Reply With Quote
clicked the link, see the website is begging for money.
i already know which way they lean
Second Circuit Decision Effectively Legalizes Insider Trading
What does this mean in practical terms? The court has just provided a very-easy-to-satisfy roadmap for engaging in insider trading legally.
Don’t give the person who gave you the choice tidbit any explicit payoff. You can give him all sorts of buttering up before hand (fancy meals, hot women, illicit substances, box seats, whatever you think will induce cooperation and show your seriousness and ability to pay) and just engage in vague winks and nods.
As long as you don’t pay the tipster for the trade in any crass or traceable way (and no communications that point to an explicit payoff), you are good to go. Compensation down the road, in hard dollar or soft forms is perfectly kosher.
Needless to say, the implications are terrible. Thanks to high frequency trading, way way too cozy a relationship between the Fed and its preferred banks, and years of su ious trading patterns (markets too consistently not breaching technically significant price levels, with the trading looking decidedly not organic) has sapped the faith of retail and even smaller ins utional investors in the integrity of markets. The Second Circuit has just announced open season on pervasive misuse of inside information.
And this decision pretty much puts the SEC out of the enforcement business, unless the agency gins up the nerve and skills to take on targets other than insider trading. The SEC had pretty much retreated to pursuing only insider trading cases; to the extent it does anything else, its policy is to (at most) file a claim and negotiate a settlement.
But its targets know that the agency’s reluctance and presumed inability to go further makes it a paper tiger. That in turn leads to the widely ridiculed “virtually no admission of facts” settlements, which leaves courts (when asked to approve settlements) and the public in the dark as to whether the punishments were remotely adequate. It also deprives private plaintiffs to leverage the government case to seek res ution.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/...+capitalism%29
working assumption: the entire financial sector is 100% corrupt, unless proven otherwise.
With the financialization of America, America is irrevocably corrupted.
clicked the link, see the website is begging for money.
i already know which way they lean
... yep, messenger sucks, so ignore the message
so you would take fox news or breitbart seriously?
Damn. I need to cultivate some insiders.
yep, that's obviously what the Federal court said you can do, otherwise, you'd be on the wrong end of the corruptly tilted playing field.
It's more like hire a personal assistant.
They need it. That is one ty looking website.
C'mon bouts, answer the question.
SEC joins hunt for FIN4 attackers
America's Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has joined the hunt for the FIN4 hacking group.
The bunch, revealed by FireEye in December 2014, used a phishing attack to get access to listed companies' computer systems. Their payoff was to get insider information to trade their targets' stocks.
According to Reuters, the SEC has contacted “at least eight listed companies” for information about their breaches.
The SEC investigation is running in parallel to another run by the US Secret Service, the usual authority for investigating cyber-crime.
In its original announcement, FireEye reckoned the spear-phishing attacks by FIN4 started in 2013 and had targeted “100 law, health care and pharmaceutical firms”, 98 of which were listed on NYSE or NASDAQ.
At that time, FireEye had been unable to establish di9rect evidence that the phishing attack had yielded information to run trades.
That makes the SEC's action intriguing: the regulator's been on the case for six months, and at least seems to believe it's worth looking for a smoking gun of some kind.
Former SEC Internet enforcement bod John Reed Stark told Reuters the action is a first for the agency, saying “failures in cybersecurity have prompted a dangerous, new method of unlawful insider trading”.
http://recode.net/2015/06/23/why-the...cybersecurity/
There's pe ion around to kick Mary Joe White out of SEC for being too cozy, duh, with the financial sector. , that's why she got the job.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
