Post by justjanet on Mar 12, 2007 18:11:43 GMT -4
and let him know we are out here watching!
I sent mine on Saturday:
Here is my email to the Bloomberg Reporter. I hope he's a good guy ~ it's all out there on the internet anyway.
Dear Mr. Schneider,
I am writing to you regarding a news story Special Report to be shown on Bloomberg TV Tuesday, March 13th titled "Phantom Shares." It is my hope that while investigating this story, you were able to find information from "Main Street" Investors who have been victims of this Crime as well as Advocates that have spent countless hours dedicated to uncovering the practice also know as "Naked Shorting."
Until recently, the Securities and Exchange Commission denied the existence of "Naked Shorting." The Regulation SHO band-aid has not worked and to this day companies continue to be naked shorted while the SEC turns a blind eye to the practice.
Here is a link to the Comment Letter submitted regarding the effectiveness of Reg SHO and proposed changes that have yet to be implimented:
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72303.shtml
Please be sure to read the letter from The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) which addresses the issue from a non-biased perspective:
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72303/nasaa010504.htm
There are also some excellent letters from The Stoecklein Law Firm, Attorney John O'Quinn, and Market Reform Advocate Dave Patch, among others.
The following is a Summary Report of all the comments submitted by Companies, Individuals, Attorneys and Regulatory Agencies,from the SEC Website;
Please choose the pdf file: for October 23, 2003 Short Sales; Summary of Comments
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/proposedarchive/proposed2003.shtml
The DTCC Website Explanation of the terms "Short Selling" and "Naked Shorting."
www.dtcc.com/ThoughtLeadership/keyissues/naked_short_selling.htm
Short selling is a trading strategy where a broker/dealer or investor believes that a stock is overvalued and is likely to decline. It is an integral part of the way our capital market system works. Basically, it involves borrowing stock that you don’t own and selling it on the open market. You then buy it back at a later date, hopefully at a lower price, and as a result, making a profit.
Naked short selling is selling stock you don’t own, but not borrowing it and making no attempt to do so. While naked short selling occurs, the extent to which it occurs is in dispute.
So, they are not borrowing AND making NO ATTEMPT to do so. This doesn't mean that the shares have been located and will be settled. When Naked shorting, there is never any intention to settle. Shore Selling and Naked Short Selling are TWO VERY different practices, but the people doing this, want to confuse the terms and practices to the unassuming investing public. After all, we are being protected by the SEC, DTCC, and any Government Agency that has the authority, right?
The SEC has been said to “be in bed” with the Prime Brokers. While they appear to be doing their job by imposing fines for illegal conduct, the amounts are merely a fraction of the damage that is done to the small investor. For them, it is just the cost of doing business. As these Brokers are fined over and over again, they profit much more than they are ever fined. If they can manipulate the market making billions and being fined millions, they can still make huge profits with no criminal prosecution as they gladly open their wallets paying those miniscule fines with the disclosure that they “admit no wrongdoing.”
The purpose of my letter to you today is to commend you and Bloomberg for bringing this issue to the General Public and I do hope that your investigation did uncover more than the "cookie cutter" version that has been given in the past.
I also want to provide some information that you may not have found in the regular course of your investigation. If this is an arena of intrigue that you want to investigate further, there are a number of market reform advocates fighting the abusive practice of "naked shorting." The naked shorting of shares has run rampant in the OTCC and Pink Sheet Markets and many small companies have failed to flourish. These small companies that may have had a chance to one day be a Hewlett Packard or a Microsoft, but were bankrupted before they had a chance by this manipulative practice of greed.
This statement is from the NASAA Comment letter linked above:
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72303/nasaa010504.htm
The essence of naked short selling is selling short without borrowing the necessary securities to make delivery, potentially resulting in a "fail to deliver" securities to the buyer. NASAA acknowledges the importance of the aspect of the Commission's proposal that requires short sellers to locate the securities they will be borrowing before they proceed with the short sales. There have been well-publicized instances of unethical individuals and firms shorting a stock without having identified adequate shares to borrow, then maliciously working to drive down the price of the underlying stock.
Here is a link to blogs by some very active Market Reform Advocates:
thesanitycheck.com/ Please be sure to visit the blogs of Bud Burrell, Dave Patch and Mark Faulk. They have a plethora of information!
We are also shareholders in a Pink Sheet company that is evidenced to have been grossly oversold, the stock price plummeting to .0001 before revocation in October of 2005. There is cause to believe that “phantom (counterfeit) shares” of this company are as high as in the trillions. This company, CMKM Diamonds (symbol: CMKX), was quashed by an SEC Investigation because they were unable to file their Quarterly Reports.
In early 2005, CMKM Diamonds hired Mr. Robert A. Maheu as a Director to help the company comply. They instituted a Task Force that requested a complete Certificate Pull immediately after revocation in an effort to identify all bona fide shareholders of the company and have yet to collect all requested Certificates from the Brokers. This process has been going on for 1 ½ years, a process that should have been done in less than 3 months due to the volume of the request and 4 to 6 weeks for a normal Certificate Request.
If you are interested in researching this further, here are some links that I hope you find helpful:
www.cmkxownersgroup.com/index2.php
www.cmkmtaskforce.com/index.php
www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmaheu.htm
Best Regards,
Gordon & Janet ******, Individual Investors
JustJanet
I sent mine on Saturday:
Here is my email to the Bloomberg Reporter. I hope he's a good guy ~ it's all out there on the internet anyway.
