funny Bunny Blog.

SEC Internal Controls Ripe For Abuse

Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog    
Posted by:   bobo 11/17/2006 8:06 AM

-------------------

Sign the Market Reform Petition Now!: View it here.

------------------

A new study from the GAO came out, in which the SEC got its annual report card.

You can read the summary of the report in an article in the NY Post, here.

The interesting thing for me is that the penalties being assessed, with great fanfare, are so badly "bungled" that nobody can even be sure they were ever paid.

How convenient for bad guys on Wall Street.

You read that right. The wrist-slap penalties assessed by the SEC, in return for no admission of guilt agreements, are conveniently part of a system that is so badly compromised that nobody can tell if they were ever paid.

Now, how unlikely is that? I mean, you could always keep a ledger - "Fines paid in" - with the date, amount, case number and payer. But I suppose that is far too sophisticated. And it wouldn't allow the miscreants the deniability provided by the same sort of opacity that shields them from scrutiny in the FTD arena. It's all a mystery, thus it is "possible" that everyone is complying. If you've paid any attention at all, this sort of "we just don't know, there is no proof" defense is the preferred one of Wall Street's worst.

So, we don't know who is taking money and failing to deliver, and we don't know how many, if any, of the bad guys, when rarely caught and pursued, actually pay anything.

We just don't know.

Which means there is no reason to believe any of these scumbags pay anything.

Does everyone see what a house of mirrors this all is?

A cynic would opine that we are talking about a sham system designed to defraud investors at every level - at the trading level, where their money is exchanged for worthless IOUs. At the SRO level, where it is wink wink, nudge nudge time in the boy's club. At the regulator level, where amid much fanfare, no change is ever achieved, and it is questionable that anyone ever pays anything for wrongdoing, in the few instances when anyone is fined. At the elected official level, where the various committees allow the wholesale theft of a generation's retirement savings by Wall Street, while debating steroids and gay marriage and the like. At the administration level, where Wall Street bigwigs occupy many of the top positions of power. At the currency creation/banking level, where we pay a private company interest on our own money that our treasury prints and then ships to them, to lend to us at a significant profit.

In Orwell's "1984", there was this overarching totalitarian authority that dictated the actions of the masses, and disseminated disinformation and propaganda to keep them in line. "War is Peace" was one of the lies that was fed to the credulous public - only by engaging in war, and by taking the lives of others in the name of nationalistic interests, could "we" be safe and live in peace. Thus, war was peace. "Freedom is Slavery" was another whopper - that the burdens of choice were an enslavement, whereas by having the superior intellects of the state make your choices for you, you were able to be truly free to enjoy your life.

Anyone seeing uncomfortable similarities in all this? One group, call it the financial/industrial/governmental complex, engages in a power grab and deceives the populace whilst slowly abrogating all rights and freedoms. Lies are the currency of this group, and the populace are its food. Anything goes, as it takes the wealth of a nation and confiscates it through sophisticated artifice too arcane for the average person to comprehend.

Back to the SEC. The computer systems are apparently less secure than a truck stop restroom stall, and likely no cleaner. This raises the question of how confidential all the confidential data could be.

My hunch? Not very.

So we have fines that are unrecorded, information systems that leak like a Haitian life raft, and a financial complex that is as adversarially disposed as one could imagine.

Have a nice weekend.

Copyright ©2006 Bob O'Brien
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (50)
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/17/2006 8:56 AM
Firms that trade on the NYSE file "Financial and Operational Combined Uniform Single Report".

The total is a subset of all fails as it doesn't include foreign fails or custodians that don't deal on the NYSE. Also, firms have been known to lie on their FOCUS reports, so it is likely to understate the problem.

Data from Q2 06

Failed to Deliver: $28 billion
Failed to Receive: $35 billion
Total: $63 billion or ten times what the DTCC says

http://www.sia.com/research/other/NYSEFirmsTotals.xls

It shows that the fail to deliver peaked at $131 billion

http://www.sia.com/research/other/qrt_res.xls

These fails are above the billions in stock repos. Regulation SHO has a nasty loophole that being contractually obligated to buy stock in the future is the same as being long in the stock.

