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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 10:40:00 AM
From: benchpress550	Respond to of 122087

Do they have a real weight room?

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 10:47:00 AM
From: MaryinRed	Respond to of 122087

Spammer Pump and Dump Operator exposed Found this on clearstation. Go to the link...it is fascinating.... From : FigaRo Jun 8 2000 8:31PM Title : There''s a bandit behind every rock! I realize this is off topic, but most of the EDIG posters I've been reading here for the past 15 months are a very thoughtful and ethical bunch of folks. This message is meant to give you some insight into just what kind of slime is growing under those rocks. If it in any way forces you to rethink some of the stock info and recommend lists you've read, then my work here is done. I just received a URL for a very interesting free website: belps.freewebsites.com It was created by an internet security specialist who had his domain address pirated by a spam-tastic net marketing company based in TN. His way of getting back at them was to hack into their computers and release acres of sensitive company information, including private e-mails, which outlines stock manipulation, pump and dump schemes, and fraud. Maybe you'll even recognize, or have invested in, some of the stocks specifically mentioned. This is long but interesting reading and I've certainly seen many of these spam messages slipped into RB boards, so it's already hit pretty close to home. Happy reading, FigaRo

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 11:15:00 AM
From: rdmsqito	Respond to of 122087

Peace, Tony, you will be missed greatly. My condolences to your family, who I'm sure will miss you the most. "That which does not kill you can only make you stronger."- a bit cliched but pertinent nontheless. Eagerly awaiting your return, Vinny

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 11:58:00 AM
From: ztect	Respond to of 122087

Hey Tony, MUST READ from your old friend Gretchen.... This is something you know about so, if you don't mind, could you please elaborate on the issues being discussed within Gretchen's short article. IMO this is VERY important to all investors, especially all those "traders" who think they're getting deals with "low cost" trades. Sincerely, z ============================================= nytimes.com June 11, 2000 MARKET WATCH "When Cheap Stock Trades Aren't Cheap" By GRETCHEN MORGENSON The popularity of online stock trading has exploded as individual investors have come to believe that their computers put them on the same level as the professionals, at a very low cost. But it is becoming increasingly clear that online trading is far costlier than most investors think. Moreover, it does little to level the investment playing field. Instead, judging from a report released last week by the General Accounting Office, online brokerage firms are Wall Street's latest incarnation of the Wild Wild West. Government researchers collected data from 12 online firms in 1999. They were not identified, but they accounted for almost 90 percent of online trades. Delays and breakdowns were a big problem -- so common at one firm that it said management did not track them. Online firms provide customers with little information, the G.A.O. found, on the risks of margin trading -- that is, using borrowed money to buy stocks. Nearly half the companies did not detail the risks for their customers opening margin accounts; only a third posted on their Web sites such information as the list of stocks they would not allow customers to buy on margin. One investor found he had bought such a stock only when his broker called to demand $75,000. But even these problems pale compared with the difficulties investors have getting online trades executed at the best possible price. Good execution is crucial to improving investors' profits. But because the way a firm handles a trade is not as apparent as the $8 commission it charges, few investors understand how important execution is or how they can be victimized. Included in the report was a review by the Securities and Exchange Commission of 29 online brokerage firms. Last year, the S.E.C. found, more than half were not meeting their obligation to provide the best execution for their customers' trades. A major reason is that most online firms have other firms complete their customers' trades in exchange for payments of as much as 1 or 2 cents a share. These payments, big surprise, determine where a customer's order is sent, even if another market or trader is offering a better price. On a 1,000-share sale, a customer would receive $62.50 more if he got a price one-sixteenth above the prevailing market. Of the 29 firms the S.E.C. investigated, 17 "improperly emphasized payment for order flow in deciding where to send orders." The regulators said the firms did not even try to assess the prices available from trading firms other than those that were paying them. Indeed, most routed orders to traders whose execution quality was well below industry averages. It is high time investors understand that payment for order flow is corrupting trade executions at many online firms -- and costing investors a bundle. Steve Galbraith, a senior analyst at Sanford Bernstein, an investment firm in New York, said such conduct helped explain the outsized profitability of some online brokerage firms. "Execution is the securities industry's best-kept secret, and payment for order flow is part of that," Mr. Galbraith said. "You're seeing monopolistic-type returns in what really should be structurally an economically competitive industry. I think it's one of the paradoxes of the market today." Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who requested the G.A.O. study, agreed. "Pay for order flow is a good deal for the broker but is too often a bad deal for their clients," he said. "The S.E.C. needs to get after this problem quickly and aggressively." Until then, investors are vulnerable to bad executions and the high costs associated with them. The S.E.C. should require brokerage firms to monitor trade executions, tracking how many trades are done at prices better than those specified by investors. This is the information age. Why should investors be clueless about how much money they are losing when they trade stocks?

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 6:32:00 PM
From: David in Ontario	Respond to of 122087

Dear A@P: I guess that it will take a little while to get settled in to your new "digs" and into a routine. Doesn't sound too shabby though - and with the facilities you mentioned - it may be a chance to get into a good exercise program. In your honour I'm going to do my first ever short this week - MPPP (just a small one to start). You may not recall NTOY from a while back - but after I saw your post and short, I got out the following morning at just over $11 for a very small loss - last Friday it closed at $0.16. I'll never understand why I was long on that one. Time I learnt more about the short side of the market... Take care, David :)

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 8:13:00 PM
From: CrayUSA	Respond to of 122087

Anthony, I wanted to stop by and give my best wishes to you and your family. You have a lot of respect from me and many others. Cray

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 11:17:00 PM
From: Smartypts	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

You weren't before Judge Sanders by any chance were you? You know the story/facts about him? You think you have a past do some DD on this guy and see what you find. LOL

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/11/2000 11:26:00 PM
From: Smartypts	Respond to of 122087

If it was he's one the most crooked SOB Judges in the State. Take a look you know why its relevant to me. Disclaimer: Just IMHO of course

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	6/12/2000 12:13:00 AM
From: Pink Minion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

This is a great record of the Pump n' Dump underworld: belps.freewebsites.com Alot of duplicate e-mails but the ICQ logs are a must read. A must read for the SEC.

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	7/2/2000 8:44:11 PM
From: unclewest	Respond to of 122087

hope you are well. 4th of July independence day go for it!!! celebrate!!! dance to the music!!! and don't forget..... . . . . . . find a serviceman or woman and thank them for keeping us free. make their day! listen to the fireworks and recall...the moments many Americans spent in battle...to provide us our opportunities. unclewest

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	7/9/2000 11:45:25 AM
From: ztect	Respond to of 122087

Essay on scams @ Cyberian U. Message 14015309 Hope all is going well, and you'll be back "soon". z

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	7/20/2000 8:55:51 PM
From: Smartypts	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

Tony if your reading your thread I wanted you to see this: TMRT Annie: The court just denied defendants' motion to dismiss and motion to strike. Michael

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	10/6/2000 2:37:32 PM
From: labs	Respond to of 122087

I just heard the good news from one of your members on your private site. Welcome home, Tony! All the best to you and your family. Lawrence

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	10/6/2000 7:11:46 PM
From: SEAN007	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Welcome Back my friend!

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (57271)	10/6/2000 7:20:51 PM
From: Mama Bear	Respond to of 122087

Welcome back Tony. You have been sorely missed. Let me pass you the first can of whoop ass. -g- Regards, Barb