Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Kim who wrote (103634)	5/19/2000 1:03:00 PM
From: Robert Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

thestreet.com

To: Bob Kim who wrote (103634)	5/19/2000 1:22:00 PM
From: H James Morris	Respond to of 164684

>I don't really care about Blodget's private discussions when he was apparently under house orders to be quiet, or about his cynical comments regarding his role in a profession that deserves cynical treatment. Bob, look for Blodget the pimp, former free lance journalist, and former fact checker...to get whacked by ML. Nothing less than a $100mil severance package would be in order. Imhop! Any idiot buying into Blodget's recommendations in the year 2000...is busto by now.

To: Bob Kim who wrote (103634)	5/19/2000 3:05:00 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

Bob, If you ask me, it is a textbook case of insider trading when you trade while in possession of material information that has not been publicly released. Even if Merrill enforces its stated policy of requiring the information to be disclosed to all clients at the same time, which is doubtful in light of the inconsistency you point out in Blodget's behavior, it still does not solve the fundamental problem that the firm is benefiting by passing inside information to clients, and should be considered both a tipee and a tipper. I believe that any individual or institution who trades on the basis of such a recommendation could theoretically be considered a tipee under the scenario raised in the article you have cited. The analyst who passes the information could be considered both a tipper and a tipee. And the corporate agent who privately discloses the information to the analyst before issuing a public release should be considered a tipper. Tippers need not receive direct pecuniary benefit to share liability with tipees who trade while in possession of material inside information. Market participants who are damaged by being on the wrong side of trades while information leaks into the market in such a fashion should be able to recover from tippers and tipees alike through private lawsuits. In addition, the SEC should bring direct enforcement actions with strict penalties to let all concerned know that such behavior damages the integrity of the marketplace. Paying lip service without enforcing strict penalties for noncompliance damages the integrity of the SEC. IMHO, the SEC should just put teeth into the simple rule: Disclose or abstain from trading. Sam