Instead of lending the stock, I do a repurchase agreement. I sell the stock to another firm, with the agreement to buy it back, minus my fee. It has the essence of a loan, but I don't have to report it as a loan and the borrow can sell it without reporting it as a short.

Here's the kicker. The person who buys the stock is long AND the person who lends the stock via a repo is also long.

The recipient can enter into a new repo agreement, creating a long chain of phantom longs, each long by virtue of their agreement to buy the stock back in the future.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/17/2006 9:02 AM
"War is peace"
"2+2=5"
"You are long stock when you sell it to someone else"
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By ginger on 11/18/2006 11:32 AM
What's the "MAKET REFORM" ??? ... how about putting an "R" in MAKET to get people to take this seriously.

http://www.ncans.net/
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By rick on 11/18/2006 12:00 PM
NYSE layoffs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6130570.stm
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By Those Pesky Fees on 11/18/2006 2:32 PM
"A merged exchange has more appeal as traders, investors and issuers are all keen to reduce transaction costs - especially in clearing and settlement."
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By fees on 11/18/2006 3:27 PM
Plus it is easier to net transactions if there are less custodians.

Why fail to deliver and fail to receive when you can hide it all by netting within the custodian?
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By PhantomCertificates on 11/18/2006 4:03 PM
Well, if you're going to start changing the names, why not just call the FTD's Vaporshares. Explaining FTD's or naked shorting with the term IOUs isn't exactly accurate since in many cases they never intend to ever deliver the shares as an IOU would infer. Selling Vaporshares (kind of like the term vaporware for software that never really existed) is more accurate than naked shorting, and I think people would immediately understand what's going on in the transaction. Someone is getting money for nothing, and while the system is set up to allow you to resell your vaporshares, it's essentially just moving the vaporshare around the system.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By Wicked World on 11/18/2006 4:22 PM

"We're in this bizarro world scenario where the victims think we are tin hat conspiracy theorists." said 'sec'

"The naked shorting is the tip of the iceberg. The problem is that most of the market is smoke and mirrors where phantom shares trade in a parallel universe next to real ones," said sgaah.

------------------------------------------------

I'm envious of you guys who are able to put things so well. Sgaah, I printed your post to pin on my wall. I've been following this site for a long time and have learned so much from so many posters. As far as the discussion here went I remember when FTDs/phantom shares consisted of only naked shorts. Then one day it was revealed that there exists naked longs. And now we learn of "repo" agreements allowing 2 parties to (legally) be long the same exact shares. And this is all just one corner of the big picture. I'm thinking I don't even want to know the next chapter. Granted, I'm a small-time nobody but at this point I do not see how anything can/will be done to rectify the problems until *after* the dreaded systemic collapse/"vapor lock"/meltdown occurrs.

Bobo, I know you've heard this from me before and please don't think I can't imagine how loaded down you already are but if you believe it would benefit the cause to reach more regular Joes then please consider the more viral mediums of podcasting or even youtube. Even something like you (or someone else) reading your blogs is worth trying. Don the bunny ears and the shadowy lighting
and go viral!
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By InTheKnow on 11/18/2006 4:25 PM
Lets all start paying with vapor money!
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By msucog on 11/18/2006 6:13 PM
off topic question-sort of-i've compiled the short trading data for a particular stock for back to jan 05. if i compare the published short interest, there are 30mil share swings that do not appear on the short trading data. heck, you add up 3 months worth of short trades and they roughly equal the 30mil share short interest swing in the one month. now the short trading data doesn't include every single short trade because there is one non-participating entity according to the website. but following the other months, the numbers appear reasonable when you compare them. there is a second 30mil share swing in the short interest for the month of oct and again, it doesn't show up in the minute by minute short trading data.
HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? can the more informed people here enlighten me?
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/18/2006 7:43 PM
Sorry to add one more wrinkle, but there are also fake transactions.

The stock is trading at $.55 - .65 and no one will sell. The market makers collude and 300 shares trades, which means, move the stock down to get shares.

Suddenly, you see huge volumes trading on the bid: $.55, .54, .53....etc. until it is suddenly $.45 - .50.

