SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Auric Goldfinger's Short List -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9816)5/8/2002 12:49:39 PM
From: tuck  Respond to of 19428
 
SAG,

Speaking of reform . . .

>>By Kevin Drawbaugh

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. financial regulators on Wednesday approved new rules to force stock analysts to reveal more about their ties to companies they research, in an effort to stop them touting shares they don't really believe in.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission unanimously approved the measures with an eye to curbing abuses -- like those at Merrill Lynch (NYSE:MER - news) where Internet analysts publicly touted stocks they had slammed privately as "junk."

"This is an important first step. I hope it works and if it doesn't, we'll have other steps," said SEC Commissioner Cynthia Glassman at an SEC public meeting.

The rules, criticized as inadequate by some investor advocates, would limit when and how analysts can issue opinions on stocks, restrict their personal investing activities and force banks to disclose more about their ties to companies they research and those of their analysts.

The stock exchanges will phase in the measures over six months, said New York Stock Exchange spokesman Ed Kwalwasser.

The rules were developed over many months by the New York Stock Exchange, the Nasdaq-regulating National Association of Securities Dealers, the SEC and Republicans in Congress.

The SEC on April 25 launched a formal investigation of analysts and whether they misled investors. The probe could produce further reform proposals, officials said.

"It's a dramatic change and I just think that as we see how they work out, there could be some new changes and interpretations," SEC Commissioner Isaac Hunt told the meeting. "These rules may not go as far as some ... would hope. But this is a solid first step."

ANALYSTS UNDER FIRE

Amid a broad crisis of market confidence triggered by the Dec. 2 bankruptcy of former energy trading giant Enron Corp. (Other OTC:ENRNQ.PK - news), controversy has grown over the role of stock analysts at the world's top investment banks.

Experienced Wall Streeters have long winked at the dual roles of sell-side analysts. While portrayed as objective market researchers, they also serve the marketing and investment banking interests of their powerful employers.

Such conflicts were tolerated until early 2000, when America slid into its first major bear market since stock ownership exploded among the middle classes in the 1990s.

New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer last month starkly exposed the problem. In an investigation he led, Merrill analysts were shown to have privately disparaged shares in Internet firms that they had publicly recommended.

The new rules would take several steps:

--Prohibit pegging analysts' pay to specific investment banking deals and require disclosure if analysts' pay is pegged to investment banking revenues in general;

--Ban offering favorable research for banking business;

--Ban analysts from issuing research reports 40 days after the IPO of a company handled by that analyst's bank; or 10 days after a secondary offering "for an inactively traded company."

--Restrict, but not ban, collaboration on research reports between analysts and investment banking employees;

--Limit pre-publication review of analysts' research reports by the companies written about;

--Require more disclosure of analysts' pay and personal holdings, the bank's holdings and its client relationships;

--Restrict analysts from dealing in initial public offering shares in sectors they cover, except in diversified funds;

--Require "blackout periods" prohibiting analysts from trading in shares of companies they follow for 30 days before and 5 days after issuing a research report about the company.

--Prohibit analysts from trading against their most recent recommendations.

--Require banks to clearly explain their stock rating systems and disclose historic data about ratings assigned.

The commission also unanimously approved a rule -- which goes into effect on Nov. 4 -- ordering foreign companies to electronically file stock registration statements and documents, making it easier for U.S. investors to access them.<<

Cheers, Tuck



To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9816)5/10/2002 6:11:35 PM
From: StockDung  Respond to of 19428
 
RE:Dynacq International:Putting profits ahead of patients?
04/29/200 khou.com

By Jeremy Rogalski / 11 News

There are some serious allegations against Vista Medical Center Hospital in Harris County. It's been cited by the federal government, the state shows a doctor there with a long history of malpractice, and other critics claim the Pasadena hospital is putting profits ahead of patients.

Click to watch the story.
If you do not have Real Player, click here to download.

The Vista Medical Center Hospital portrays itself as an ultra-efficient, highly specialized surgical center, a facility without the stress and congestion of large general hospitals.

Its Web site boasts of attracting "premier surgeons," and nurses "handpicked from the finest," and a place where "one-on-one attention is the rule, not the exception." But is that the case?

"I don't think they're really interested in quality care. They certainly aren't policing. Their credentialing is faulted, " said Dr. J. Martin Barrish, past president of the Texas Association of Neurological Surgeons.

A recent federal survey cited Vista for numerous deficiencies, including no verification that many nurses even had a valid and current license, and patient rooms with mold and mildew in bathrooms and sleeping areas.

According to the survey, "The hospital's environment had not been maintained in a manner that the safety and well-being of patients was assured."

Kenneth Woods, a former patient at Vista Medical Center Hospital had back surgery at Vista. "I tell you I wouldn't let my dog go in there, you know?" said Woods. "As far as the care, they're terrible."

"This is what he put in my body, this is what's in my body right now," said Woods, holding up an x-ray of his back. Screws and cages now line his spine, and he has complained of numerous complications.

"I mean, I was crying like a baby in there. I'll be honest with you. I was hurting so bad," said Woods.

What Woods didn't know at the time of his surgery was exactly who was in the operating room: Dr. Eric Scheffey, a man with a troubling medical track record.

State records show he's been suspended for performing unnecessary surgery. He was accused of overcharging for them. A state board also reprimanded Scheffey and put him on probation for other incidents. And his license was severely restricted.

Dr. J. Martin Barrash has reviewed Scheffey's work for years, and on behalf of patients, has testified against him in court.

"I think he has, he's got more lives than a cat. He has been sued, as far as I know, more than any physician in the United States," said Barrash.

In fact, published reports claim Scheffey has acknowledged before state medical examiners to have settled between 20 and 30 medical malpractice lawsuits during his career.

"It's a stabbing, shooting pain," said Woods, describing his symptoms. He says he knew something was seriously wrong when he went to a local Walgreens to get one of Dr. Scheffey's prescriptions filled.

"Give them the prescriptions, and they laughed in my face man and they said, 'We're not filling this man's prescriptions.' They said, 'I doubt anybody in Houston is going to fill this man's prescriptions,'" said Woods.

Dr. Scheffey didn't return our calls, and Vista said only that its doctors are subject to state regulators, who have allowed Scheffey to continue practicing.

In a statement, as far as the other violations go, Vista claims they've all been corrected and it now has a clean bill of health.

But the alarm bells are ringing far beyond the hospital's hallways. They ring all the way to Wall Street, where some attorneys argue Vista's owners duped investors with an illegal profit-making prescription.

"They were misstating their earnings," said attorney Tom Bilek.

Tom Bilek and lawyers from several other firms are suing Vista's parent company, Dynacq International, for securities fraud, claiming it artificially inflated stock prices while executives dumped loads of company stock for their personal gain.

The complaint alleges that Dynacq's CEO, in just one year's time, sold more than 300,000 shares of stock, reaping proceeds of some $6 million.

"The Dynacq case, is I think, another example of greed," said Bilek.

Vista and its owners declined to sit down for an interview, but described the lawsuits as frivolous. Long-time neurosurgeon Dr. Barrash says it doesn't take a brain surgeon to understand what's going on. "Money," said Barrash. "M-O-N-E-Y. Money."

For patients like Kenneth Woods, you can't put a price tag on quality of life. They're left wondering if their care took a backseat to big business and its bottom line.



To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (9816)5/17/2002 2:24:11 PM
From: StockDung  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 19428
 
RAYMOND L. DIRKS INTERNET RESEARCH TRIBUNAL THREAD
Subject 52930