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.

Non-Tech : Meet Gene, a NASDAQ Market Maker -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonkie who wrote (778)	8/25/2000 2:09:13 PM
From: LPS5	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1426

Having thought about it I agree: to merely punish the wrongdoers, when caught, is to send the message that one need only not be caught. The economic incentive to conduct such fraudulent activity must be taken away as well, and to that end - trades should be broken. I guess my question would then be, how far back? Someone committing this sort of act could execute trades in the issue on the day of the fraudulent release or in the weeks leading up to it. Assuming that there are no obviously irregular patterns of buying/short selling at some period leading up to a fraudulent occurrence such as this one, what would you, if king for a day, suggest toward an end of both punishing wrongdoers and not weighing heavily on legitimate position holders? I'd bet that the NASD, SEC, and state agencies are wrestling with this potentially precedent-setting issue right now. LPS5