All those trades were fake. After the market closes, they cancel all those trades as errors, but in the mean time, they've freaked out long investors who all sell at $.45 because they don't want to try to catch the falling knife.

I like "vaporshares". Also "vaportransactions".

The important thing is to not let them pigeonhole us that this is about shorting, because it isn't.

Whether someone is selling long or selling short, the problem is that the shares are only vapor. There is no IOU aspect as there is no intent to EVER deliver in many cases.


Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By We Don't Need No Steenkin Retail on 11/18/2006 9:39 PM
Sears profits on hedge fund tack
Big 3rd-quarter gains despite revenue drop
By Sandra Jones
Tribune staff reporter
Published November 16, 2006, 7:33 PM CST

Has billionaire investor Edward Lampert finally turned Sears Holdings Corp., one of the nation's oldest retailers, into a hedge fund?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-061116sears,0,1650856.story?coll=chi-business-hed
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By mhelburn on 11/19/2006 12:46 AM
In the financial report for the exchange, Fails to deliver were called receivables or assets and Fails to receive were payables or liabilities. What is that all about? If they are both situations where money is taken from individuals at the brokerage level and nothing is delivered, either by the customer's broker or an outside broker, it doesn't make sense. ..And why is the exchange reporting this? I could see a broker having fails in both directions between brokers, but the exchange should be even all the time.... or this is so completely out of whack...

I guess both are a mechanism that recognizes the imbalance from either end..This is the way they do their "off books" balancing... The brokers are just moving their debts to the exchange. This is after they do their own netting of shares.

If a broker is short shares, they can just write a contract to buy them back. Then these are not counted as being short.... instead they are long.. and these are either held long by someone...but it makes no sense for a long to enter this kind of contract. Instead it would seem logical that this would be a way to disquise a huge brokerage short position.

yuk....
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sick, sick and more sick on 11/19/2006 6:51 AM
Comparing Edward Lampert to
Warren Buffett is like comparing vomit to prime rib.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/19/2006 11:44 AM
Liability: when I receive the shares, I will have to pay for them
Asset: when I deliver the shares, I will get paid

The reason this is so prevalent is the receives and delivers cancel out. I don't care if I get the money from the shares I need to deliver as I already have my own customer's money for the shares I need to receive.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By dark corners of thallium poison on 11/19/2006 4:41 PM
Be VERY careful.

Ex-Spy Who Accused Russians Is Poisoned
http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2666002&page=1


Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By SteveM on 11/19/2006 9:47 PM
Oldfeller,

If things are not getting worse, that means new bogus shares aren't being introduced into the system. This would be excellent news because normal market pressures would again lift share prices of artificially depressed companies. Unfortunately this would cause the booked-to-market liability of the hedge funds to rise and cause them to have margin calls.
They cannot afford to let this happen, so they must continue the fraud for self preservation. Things will continue to get worse!
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By One Big Happy Family on 11/20/2006 2:21 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/20/AR2006112000077.html

"Nasdaq launches $5.1 bln bid for London stockmarket
Reuters
Monday, November 20, 2006; 3:12 AM


LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. stock exchange Nasdaq launched a 2.7-billion-pound ($5.1 billion) bid for the London Stock Exchange on Monday and strengthened its hand by buying more shares in the market."
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By My Crystal Balls on 11/20/2006 2:51 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/19/business/yourmoney/19mark.html?_r=2&ref=business&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"THE stock market has had a great run over the last few months, but as the holiday season begins, some analysts are worrying that the traditional year-end rally on Wall Street may have already come and nearly gone"

Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By gregcable2002 on 11/20/2006 8:14 AM
You want to know why there is a rush to outlaw physical certificates of company stock,because more and more companies are trying to get some control over their shares by calling for a cert pull.The only way the crooks can keep from being found out is by outlawing any physical cert ownership.GET YOUR CERTS NOW.



Press Release Source: Bancorp International Group Inc.


