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.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: OLDTRADER who wrote (169395)	4/26/2002 9:39:09 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 176387

Gold mining stocks: The next big thing - Doug Casey "The recently ended bull market in New York is actually an excellent underpinning for the building run in gold stocks. That's because there are now scores of millions of people out there who've had their appetites whetted for "hot," volatile sectors of the market. They've lost a lot of money in the last couple of years, but they're still players. Most tend to be trend followers, who are anxious to jump on board any sector that's moving, especially if it's got a credible story to go with it. Gold stocks are made to order for these folks." worldnetdaily.com

To: OLDTRADER who wrote (169395)	4/26/2002 2:09:15 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 176387

Judge To Render Verdict in HP and Hewlett Testimony Apr 26, 2002 (NewsFactor.com via COMTEX) -- After three days of testimony and often-heated exchanges, the Delaware Chancery Court judge presiding over the trial between Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HWP) and dissenting board member and shareholder Walter Hewlett has said he will issue a decision "very quickly." Rather than taking final statements from both sides, Judge William B. Chandler III said he will examine post-trial briefs from the two adversaries. The briefs must be filed no later than midnight Friday to be considered in the judge's decision. Despite testy exchanges between HP CEO Carly Fiorina and Hewlett attorney Stephen Neal, Fiorina expressed confidence that Judge Chandler will rule in favor of HP. At its annual meeting Friday, HP is expected to announce that it will officially merge with Compaq (NYSE: CPQ) on May 7th. Damaging Transcript On Thursday, Neal showed Fiorina a transcript of a conference call between HP and Deutsche Asset Management executives, in which the HP side urged the Deutsche side to vote in favor of the merger. "This is obviously of great importance to us as a company, and it's of great importance to our ongoing relationship," the transcript read. "We very much would like to have your support here. We think this is a crucially important decision for the company." HP Disputes Implications Although Neal argued that the contents of the transcript imply that Deutsche Bank was coerced into voting for the merger, Fiorina asserted that HP was simply expressing its appreciation for Deutsche Bank's help and that it hoped it could work with its asset management team in the future. Later on Thursday, HP released a statement saying that Hewlett's team failed to prove its claims of untoward activities with regard to either Deutsche Bank or HP shareholders. "HP's management and Board members demonstrated over and over again that they acted properly and consistently in the interest of shareholders," the statement read. "We look forward to the Chancellor's ruling and will continue to prepare the launch of the new HP." No Smoking Gun Rob Enderle, lead HP analyst at Giga Information Group , told NewsFactor that Judge Chandler has a difficult decision to make and probably would have preferred a more clearly defined sense of misconduct on either side. "There were indications of wrongdoing, but they fell short of [being the] smoking gun," that would have enabled the judge to rule against HP, Enderle said. SEC Response Still Possible While Judge Chandler may not have enough evidence to rule against HP, this week's trial may have unearthed enough evidence for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to take action, according to Enderle. He noted that at the very least, the SEC will revisit the action so that the rights and wrongs of similar situations will be more clearly defined in the future. Copyright (C) 2002, NewsFactor Network. All rights reserved

To: OLDTRADER who wrote (169395)	4/26/2002 4:30:46 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 176387

S.E.C. Begins Investigation Into Analysts April 26, 2002 By PATRICK McGEEHAN The New York Times The Securities and Exchange Commission, the chief regulator of financial markets, announced yesterday that it had begun a formal investigation into Wall Street stock analysts and their potential conflicts of interest. One day after meeting with Eliot L. Spitzer, the New York attorney general, Harvey L. Pitt, the S.E.C. chairman, said the commission would join forces with Mr. Spitzer and other state and federal securities regulators in a "formal inquiry." The commission does not usually announce its investigations but Mr. Spitzer has received a lot of attention in the last three weeks for his investigation of whether analysts at Merrill Lynch and Citigroup recommended stocks to help their employers' obtain or keep investment banking business. Mr. Pitt's announcement signals that other firms on Wall Street will not be left out and that the regulators will seek to propose solutions that will affect all securities firms. Shares of several major securities firms dropped sharply after the announcement. "This is a significant step," said Lewis D. Lowenfels, an authority on securities law at Tolins & Lowenfels in New York. "A federal agency is exercising its jurisdiction to take control of an investigation that has national implications from a policy standpoint." Since last year, regulators at the commission and the National Association of Securities Dealers have been looking into analysts' practices. But turning the effort into a formal investigation gives the commission the power to compel testimony and to issue subpoenas to investment banks for any relevant documents. Mr. Spitzer's investigation, begun last summer, took on a new life after his office gathered e-mail messages written by Merrill analysts that appeared to show that their private opinions of some stocks differed markedly from their public statements. In those messages analysts, including Henry Blodget, a former star analyst at Merrill, called companies they were recommending junk and worse. Talking to reporters after giving a speech in New York yesterday, Mr. Pitt said that it would be irresponsible of the commission to ignore the issues that had been raised in the investigations by Mr. Spitzer and others. He also indicated that the commission wanted to take control of the policing of an issue that many on Wall Street think should be left to federal regulators, not sorted out state by state. In a statement, Mr. Pitt said, "We will give investors confidence that the same securities rules and protections apply no matter where they live or do business." Mr. Pitt said the S.E.C. would coordinate its inquiry with state securities regulators, the New York Stock Exchange and the N.A.S.D. On Wednesday, the North American Securities Administrators Association said that it had formed a multistate panel to study analysts' practices. Mr. Spitzer said in an interview yesterday that he welcomed the involvement of the federal regulators but that he would proceed with his investigation. "I have always believed that the best way to resolve this was to have the regulatory agencies working together," Mr. Spitzer said. "We framed the issue. Now, we need to solve it." He declined to discuss what he and Mr. Pitt talked about when they met in Washington on Wednesday. But he said he intended to continue trying to reach a settlement with Merrill Lynch. Mr. Spitzer has been demanding that Merrill Lynch pay a large fine and create a restitution fund for investors who bought stocks on the recommendations of the firm's analysts. He has asked the firm for $100 million or more, according to people close to the negotiations. Merrill has balked at paying that much and, especially, at admitting any wrongdoing, which could weaken the firm's defenses against lawsuits by investors, these people said. Last fall, Merrill agreed to pay $400,000 to settle a complaint a customer brought against the firm and Mr. Blodget. Mr. Spitzer has also asked Merrill to make structural changes to increase the insulation of its analysts from the firm's investment bankers and their corporate relationships. Merrill officials proposed setting up a board for its research department, with the majority of them coming from outside the firm and reporting directly to the firm's senior executives. But Merrill is reluctant to agree to significant changes that might handicap it in competing with other firms that have not made such changes, people close to the firm said. Even Mr. Spitzer has acknowledged that Merrill has done more to insulate analysts from bankers than some of its major competitors. "It may be that what we want Merrill to do is more substantial than what others are thinking of," Mr. Spitzer said. Merrill's stock fell another 4.8 percent yesterday, to $42.50, and is now down 21 percent since Mr. Spitzer released the e-mail messages on April 8. nytimes.com