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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RumbleFish who wrote (91311)	6/22/2001 6:35:10 AM
From: Knighty Tin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Rumble, I have had discussions with SEC employees about this stuff back when I managed a closed end fund (we never had a rights offering while I was there, and had the firm tried, I wouldn't have been there much longer <g>). My problem back in those days of yore was the total lack of logic applied. If a manager wanted to increase his management fees by .10%, he had to justify his actions six ways to Sunday and was still likely to be denied. But if Mexico Fund wanted to stiff their shareholders for an immediate 7% loss of their capital, the welcome mat was always out at our regulators. Nutso. Of course, the SEC eliminated that contradiction by changing the rules to allow managers to raise fees pretty much at will. <VBG> Now, the SEC would probably argue that shareholders have to vote on a rights offering. True, but how many really understand what they are voting on? My guess is something along the line of 5% or less. I have never known a shareholder to vote for an extra tax or commission with no benefit for him if it was explained correctly.