Bancorp International Group Inc. Announces Mandatory Share Certificate Exchange
Monday November 20, 10:06 am ET


OKLAHOMA CITY, Nov. 20, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- A meeting of the Board of Directors of Bancorp International Group Inc., held November 14th, 2006, resolved to authorize a share certificate recall in order to implement an immediate share certificate exchange of the common stock of the company.
The company hereby requires that all persons, corporations and/or other legal entities in possession of stock certificates in the original names of:



1. NEC Properties Inc.,
2. March Indy Inc.,
3. Bancorp International Group Inc., such certificates comprising the
issued share capital of Bancorp International Group Inc., must
tender these certificates immediately to the Company`s stock
transfer agent Pacific Stock Transfer Inc. for Certificates of a
new design and depicting the current cusip number 05968x205 issued
by the S&P cusip division on January 9th,, 2006. The exchange will
be for a 1 for 1, with the stipulation that the old certificates
with the old company names, cusip numbers and design, will be
void, shall not entitle the certificate holder to any of the
rights of a shareholder, and shall be worthless, non- transferable
and non-tradeable in any public or private market or exchange
beginning January 16th, 2007, being 60 days as of November, 14th
2006, and shall have no value except for the right to be exchanged
for new certificates.

Persons who hold their shares in brokerage accounts or 'street name' are not required to take any further actions to effect the exchange of their share certificates, this being the responsibility of their brokers, and are advised not to contact the transfer agent.



Please send all certificates to
Pacific Stock Transfer Inc.
500 E Warm Springs Road
Suite 240, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
tel (702) 361-3033, fax (702) 433-1979

The company will cover the fee for the issuing of new certificates.

All enquiries relating to this certificate exchange sh

Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By drs on 11/20/2006 9:30 AM
Direct registration is the slippery slope. Stage one seems safe enough, but it seems they are just getting us ready for stage two.

http://www.dtcc.com/Publications/dtcc/jan06/drs.html

Stage 1:

If they eliminate paper certificates, but your name is registered at the company transfer agent, then it is exactly the same as having a paper certificate. You are the registered, actual owner.

"DRS provides for electronic direct registration of eligible securities in an investor’s name on the books of a transfer agent or issuer"

Stage 2:

What I am more concerned with is the next sentence. If the shares are instead registered in your name, but at the DTCC, then it is the beginning of the end and nothing more than a coverup of all the vaporshares.

"Investors also have the option of maintaining securities electronically on the books of their brokers by holding shares in “street name.”"
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By lose confidence in government, NO SHIT, wonder why on 11/20/2006 9:33 AM
Tom Noe, convicted last week on 29 charges for stealing from Ohio’s $50 million rare-coin fund, was sentenced to 18 years in state prison and ordered to pay fines and restitution by Judge Thomas Osowik this morning in Lucas County Courthouse.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061120/BREAKINGNEWS/61120015
Re: SEC Internal Controls Ripe For Abuse By mhelburn on 11/21/2006 2:20 AM
Question about repo agreements:

Does a person have to own the stock, sell it with a repo to qualify for this exemption, or can you just write a repo agreement to qualify as being long?

The repo agreement sounds more like owning a call. Since the stock is transferred to someone else, one shouldn't be considered long for accounting purposes. If both the originator and the receiver of the shares/ or possibly non shares are long, this is a doubling up of counting shares, possibly counterfeiting. If there is a way to cheat this exemption, you know it will happen. With the 60 day hang-time that is allowed for an ACAT transfer, it seems very likely that this would be abused. The costs of borrowing from the SBP is minimal and any profits are awarded back to the participants according to how much they are charged.
Generic cialis tadalafil mg pills nextag com. By TrackBack on 4/15/2007 10:39 PM
Buy cialis order cialis buy cialis generic.
# Generic cialis apcalis price comparison.
Brand ultram order ultram tramadol pain medicine. By TrackBack on 4/16/2007 1:11 PM
Brand ultram order ultram tramadol pain medicine.
# Brand ultram order ultram tramadol pain medicine.
Cheapest generic cialis. By TrackBack on 4/16/2007 8:56 PM
Generic cialis. Buy generic cialis without prescription. Best price generic cialis. Buying generic cialis. Cheapest generic cialis. Cialis generic.
# Generic cialis.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By virakiller on 11/17/2006 9:11 AM
have no fear America
once the sleeping giant awakes that is our populace
THEY are going to either settle the markets
OR
settle in the cemetary of guilt if they get that far

