Peter,
Relatively new to SI, I just discovered this board--it looks like an interesting place to listen, if I may.
Fwiw, I'm in agreement with you. As I recall there is some all inclusive language sitting out there which might support a wider net, but it would be irrational to muzzle somebody with 10b-5 problems because he knew something, on his own, about an area to be mined or a product to be sold, that made him take a short position. For example, a guy in a tire shop or a wrecking yard sees an inordinate number of Firestone tires come in on Ford Explorer wrecks. He dials up the Yahoo Firestone Board (assuming one exists) and writes, "Not only is the rubber hitting the road, it's hitting the shoulder, the Yield signs and trees nearby, because these tires are functioning worse than retreads on a 18 wheeler. Not only am I changing my tires but I'm shorting the stock."
No insider information, no insider trading liability, no market manipulation liability.
Let's say a guy is a geologist and has surveyed European maps and skycams and whatever in years past and is convinced you'll never find commercially viable gas deposits in Poland. He posts this on the FXEN board and sure enough FXEN hits some dry holes (hey, it's the oil bidness" and the stock tanks. Can anyone think the geologist has securities laws liablities here? I think not.
This hypothetical seems to be on all fours with the original idea. |
