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 (64327)	12/10/2000 11:02:00 PM
From: summerboy	Respond to of 122087

No AP, Thank YOU, and Bob and Regina

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (64327)	12/10/2000 11:05:08 PM
From: 2MAR$	Respond to of 122087

Tried your site Tony , nice place to hang out , you guys have done well, and Regina is very nice people . Hope you'll keep making calls here on the public thread...enjoy them all. ;-) PS: don't you start puttting those pounds back on!! ( we want you "lean and mean' ! ) ;-)

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (64327)	12/11/2000 2:38:08 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 122087

Fraud Concerns Deter UK Consumers From Web Shopping, PwC Says London, Dec. 11 (Bloomberg) -- U.K. consumers are more concerned than other Europeans about Internet fraud, with nine of 10 reluctant to give out credit-card details over the Web, according to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers. U.K. citizens are reluctant to shop on the Web because they're less aware that companies use anti-fraud devices such as data encryption to help protect them, according to the report, ``E- Privacy Solutions: Bridging the B2C Divide.'' While U.K. consumers are most reluctant among Europeans to give out personal details over the Internet, three-quarters of Europeans also refuse to release information on the Web. Still, Internet fraud has affected just 2 percent of online shoppers, the report said. ``Building consumer confidence is fast becoming strategically vital for success in the ever-intensifying war for customers,'' said David Wright, head of the U.K. privacy practice at PricewaterhouseCoopers. ``Ignoring e-privacy is a risk businesses cannot afford to take.'' Businesses must reassure consumers that they will not misuse information submitted via the Internet, the report said. Companies also must overcome the gap between consumers' concern about Internet fraud and the amount of actual deception taking place or run the risk that people will refuse to shop online, it added. Companies with well-known brand names have the upper hand in reassuring customers, the report said. More than a third of shoppers are more willing to buy goods online from companies they know well. That may bode well for U.K. financial-services companies such as Barclays Plc that are competing with new entrants to get consumers to buy products online. ``Building confidence is the key to the Internet's expansion, and without that, its enormous potential may be lost,'' Wright said. Dec/10/2000 19:01 ET For more stories from Bloomberg News, click here. (C) Copyright 2000 Bloomberg L.P.

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (64327)	12/11/2000 8:38:20 AM
From: Jim Spitz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Tony, Do you know anything about Cyber Group Network Corp? I read an article that mentioned them in today's Star Tribune. Here's the link: startribune.com In the article they say they plan to introduce a device that will automatically retrieve and data that is stored on a stolen laptop. Now there are over 300,000 laptops stolen every year, according to the article. Any, what I find interesting is that when I pulled up the chart from SI/realtime quotes, The company listed is "Hollywood Entertainment Net". Sounds like a possible scam to me, although, I haven't had time to research the company's history yet, so I don't know for sure. I was looking for a possible good long investment when I started looking at them, but now, am looking to see if they will make a good short someday. They are trading at just under $0.20/share right now and falling, according to the chart. Warm Regards, jimS

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (64327)	12/11/2000 9:58:28 AM
From: StockDung	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Feds probe IPO deals Report: Investigating if Wall St. sought big commissions to sell investors hot new IPOs December 7, 2000: 1:12 a.m. ET NEW YORK (CNNfn) - Federal officials are probing whether Wall Street securities firms asked some big investors to pay unusually large trading commissions in exchange for hot initial-public-stock offerings, according to a published report. The Wall Street Journal's Web site reported Thursday morning that the Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan are conducting the inquiry. IPO PROBE UNDERWAY A federal grand jury has also been called by the U.S. attorney's office to consider evidence. Both the U.S. attorney's office and the SEC have issued subpoenas to IPO participants, requesting trading records and other documents. A federal grand jury has also been called by the U.S. attorney's office to consider evidence, the story said. Both the U.S. attorney's office and the SEC have issued subpoenas to IPO participants, requesting trading records and other documents, the story added. The story was attributed to people familiar with the matter. The authorities are scrutinizing ways in which Wall Street dealers may have sought and obtained larger-than-typical trading commissions in return for giving coveted allocations of IPOs to certain investors, the Journal reported. Some of the arrangements could have included specific formulas tied to the investors' profits on the offerings, the story said. Many of the offerings doubled or more in their first day of trading during an IPO mania that began in late 1998. An early focus of the investigation is the Credit Suisse First Boston unit of Credit Suisse Group, the story said. CSFB officials confirmed the inquiry in a written statement, according to the Journal. "We have received requests from governmental agencies for information regarding the allocation of shares to investors in IPOs," CSFB said.