YOU ARE CAUGHT

SETTLE MARKETS

GOD SEES ALL

YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO HIDE BEHIND HIM FOR MUCH LONGER

TAKING MONEY FROM STARVING FAMILIES IS UNKIND IN HEAVEN

AWAKEN AMERICA
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By bbhindyou on 11/17/2006 9:12 AM
It must scare the heck out of them ,living in those houses of glass ,smoke and mirror knowing the rocks/ability to order certs haven't been removed from our hands YET.
ORDER YOUR STOCKS IN CERTIFICATE FORM.
Throw a rock at the house of glass.
Soon you won't be allowed to.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By adam ant on 11/17/2006 9:17 AM
toooooooo funny.

prozac and sleeping pills sales up?

Would it be bad if tens of millions sort of slipped through the cracks of our regulator whilst their top-secret computer data was passed around Wall Street like a pack of Kools at a rock concert?

The computer systems are apparently less secure than a truck stop restroom stall, and likely no cleaner.

So we have fines that are unrecorded, information systems that leak like a Haitian life raft, and a financial complex that is as adversarially disposed as one could imagine.

Have a nice weekend.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By history on 11/17/2006 9:18 AM
There have been lots of historical examples where populations rose up against tyranny and prevailed. Many powerful people (police, judges, members of the military and intelligence community, etc.) are among the victims of these crimes.

The thieves have a false sense of security because they believe that looking at how things worked in the past is predictive of how things will work in the future.

This time, thinks are different.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By propaganda on 11/17/2006 9:45 AM
Propaganda is when you use the media to convince a population of something that isn't true. Movies can be used to create a false belief.

For example, in the movie Wallstreet, they showed agents storming a brokerage and arresting Bud Fox. They had "SEC" emblazened on their backs and they put Bud in handcuffs. It's funny the producers of the movie didn't know the SEC only has civil authority to sue miscreants.

Another example would be the endless media coverage of the 14 year old who was charged for telling message board readers his stock picks.

http://www.out-law.com/page-1014

Someone has crafted a careful SEC personae where they where the white hats and protect us from the miscreants.

What if they actually wear the black hats and work for the bad guys?
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By gregcable2002 on 11/17/2006 9:51 AM
When you get 250,000 people looking at Arron Russo's website and many more joining the taxpaters revolt against tyranny you know it won't be long before the real crap hits the fan.We'll see UN troops here,Russian and Chinese.It's coming
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By bbhindyou on 11/17/2006 11:03 AM
Hey all you history buffs!
Can you tell me what the american ideal was ?
Why we fought world war's one and two?
What were the principals of democracy that america supposedly stood for in the intervening decades that caused so many of our young bright people to die in the defense of them?
Now for the big one .
Who won the cold war?
What principals prevailed?
What are your rights in 2006?
What were your rights in 1940?
Did we win the defense of democratic principles in the world?
Should we have defended them here first?
Is it too late?
Is there anything I can do?
It's not what we can do for our country or what our country can do for us it's what we MUST do for ourselfs.
Protect yourself and take care of your own property .
It's been proven time and again that if you don't take care of what is yours and defend it it WILL be taken from you.
Act now before your property can't be held by you.
The date has been set.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By who cares about hedge funds? on 11/17/2006 11:21 AM
The dollar took a hit on Friday amid talk that a large hedge fund was forced to cut its trading positions betting on a rise in the US currency.
Market rumours suggested that the fund was having to cash in on profitable bets on the dollar to cover losses incurred on the oil market.


http://www.euro2day.gr/articlesfna/24106449/
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By Wicked World on 11/17/2006 11:26 AM

sgaah,

"Regulation SHO has a nasty loophole that being contractually obligated to buy stock in the future is the same as being long in the stock.

Instead of lending the stock, I do a repurchase agreement. I sell the stock to another firm, with the agreement to buy it back, minus my fee. It has the essence of a loan, but I don't have to report it as a loan and the borrow can sell it without reporting it as a short.

Here's the kicker. The person who buys the stock is long AND the person who lends the stock via a repo is also long.

