SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Ashton Technology (ASTN)

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mmmary who wrote (4244)10/17/2001 9:00:53 PM
From: mst2000  Read Replies (2) of 4443
 
There you go again. Just can't help yourself.

I read that Westergaard blurb three times, and it is clear that he was not found GUILTY of anything, much less fraud. Let's see what it really says, without Maryspeak.

He was originally formally accused of 2 things: First, failing to "fully disclose the compensation . . . received to promote issuers." (That's the Section 17 (b) claim) Second, falsely claiming his Internet site provided "independent" analysis. (That's the Section 10(b)/Rule 10b-5 claim). No assertion that he committed fraud regarding the companies themselves, just that he did not disclose his relationship to those companies adequately.

Let's see what the result was: "Without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations, Westergaard consented to the entry of a permanent injunction against future violations of Section 17(b) of the Securities Act." (i.e., he agreed to fully disclose any compensation he receives from companies he promotes in the future). He did not consent to any relief relating to the 10(b) claim, nor did the SEC require him to accept a finding of guilt or responsibility on any of the claims, or any injunction relating to any of the claims besides the 17(b) issue, or anything else relating to "fraud". So, after 2-3 years of litigation, with the SEC originally accusing him of false claims of independence, all the SEC got was his agreement to fully disclose any compensation he gets from companies he promotes on the web in the future. That, Mary, is NOT being found guilty of anything, much less fraud, it is settling (without any finding of guilt or wrongdoing) all claims by agreeing to that he will not fail to disclose fees he receives from companies he "promotes" in the future (meaning he is still allowed to promote, by the way, as long as he makes the disclosure). It has nothing to do with anything he said about the companies for whom he hosted cyberstations -- only that he was being compensated for it (which was well known, by the way, to the ASTN internet community).

But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of a little distortion - I mean, why start now?

Oh yeah, that .20 print of 300 shares this morning -- ouch indeed -- but it was nice to see the stock close up 30% from that low, huh? And how about those 4.5 Million revenue shares?

MST
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext