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 : Dividend investing for retirement -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E_K_S who wrote (24341)	2/8/2016 10:40:33 PM
From: Elroy	Respond to of 34328

Yeah, that's an interesting one.

To: E_K_S who wrote (24341)	2/8/2016 11:38:58 PM
From: Joan Osland Graffius	Respond to of 34328

I wonder if that is why they sent the letter to shareholders. it let shareholders know the data is not a fraud.

To: E_K_S who wrote (24341)	2/9/2016 12:04:53 PM
From: geoffrey Wren	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34328

This is a very interesting development regarding PSEC. It is quite possible that Bock of Wells Fargo is acting as a tool of short sellers. In fact I rather assume he is. That does not mean his message is wrong, but it does get to the "what is his agenda?" question. And what prompted the SEC to start this investigation, if it has, but a short seller? Again, nothing wrong with that, but the SEC presumably is going to check things out on its own and perhaps quickly decide to close the investigation, or not. And how far in is the investigation? If PSEC rebuffed offers from other companies that appraised CLO's, that in itself is not worrisome. What does that mean? A salesman made a call and was told "no thank you."? All companies are solicited by service companies (insurance, accounting, legal, etc.) all the time I presume. The meat of it is this: Bock says the potential SEC inquiry involves whether PSEC and the company that values its CLOs had "conspired with Prospect to set improper marks for its CLO investments.” That is willful decision to mark prices higher than they should be. But the only way that is a sure thing is if the assets are traded, or something quite similar is traded. Otherwise value is a matter of opinion, and different people have different opinions. No doubt PSEC marks its assets optimistically, and no doubt PSEC's management is overpaid and self-serving. But I do not see how it would be in their self-interest to go beyond optimistic asset pricing to fraudulent asset pricing. But they are an arrogant bunch, so maybe they thought they could, and did, so as to get more of a management commission in the short term. PSEC will need to get out a press release on this. They will not be kind to Bock. I would guess that in one year either Bock is gone from Wells Fargo, or PSEC has changed the company it uses to value CLO's and made some other major changes as well.