The recipient can enter into a new repo agreement, creating a long chain of phantom longs, each long by virtue of their agreement to buy the stock back in the future."


OMF'NG! Where does it end!!!???!!! I cannot take anymore!!!!!!!
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By idontcare on 11/17/2006 12:39 PM
Who cares:

I don't care if hedge funds all go bust, as they are usually on the opposite side of the trade, betting against us.

When they are losing money, we are making it.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By Mosses on 11/17/2006 1:21 PM
"In a statement, the SEC said McCarthy is joining an unnamed privately held trading firm."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SEC says John McCarthy leaving regulator

By John Spence
Last Update: 12:56 PM ET Nov 17, 2006



BOSTON (MarketWatch) -- The Securities and Exchange Commission said Friday that John McCarthy, associate director in the office of compliance inspections and examinations, will leave the Commission later this month. In a statement, the SEC said McCarthy is joining an unnamed privately held trading firm. McCarthy, 42, joined the SEC in 1992 as a staff attorney and has held his most recent position since 2000, the agency said.

Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By nfi on 11/17/2006 1:46 PM
What's happening with the NFI shareholder lawsuit? Is something happening on 11-22?

Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By netting on 11/17/2006 3:03 PM
I'm familiar with a company that trades many millions of shares on the Berlin exchange, with real European buying and selling.

Buying from Europe clears through:

http://www.euroclear.com/

or

http://www.clearstream.com/ci/dispatch/en/kir/ci_nav/home

yet neither of these entities have stock on the company shareholder list and neither appear in the DTC Security Position Report. In fact, there are no European brokerages or custodians that show up to represent this ownership.

I assume that means Europeans that buy on the Berlin only ever buy phantom shares and it isn't possible for them to buy a real share, but what happens when they sell phantom shares into the US market.

If the buyer is located in a US brokerage, then how do they settle this international transaction?

The numbers aren't adding up and something smells like rancid bratwurst coming from across the Atlantic.

I'm very suspicious about clearstream, specially given its reputation for laundering money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearstream_scandal

"Following the publication of Révélation$ (2001) by investigative reporter Denis Robert and ex-Clearstream banker Ernest Backes, Clearstream was accused of being an international platform for money laundering and tax evasion via an illegal system of secret accounts. This became known as the "Clearstream Affair.""


Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By netting on 11/17/2006 3:29 PM
What is the relationship between clearstream, Ladenburg Thalmann, Refco, Badian and the Berlin Exchange?

"In what is being referred to as "StockGate," more than 200 US publicly traded companies have been listed on the Berlin-Bremen Stock Exchange, and more than 650 additional companies have listings pending, virtually all without the companies’ knowledge, consent or authorization."

http://www.microcapalliance.com/editorials/article.asp?aid=65

Companies are not allowed to delist from Berlin.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By Nice, very nice. on 11/17/2006 5:01 PM
A bird told me some idiots are in for a big suprise.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sweetsplat on 11/17/2006 9:31 PM
Keeping Hope Alive

This is my job!
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sec on 11/17/2006 11:07 PM
When is the new SEC SHO rule due? I know it will have more holes than Swiss cheese and be effectively useless, but I'm curious when it might be effective.

I feel like I am living in bizarro world that this crime is even possible.

If I wrote a movie with the premise that one of the characters was going to steal trillions and use part proceeds to buy off the media and politicians and that the propaganda effort would be so successful that the victims would be unaware that they had been stolen from, the studio would likely reject it as being too far fetched.

We're in this bizarro world scenario where the victims think we are tin hat conspiracy theorists.

When I saw the Die Hard movie where they stole billions in gold from Fort Knox, it seemed far fetched, but these scum bags have stolen trillions in the last couple decades and the victims are oblivious to the crime.

