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.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Final Frontier - Online Remote Trading -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TFF who wrote (7509)6/27/1999 9:39:00 PM
From: agent99  Respond to of 12617
 
DJ Internet Chat Rooms Concern Regulators, Companies



By Judith Burns

WHITE SULPHUR SPRINGS, WEST VA.(Dow Jones)--Loose lips don't sink ships

anymore, but they can knock down a company's stock or send it soaring by

spreading rumors on Internet chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards, a

fact that concerns securities regulators.

"Chat rooms of the 1990s increasingly look like boiler rooms of the 1920s,"

New York Stock Exchange Chairman Richard Grasso told the American Society of

Corporate Secretaries, meeting here over the weekend.

Addressing the same group, Securities and Exchange Commissioner Laura Unger

said the issue of chat-room rumors "is something we will be focusing on" at

the SEC. She stressed that her remarks reflect her own views, not those of

the Commission.

"The Internet is probably our best dream and our worst nightmare," as

regulators of U.S. securities markets, Unger commented. Among the benefits,

she said, is the potential to increase disclosure about public companies,

putting information just a mouse click away for investors.

Corporations are jumping online to reach shareholders. According to the

National Investor Relations Institute, more than 90% of publicly traded

companies now have a presence on the Internet, posting fact sheets, press

releases, quarterly and annual reports, earnings, and analysts' reports.

SEC Eager to Crack Down On False Information Online





Ironically, the same technology companies use to target shareholders is

being used by investors to challenge management, by disgruntled employees

with an axe to grind, and by those aiming to push the stock's price up or

down. The weapon of choice: An online posting, often made anonymously.

Such chat can be "enormously damaging," Unger noted, citing the case of a

PairGain (PAIR) employee who posted a rumor on the Internet earlier this

year and included a link to a bogus Bloomberg News page that appeared to

confirm that PairGain would be acquired by an Israeli firm.

PairGain's stock surged more than 30% before backing down once the company

announced there wasn't a merger in the works. Gary Hoke, who posted the

item, was identified quickly and has since pleaded guilty to criminal

charges.

Looking ahead, Unger said the SEC's "cyberforce" which routinely patrols

the Internet, is eager to crack down if false information is spread online.

"This, in my mind, is a very fertile area for enforcement," agreed Stephen

Cutler, deputy director of the SEC's enforcement division. "If someone is on

a chat room or bulletin board and saying something false about a company,

whether positive or negative, that's something we would look at very

closely."

SEC cops on the cyberbeat may pursue such cases even if the individual

spreading the false report doesn't personally gain from it. Hoke, for

instance, doesn't appear to have traded PairGain's stock the day he pushed

it sharply higher on the false merger story.

Equally disturbing to regulators are investors with short positions in a

stock who use the Internet to circulate "cybersmears" about the company in

hopes of driving the price down and generating profits for themselves.

"Are there short sellers out there bashing stock? Yes," said Brian Lane,

director of the SEC's corporation finance division. But, like chatting up a

stock, he said the practice existed before the Internet, and may not be easy

to uproot.

Meanwhile, some firms are taking matters into their own hands, assigning an

employee or hiring an outside contractor to patrol the Internet and monitor

online chatter for any references to the company, good or bad.

"Almost every in-house lawyer will say: Don't engage," if the company

uncovers rumors, said the SEC's Lane. That's the position taken by NIRI,

which estimates only 3% of U.S. corporations respond to chat-room rumors.

"Some CEOs can't help themselves," and will jump right in, despite advice

to stay out of the fray, however, Unger noted.



Rumors, General Griping Not Likely To Result In Action



There's good reason to say nothing, attorneys say, because if a company

knocks down one rumor, and doesn't react to the next one, its silence could

be viewed as an admission the report is true.

"You've got to believe there's a lawsuit somewhere in the future," if

company responds to some reports, but not others, Lane said. To avert that,

he said firms would do well to adopt written policies about handling

Internet chat and rumors.

Rumors and general griping about a company aren't likely to generate legal

action by the SEC, though, since its purview is limited to fraud, not libel.



"Gripe sites" have been popping up, often using a web address that attaches

an expletive before or after the company's proper corporate name, making it

easy for unhappy shareholders to find a their way to a forum for airing

their complaints.

"There's not a lot a company can do about that," Unger said, except to

preemptively register domain names that its critics might want to employ.

Charles Schwab & Co. (SCH), the online brokerage firm, has done just that,

reserving web addresses such as screwschwab.com, and schwabsucks.com.

"We have proactively gone out and registered domain names," said Schwab

spokesman Glen Mathison. Of the dozens of names the company has staked out,

most are similar to Schawb's existing address, or reflect names it may want

to use in the future, such as schwabjapan.com. But, Mathison said the

company registered a few off-color domain names to "forestall criticism," on

those sites.

Don't look for SEC officials to undertake the same move, though. "It never

crossed our minds," said Unger. -By Judith Burns; 202-862-6692;

judith.burns@dowjones.com

(END) DOW JONES NEWS 06-27-99

02:42 PM



To: TFF who wrote (7509)6/27/1999 9:44:00 PM
From: agent99  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 12617
 
Disputes With Online Brokers Could be Frustrating to Resolve
By JASON ANDERS
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL INTERACTIVE EDITION

Complaints against online brokerage firms are surging in tandem with Internet trading, but many investors who feel they have been harmed by their broker can't file a lawsuit to recover any damages.

Most brokerage agreements require disputes between a firm and its clients to be settled through industry-sponsored arbitration -- fine print that many investors probably never pause to read when they open an account.

Arbitration has long been a very contentious issue. Lawyers for investors claim it is stacked in favor of securities firms. But the firms insist the system is fairer and quicker than going to court to settle a dispute.

Nevertheless, securities lawyers say a number of high-profile system failures at online brokerage firms recently have inspired a wave of arbitration cases despite concerns about fairness.

But Phil Aidikoff, a Beverly Hills, Fla., securities lawyer who has fought against brokerage firms, cautioned investors against incorrectly believing arbitration is like small claims court.

"They think they walk in and Judge Judy will give them justice. But it's a very complex process, and the other side is very, very good at it," says Mr. Aidikoff.

The rush of claims by investors come as securities regulators examine problems at major online firms. Among their concerns is whether the firms are living up to their pledges of reliable service.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission says the number of complaints involving online brokers has risen dramatically. The agency says complaints rose 330% last year to 1,114 from 259 and continue to surge.

The SEC says the top three complaints it receives against online brokers are difficulties in accessing accounts, failures or delays in executing orders and errors in processing orders.

Several firms, including Charles Schwab Corp. and online pioneer E*Trade Group Inc., the two biggest Internet brokers, have experienced computer problems recently that have prevented investors from trading.

"Investors don't know what they're getting into when they sign up with online brokers, and they definitely don't know what to do when they run into a problem," says Denise Voigt Crawford, the Texas securities commissioner.

While arbitration is the main forum for settling disputes, most online investors probably know just enough about the arbitration process that they never want to go through it. The process can be intimidating for a novice.

What's more, regulators say investors may avoid bringing cases because they often chalk losses up to their own inexperience, rather than a problem with their online brokers.

Nevertheless, some investors have started to file claims arguing online firms should have stopped them from making risky trades -- despite the do-it-yourself nature of online investing

Arbitration became widely embraced after a 1987 Supreme Court ruling affirmed its use for settling securities matters. The forum is far more informal than court proceedings.

Proponents point out that arbitration is faster and cheaper than a traditional court case. Most cases are resolved in 10 to 12 months, compared with court cases that can span years.

The National Association of Securities Dealers, an industry self regulator that handles the bulk of arbitration claims, says about 63% of all such cases end with investors receiving some money.

Lawyers for investors say that number is low and shows a bias for firms. But securities firms say it proves that hearing panels are more sympathetic to investors who have lost money, even if it was their own fault.

They say investors are often upset that they made a bad trade, and want the firms to bail them out. "There are many people who go into the market, and you have to believe they're fully cognizant of the risks, but when they lose a lot of money they figure they can cut their losses by initiating a claim," says John Peloso, a securities attorney with Morgan Lewis & Bockius in New York and a former arbitrator. "But many times, these cases are very unclear, and there is fault on both sides."

Still, lawyers say, the arbitration process isn't easy for an individual investor. "You walk in with your complaint form, and there's an attorney from the firm with 175 indexed document exhibits. These guys know what they're doing," says Mr. Aidikoff, the Florida attorney.

Arbitrators are selected from a pool of candidates who are screened by the NASD. Cases involving more than $50,000 are argued before a three-member panel. The others are decided by one arbitrator.

Ms. Crawford, the Texas securities regulator, says many investors can resolve their problems just by contacting the firm's compliance officer rather than taking a case to arbitration.

She says documentation is important, and that means printing out screen shots and saving trading confirmations. "You've got to have a paper trail. Without it, you're not going to get anywhere," she said.

Still, regulators and attorneys agree that investors ultimately have to be responsible for making unwise investment decisions.

"There comes a point in time where we have to accept the fact that people have to have some responsibility for getting themselves into trouble," says Bill Singer, an attorney with Singer Frumento in New York. "When you walk into a casino and put your life savings on the craps table, you don't get it back just because you claim that the casino shouldn't have let you place the bet."