David, I'd sort of break your question down into three separate components:
1) Is it non-public?
2) Is it "price sensitive" (i.e. material)?
3) Is it factual?
And how you answer each probably throws you into all sorts of different areas of securities law, but let's assume the answer is "yes" to all of the above.
If it's non-public material information, and Person A communicates that info to Person B, and Person B trades on it, it's most likely (I'm using that term because I'm assuming that the position of Person A may be relevant, but I'm not totally certain) a violation of the SEC Act of 1935 under a recent Surpreme Court decision which widened the definition of "insider trading" by adopting an approach commonly referred to as the "misappropriation" theory.
I think most people with any sense whatsoever want a "level playing field" in the markets and for good reason. Look, it's a Saturday morning and I'm about to read through some trade mags, do some research, etc. and I'm not the only one. So we're all out here working on building critical mass in the company's we follow, trying to do our homework, and hopefully that effort's going to pay off.
And somewhere out there Person A is going to call Person B with "a tip" involving non-public material information and Person B is going to trade on it and possibly get the payoff without any effort.
I don't like Person A or Person B. Sorry to look like a boy scout, but that's just not fair and not only that - IT'S ILLEGAL! So if the SEC can fry them - good.
And aside from the micro-level, you get into the whole macro-level issue of the need to assure participants in the securities markets that there is a level playing field...
I don't know if there have ever been cases involving "tips" found on chat rooms, but it would be interesting to see how the Courts would come down on that.
As far as the NASDAQ release, IMHO the overwhelming majority of posters have nothing to worry about. Being "negative" or "critical" of a company is not what they're worried about. I'm assuming what they're worried about is the kind of stuff that goes "well, my good friend Mr. Insider assures me with utter certainty that Company X will not only meet their number - they'll blow it away so you'd be downright fools not to load up" (or something to the converse of that).
I mean, just because the state troopers over in Jersey have radar guns and write tickets, that doesn't mean I'm not going to drive home down 295 and see my parents (and of course, the fact that my cousin's a trooper is totally irrelevant...honest <g>)
Good trading,
Tom
|