Curiouser and curiouser...
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By oldfeller on 11/18/2006 12:51 AM
Orwell, so many others predicted. Here and now boys, here and now fans are the ones we need> I see changes taking place. Things not getting better very fast but maybe it won`t get worse as fast as it did. The media seems comfortable now talking about naked shorting like they invented the phrase.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah, this doesn't make sense on 11/18/2006 2:44 AM
We've learned a lot of the ways that stock entitlements are manufactured, but it doesn't make sense to add Fails to Deliver with Fails to Receive. In the perfect world, each broker would report his FTD's and FTR's and these would match other fails of other brokers, so the total number of manufactured shares would be either be FTD's or FTR's, but counting both would double the actual number.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By InTheKnow on 11/18/2006 4:40 AM
Methinks some turkeys are going to get roasted shortly!
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/18/2006 9:48 AM
Here's why it makes sense to add them together.

Sally buys $1000 of stock from E-trade and it fails to deliver to her brokerage, Schwab

Tom buys $1000 of stock from Schwab and it fails to deliver to her brokerage, E-trade

E-trade owes Schwab $1,000 and Schwab owes E-trade $1,000, so it cancels out and no one owes anyone anything. BUT, Tom and Sally are owed $2,000.

E-trade has a fail to deliver, x-clearing, to Schwab of $1,000
E-trade has a fail to receive, x-clearing, from Schwab of $1,000

In the real world, these fails don't happen at the level of the brokerage. They happen at the custodian who has already massively netted obligations, doing repos and loans where they can. By the time it is a fail to another custodian, the fails understate the problem.


Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/18/2006 9:59 AM
If your theory was right, fails to receive and fails to deliver would be equal.

What is going on is they treat stocks as being fungible. $1,000 in government bonds, $1,000 of IBM and $1,000 of CMKX are treated as being equivalent.

Also, the same bad guys can own the same custodian. Look at the custodians:

https://login.dtcc.com/dtcorg/binary/19003Part_Alpha.pdf

The Bank of NY has a whole page of accounts for example. They can have long chains where one account owes another who owes another, etc. Adding in netting, repos and loans, it gets hard to trace.

Effectively, the fails represent value and as long as the value is the same both directions, it costs them nothing.

In the case in the previous example, E-trade wouldn't forward Tom's $1,000 to Schwab until Schwab delivered the shares, but Schwab doesn't care as they have Sally's money.

It isn't correct to add fails to receive and deliver together, but the real problem is higher than adding them together because it is post all the netting.
Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By ginger on 11/18/2006 10:09 AM
But Schwab's customer has $1000 of "stock" recorded in his monthly account statement, which is not stock at all, but IOUs.

Also Etrade's customer has $1000 of "stock" recorded in his monthly account statement, which is not stock at all, but IOUs.

Both customers are out the cash and won't even have the fraudulent monthly account statements when the company they think they invested in is driven into bankruptcy by this type of financial terrorism.

Re: SEC Internal Controls Rife For Abuse By sgaah on 11/18/2006 10:34 AM
As terminology, I've started using "phantom shorts" and "phantom longs". We have nothing against selling short or selling from a long position. Our problem is that the stock is so ethereal.

A phantom long can be created by doing a repurchase agreement. Rather than lend someone the shares, it can be safer to sell them the shares, then agree to buy them back next month, minus the fee for the loan. The person you sold them to is really long and you are "phantom long" because the SEC says having a contract to buy a share is the same as owning the share.

A phantom long occurs when you let your brokerage hold a restricted stock for safekeeping. The stock could be counterfeit, but as long as there is a potential to remove the legend, the restricted stock is treated as if it is a real free trading share.

A phantom long can occur when you do a debenture with a company. The future agreement to convert the debt into shares can be treated as a long position.

A phantom long is a call option.

A phantom long is when you mark your sell ticket long when you don't own any shares.

A phantom long is a fail to receive. You can sell the shares even though they were never delivered to you.

A phantom long is a long position created by daisy chains of ownership in the stock borrow program or through broker to broker stock loans where it is borrowed then immediately relent.

ETC.

A phantom short is when someone sells you shares without borrowing them.

The naked shorting is the tip of the iceberg. The problem is that most of the market is smoke and mirrors where phantom shares trade in a parallel universe next to real ones.

Your name:
Title:
Comment:
Please limit your comments to 500 characters. For longer comments, use our forums.
Subscribe via Email
Get This Blog via Email:


Powered by Squeet.com
Sanity Check Archive