hadnt read the other board so didnt realize the c
Post# of 1034
(Total Views: 387)
Posted On: 06/04/2018 11:30:40 PM
hadnt read the other board so didnt realize the claim of sec investigation could be weighing on pps
but as i posted elsewhere:
on the federal level FOIA requests are free for the 1st 2 hrs of agency research and they tell u if costs will exceed 25 dollars(i've seen state requests upfront charges of 500)
i didnt even realize this could be a reason for pps fall bc this is a scare tactic often used against companies
"What I would like to know is if Mr. Probes Reporter (and his clients, who for that cool $20k can get "private meetings & conference calls" with Mr. Probes himself) shorts a stock once he (and his clients) receives the affirmative response from the SEC of an investigation, prior to accusing a company of being under investigation on social media. Would this activity be illegal?"
very interesting question-quite a racket bc such a racket seems to violate the INTENT of insider trading without being insider trading- what is the definition of insider trading-usually involves info privy to the company or those who received such material nonpublic info from the company-and the company often does not know until they receive official charges etc from the sec
once the FOIA reply is released its public info-so not private info- though to most people it is private
it is material nonpublic info(NOT USUALLY KNOWN TO THE COMPANY) until released
there are shorting groups who presumably short based on their advanced knowledge of SEC investigations(by regularly researching sec docs etc)and then they break the news of an SEC investigation on these boards-such news would be particularly chilling during the era when political appointees-including those at sec- were instructed to destroy penny companies bc "all business is evil and has to be stopped":
i've asked such a group if they had advanced knowledge of what they announced on the board and they of course said no-i didn't believe them bc their pattern of posting indicated to me something was coming.
I doubt that ZN has knowingly committed infractions
2 of the 5 SEC commissioners,though they may not directly rule on these things, are now pro-business,so the 2009-2017 terror reign we came out of is now over
most investigations probably dont end up in charges
when they do, a settlement is usually reached before trial
outside of the bizarre stock environment from 2009-2016 the general rule is innocent until proven guilty
shorters etc often shout sec or insider knowledge as scare tactics
ZN insiders cannot trade on insider info and they now even more likely wont now that this is on the board
but as i posted elsewhere:
on the federal level FOIA requests are free for the 1st 2 hrs of agency research and they tell u if costs will exceed 25 dollars(i've seen state requests upfront charges of 500)
i didnt even realize this could be a reason for pps fall bc this is a scare tactic often used against companies
"What I would like to know is if Mr. Probes Reporter (and his clients, who for that cool $20k can get "private meetings & conference calls" with Mr. Probes himself) shorts a stock once he (and his clients) receives the affirmative response from the SEC of an investigation, prior to accusing a company of being under investigation on social media. Would this activity be illegal?"
very interesting question-quite a racket bc such a racket seems to violate the INTENT of insider trading without being insider trading- what is the definition of insider trading-usually involves info privy to the company or those who received such material nonpublic info from the company-and the company often does not know until they receive official charges etc from the sec
once the FOIA reply is released its public info-so not private info- though to most people it is private
it is material nonpublic info(NOT USUALLY KNOWN TO THE COMPANY) until released
there are shorting groups who presumably short based on their advanced knowledge of SEC investigations(by regularly researching sec docs etc)and then they break the news of an SEC investigation on these boards-such news would be particularly chilling during the era when political appointees-including those at sec- were instructed to destroy penny companies bc "all business is evil and has to be stopped":
i've asked such a group if they had advanced knowledge of what they announced on the board and they of course said no-i didn't believe them bc their pattern of posting indicated to me something was coming.
I doubt that ZN has knowingly committed infractions
2 of the 5 SEC commissioners,though they may not directly rule on these things, are now pro-business,so the 2009-2017 terror reign we came out of is now over
most investigations probably dont end up in charges
when they do, a settlement is usually reached before trial
outside of the bizarre stock environment from 2009-2016 the general rule is innocent until proven guilty
shorters etc often shout sec or insider knowledge as scare tactics
ZN insiders cannot trade on insider info and they now even more likely wont now that this is on the board
(0)
(0)