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 : Americans 4 "No Own - No Sell" -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ga Bard who wrote (280)	10/3/2001 2:27:00 PM
From: Rande Is	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 455

Gary I must disagree on the S.E.C. repealing the uptick rule. I've done a study on the history and effects of the Short Sale rule on my HOME board on Insighters. Here is the bottom line of what I think about it: FACT: The short sale rule was established in 1934 when congress discovered that unrestricted short-selling was a primary contributing factor in the Great 2 1/2 year Slide that led to the start of the Great Depression in mid 1932. The current market is in its most vulnerable state in recent history. We may be on the verge of another even Greater Depression, as we have been sliding at a greater rate of speed than between 1929 and 1932. The current slide has lasted 1 1/2 years. The uptick rule tends to slow short-sellers from driving down the price of a stock, once they gain control of it. . . and let's face reality here. . it really is about gaining CONTROL over the stock. Not having to wait for an uptick allows short-sellers to "pile on the ask" and drive the stock down toward zero at a much faster rate of speed. My feeling about this is that new administration of the S.E.C. is, at the least, RECKLESS in their actions. At worst, they know what they are doing and simply do not care. If we were to learn that they understood the ramifications and went ahead anyway, this would make me question their motivation altogether. What I don't believe is that they simply do not know the history that led to the short sale restrictions of the 1930's. The markets are extremely vulnerable at this point in time. This is NOT the time to be making changes, when uncertain about how they will affect the markets. I mean. . .think about it a second. The S.E.C. stated originally that they were interested in testing the removal of the uptick rule on a dozen of the most liquid stocks. Do they think we are STUPID or what? The most liquid stocks are going to be barely affected by such a change. Isn't that glaringly obvious? But stocks with a few million in the float, which have already come down 90% and show an average daily volume of under 100,000 shares, due to current market conditions, are the ones that could drop 30% per day until they are at $0.001. . . .and forced to file bankruptcy. Let me clarify that last part. Forced by traders to file bankruptcy. Since when should traders dictate the outcome of a company. And what chance would investors have of stopping this action? Going to the company and organizing some sort of collaborative corporate/investor buy back program? Believe me. That is just the sort of creative emergency action that is being discussed throughout the boardrooms of America these days as we draw nearer a meltdown. . . with apparently no effective assistance from the overweight and underbrained Securities Exchange Commission. Sorry about that. But with news of their repeal of the Short Sale Rule, I have lost whatever respect I may have had left for that institution. . . and am resolved to working towards breaking them up into 3 or more little [more responsive] pieces one day. . . as I've said many times. Rande Is