Dear Mr. Schneider,
I am writing to you regarding a news story Special Report to be shown on Bloomberg TV Tuesday, March 13th titled "Phantom Shares." It is my hope that while investigating this story, you were able to find information from "Main Street" Investors who have been victims of this Crime as well as Advocates that have spent countless hours dedicated to uncovering the practice also know as "Naked Shorting."
Until recently, the Securities and Exchange Commission denied the existence of "Naked Shorting." The Regulation SHO band-aid has not worked and to this day companies continue to be naked shorted while the SEC turns a blind eye to the practice.
Here is a link to the Comment Letter submitted regarding the effectiveness of Reg SHO and proposed changes that have yet to be implimented:
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72303.shtml
Please be sure to read the letter from The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) which addresses the issue from a non-biased perspective:
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72303/nasaa010504.htm
There are also some excellent letters from The Stoecklein Law Firm, Attorney John O'Quinn, and Market Reform Advocate Dave Patch, among others.
The following is a Summary Report of all the comments submitted by Companies, Individuals, Attorneys and Regulatory Agencies,from the SEC Website;
Please choose the pdf file: for October 23, 2003 Short Sales; Summary of Comments
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/proposedarchive/proposed2003.shtml
The DTCC Website Explanation of the terms "Short Selling" and "Naked Shorting."
www.dtcc.com/ThoughtLeadership/keyissues/naked_short_selling.htm
Short selling is a trading strategy where a broker/dealer or investor believes that a stock is overvalued and is likely to decline. It is an integral part of the way our capital market system works. Basically, it involves borrowing stock that you don’t own and selling it on the open market. You then buy it back at a later date, hopefully at a lower price, and as a result, making a profit.
Naked short selling is selling stock you don’t own, but not borrowing it and making no attempt to do so. While naked short selling occurs, the extent to which it occurs is in dispute.
So, they are not borrowing AND making NO ATTEMPT to do so. This doesn't mean that the shares have been located and will be settled. When Naked shorting, there is never any intention to settle. Shore Selling and Naked Short Selling are TWO VERY different practices, but the people doing this, want to confuse the terms and practices to the unassuming investing public. After all, we are being protected by the SEC, DTCC, and any Government Agency that has the authority, right?
The SEC has been said to “be in bed” with the Prime Brokers. While they appear to be doing their job by imposing fines for illegal conduct, the amounts are merely a fraction of the damage that is done to the small investor. For them, it is just the cost of doing business. As these Brokers are fined over and over again, they profit much more than they are ever fined. If they can manipulate the market making billions and being fined millions, they can still make huge profits with no criminal prosecution as they gladly open their wallets paying those miniscule fines with the disclosure that they “admit no wrongdoing.”
The purpose of my letter to you today is to commend you and Bloomberg for bringing this issue to the General Public and I do hope that your investigation did uncover more than the "cookie cutter" version that has been given in the past.
I also want to provide some information that you may not have found in the regular course of your investigation. If this is an arena of intrigue that you want to investigate further, there are a number of market reform advocates fighting the abusive practice of "naked shorting." The naked shorting of shares has run rampant in the OTCC and Pink Sheet Markets and many small companies have failed to flourish. These small companies that may have had a chance to one day be a Hewlett Packard or a Microsoft, but were bankrupted before they had a chance by this manipulative practice of greed.
This statement is from the NASAA Comment letter linked above:
www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72303/nasaa010504.htm
The essence of naked short selling is selling short without borrowing the necessary securities to make delivery, potentially resulting in a "fail to deliver" securities to the buyer. NASAA acknowledges the importance of the aspect of the Commission's proposal that requires short sellers to locate the securities they will be borrowing before they proceed with the short sales. There have been well-publicized instances of unethical individuals and firms shorting a stock without having identified adequate shares to borrow, then maliciously working to drive down the price of the underlying stock.
Here is a link to blogs by some very active Market Reform Advocates:
thesanitycheck.com/ Please be sure to visit the blogs of Bud Burrell, Dave Patch and Mark Faulk. They have a plethora of information!
We are also shareholders in a Pink Sheet company that is evidenced to have been grossly oversold, the stock price plummeting to .0001 before revocation in October of 2005. There is cause to believe that “phantom (counterfeit) shares” of this company are as high as in the trillions. This company, CMKM Diamonds (symbol: CMKX), was quashed by an SEC Investigation because they were unable to file their Quarterly Reports.
In early 2005, CMKM Diamonds hired Mr. Robert A. Maheu as a Director to help the company comply. They instituted a Task Force that requested a complete Certificate Pull immediately after revocation in an effort to identify all bona fide shareholders of the company and have yet to collect all requested Certificates from the Brokers. This process has been going on for 1 ½ years, a process that should have been done in less than 3 months due to the volume of the request and 4 to 6 weeks for a normal Certificate Request.
If you are interested in researching this further, here are some links that I hope you find helpful:
www.cmkxownersgroup.com/index2.php
www.cmkmtaskforce.com/index.php
www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmaheu.htm
Best Regards,
Gordon & Janet ******, Individual Investors
JustJanet