To: Anthony@Pacific who wrote (64327)	12/11/2000 5:25:16 PM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 122087

BEAR STEARNS COMPANIES INC filed this 10-K on 09/28/1999 On October 24, 1994, a shareholder of certain biotechnology companies whose securities were underwritten by, or that otherwise had some relationship with, D. Blech & Co . ("Blech Securities"), commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against D. Blech & Co., David Blech, certain money managers and investment advisors, and Bear Stearns, which had been a clearing broker for D. Blech & Co. tenkwizard.com From Todays SEC digest tenkwizard.com COURT ENJOINS DAVID BLECH FROM VIOLATING NUMEROUS PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS, AND COMMISSION ISSUES ORDER BARRING BLECH FROM BEING ASSOCIATED WITH A BROKER OR DEALER The Commission announced today that on December 5 the Southern District of New York entered a permanent injunction against David Blech, enjoining him from violating numerous provisions of the federal securities laws in SEC v. David Blech et al., 99 Civ. 4770 (RWS). The Commission also issued an Order Instituting Public Administrative Proceedings, Making Findings and Imposing Remedial Sanctions against Blech. This Order barred Blech from being associated with a broker or dealer. Blech consented to both the injunctive and administrative relief without admitting or denying the Commission's allegations against him. In the underlying injunctive action, the Commission alleged that from approximately June through September 1994, Blech, the Chief Executive Officer of D. Blech & Co., Inc. (D. Blech & Co.) orchestrated a massive manipulative scheme designed to increase and/or stabilize the prices of a number of the biotechnology securities that D. Blech & Co. took public and in which it made a market. Specifically, D. Blech & Co. specialized in underwriting and making markets in biotechnology securities. In 1994, the biotechnology industry experienced a cyclical downturn and the price of securities that D. Blech & Co. made a market in declined. Because D. Blech & Co. held large inventory positions in these biotechnology securities, and the equity value of the securities decreased, D. Blech & Co. experienced a net capital crisis. In an attempt to keep D. Blech & Co. afloat, Blech engaged in unlawful and unauthorized trading in a number of biotechnology securities. Blech routinely sold biotechnology stocks from D. Blech & Co.'s inventory accounts to brokerage accounts Blech controlled that were in the names of other individuals and entities. These controlled accounts then sold the biotechnology stocks back to D. Blech & Co. or to other accounts controlled by Blech. Additionally, Blech engaged in other practices such as wash sales and matched orders in the biotechnology stocks. Blech also engaged in unauthorized trading in customer accounts. These trades created the appearance of active trading in the biotechnology stocks. Additionally, through this trading, Blech was also able to reduce D. Blech & Co.'s inventory position in the biotechnology stocks, yet still artificially withhold from the market the supply of the biotechnology stocks. While this illegal trading was occurring, D. Blech & Co. failed to maintain adequate net capital and failed to keep accurate books and records, and Blech, who controlled D. Blech & Co., was liable for these violations. In addition, Blech again engaged in unlawful and unauthorized trading of several biotechnology stocks between approximately November 1997 and January 1998. The injunction enjoins Blech from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b), 15(c) and 17(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 10b-3, 10b-5, 15c1-2, 15c3-1, 17a-3, 17a-4, 17a-5 and 17a-11. Disgorgement was waived, and civil penalties were not imposed, based on Blech's inability to pay. As noted above, the Commission also issued an order barring Blech from associating with a broker or dealer. This order was based both on the entry of the injunction, and Blech's criminal conviction. On March 28, 1998, Blech pled guilty and was convicted of two counts of securities fraud. (Rel. 34-43693; File No. 3-10379)