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.

Non-Tech : CYBERTRADER -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gbh who wrote (1284)	9/7/1998 9:24:00 PM
From: Gorak Shep	Respond to of 3216

If NASD sees a pattern of short sale abuse via related accounts, you would be hard pressed to convince them that you didn't know the rules. And if NASD wants to get nasty, they can just break your illegal trades. And you may find yourself in positions of a different sort that you don't want to be in <G>

To: gbh who wrote (1284)	9/8/1998 8:16:00 AM
From: steve goldman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3216

You are the principal in the transaction and your broker is only your agent (not talking about the mm/principal/agent status). Ok, let me give you an example. Lets say you hire an accountant to do your tax work. The accountant doesnt tell you that you have to file a particular form by such and such date. You dont and the governement prosecutes you. Now, you definately might have a case against the accountant, but where does the accounts responsibilities end yours begin. My case is that your responsibilities begin day one, step one. Sure, you might win via. the accountant for damages, etc. but that doesnt minimize YOUR liability. Who, How and when the SEC might prosecute, I dont know. I am just talking prudence. To me it just aint worth it for an extra 1/8 or 1/4. I wait for an uptick,bid. Regards, Steve