September 06, 2008     | Register

The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue.

Location: Blogs Bud Burrell - Front and Center    
Posted by:   bburrell 4/17/2007 7:41 AM

I write this piece on something a friend reminded me of going back to the late 1970’s, my very first experience with the concept of “Grandfathering” the status of old versus new assets.

 

I was called by two different Executive Recruiters to work for an offshoot of a major Commodities Trading Firm, coming out of a “Translation” presentation I did in Chicago for a large group on non-technical professionals on the use of options and futures for hedging.  Both times I turned down the interview.  I would come to know later how lucky (or not) I had been.

 

After the 1974 Oil Crisis, the US Government vastly expanded incentives for exploration and production of US and other oil reserves, principally through creation of aggressive tax shelter incentives for these activities.

 

With the move to the unheard of levels of prices for Oil of $18.00 a barrel, production was quickly bumped up.  As profits of these and related enterprises exploded, there was a move in Congress to legislate “Price Controls” on the resulting production and services businesses, designed to limit profits of Oil Producers.  The compromise bill resulted in Oil being categorized into two new classes, “Old” Oil, meaning that produced from wells drilled before tax incentives, and “New” Oil, meaning that produced as a result of exploration resulting from increased tax incentives.  The “Old” Oil was left to be sold at free market prices, while strict price limits were imposed on “New” Oil, limiting the profits from this class of product.

 

A few very agile minds quickly realized that if they could “re-classify” New Oil (which in raw form was undistinguishable from “Old” Oil physically), they could radically increase their profits in the sale of such converted assets.  Certain multi-national persons began to do this aggressively with creative, but essentially criminal, book-keeping and paper transaction shuffling designed to “lose” the identity of oil in their control, and thereby making it possible for them to re-sell “New” Oil at the higher of market versus regulated prices.

 

In a conversation with a friend this week on the counterfeiting crisis of illegal naked shorting without settlement, I realized I was looking at an old idea simply recycled for another time and problem.  When the SEC grandfathered pre-existing naked shorts and their related counterfeit longs, it was repeating the old fraud I had first seen applied to Oil in the 1970’s.  This was the scam that forced Mark Rich to flee the US in front of a Federal Indictment, only to be pardoned by Clinton over 20 years later.

 

Nietzsche said “The Past is Prologue”.  Santayana’s famous quote was a variant of the same theme:  “Those who forget history are condemned to relive it.”  When we realize that everything that happened in the 1929 Crash was repeated in the 2000 Raid, we should start to see a pattern unless we are dense, or in some form of twisted denial.

 

I have previously noted that the Tax Reform Act of 1986 was an Ex Post Facto law precedent for financial and tax issues, with no precedent in the Constitution.

 

I am beginning to be certain that there is nothing new ANYWHERE.  Mark Twain said it best about Politicians, equally applicable to Regulators:  “They need to be handled like diapers, changed frequently and for the same reason.”

 

Somewhere along the line, we better get our Government officials to find a way to lighten up here, or rue the results. 

 

One of many variants of the old Poker Game theme is applicable here.  Our Stock Markets are completely rigged casinos.  What was the most valuable lesson I learned my first year on Wall Street?  The Poker Game variant is that if you sit down at a table full of gamblers, and you don’t see the sucker, you’re it!

 

We all need to wake up and smell the napalm.  Money and Flesh both make an ugly smell when they are burning.

Copyright ©2007 Bud Burrell
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (9)
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By mhelburn on 4/17/2007 11:05 AM
Bud,

I wish that you would post this to the SEC comments on Reg SHO. The term "grandfathering" goes back further as a way to disenfranchise voters. The rule was if your grandfather could vote, you could vote. It was reprehensible in that circumstance as is the SEC's current debacle. Perhaps they could grandfather some fines for the folks who abused the rule.

When reading the request for comments and the truly ignorant questions that they posted, I got angry. Should they allow more time for the initial grandfathered shares to be bought in... as if two-plus years wasn't enough.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By briguy331 on 4/17/2007 12:50 PM
Bud whats your take on this? Looks like someone is getting scared....


gary-weiss.com
Wall Street Versus America and other ramblings.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Another Defeat for Baloney


A gawdawful little company called Universal Express has taken on a leading role in the "stock counterfeiting conspiracy" movement, which seeks to deflect investor attention to a nonexistent problem from -- well, from the defects of gawdawful little companies like Universal Express.

This company's CEO Richard Altomare has become the town crier of the anti-shoring Baloney Brigade, issuing hysterical press releases such as a recent one calling this nonexistent problem a "trillion dollar tax scam."

A federal judge is fed up with all this malarkey. As reported recently in the South Flordia Business Journal:


An order by New York Federal District Court Judge Gerard Lynch, filed on April 2, calls for a penalty of $21.9 million against the Boca Raton-based company, $3.1 million against CEO Richard Altomare and $794,711 against corporate counsel Chris Gunderson. Lynch had previously ruled that they violated securities trading laws by selling unregistered shares of Universal Express and issuing misleading press releases to inflate the value of those securities.
The judge's ruling, brought in a suit by the SEC, also "prohibits Altomare from acting as an officer or director of a public company and permanently bars Altomare and Gunderson from participating in an offering of penny stocks," said the newspaper.

A more fitting punishment, I think, would be a requirement that Altomare eat the kind of stale baloney he's been pushing for the past few years.

The same goes for the state regulators, legislators and journalists who buy in to the naked shorting con game.

© 2007 Gary Weiss. All rights reserved.

-----------

Wall Street Versus America was published by Penguin USA on April 6.
Click here for its Amazon.com listing and here for more information on the book, from my web site, gary-weiss.com.
Labels: microcap fraud, naked short-selling, Richard Altomare, SEC, Universal Express


Reply: Weiss is a POS, bought and paid for. Worse, he knows nothing of the case he is commenting on.

A Jury (guess he wants to ignore that) of civilians ruled in two actions for $588 Million in damages for USXP. The Company is the first I know of that went to the SEC with proof of counterfeiting of its stock by naked shorters. The SEC told them to work it out with the MM's, who were the same people shorting the stock.

Observing his first book, which was printed without a table of contents or index, I conjectured his knowledge of shorting was from the same school of journalism. Why has the UK, Germany, Switerland, and India rejected naked shorting and FTD's?

Because they are convinced it is bad for their markets. The UK enforces 3 day settlement, and they practically invented offshore banking. All that has happened in the UK over the past couple of years has been that they have blown New York out of it #1 standing in financings.

The proof will be in the long term pudding, comparing the NYX and Tokyo (in a JV with DTCC called OMGEO) markets and their stocks' performance with that of markets that don't allow manipulation via counterfeiting.

Let Weisshole tell the EU and India he is smarter than they are. He can use the NASD's Bulletin Board for comparison to their markets, beginning in 1999. But wait, that would hardly be fair, not when over 10,000 companies have been vaporized from the BB.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By mhatmccane on 4/17/2007 2:27 PM
Bud,

Thank you for continuing the fight. The MM forces are getting more blatant in creating
"air shares" in NFI and I believe it may become a footrace to see if NFI can hang on until the stockholders suit or the SEC may bring relief.

Reply: Expecting the SEC to bring relief on this problem is like waiting for Godot.

I am on your side, but lots of luck to anyone expecting anything constructive from the SEC unless they are facing a flailing.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By Mike on 4/17/2007 2:29 PM
Maybe Gary Weisshole can explain to us if there is a "nonexistent problem " why the SEC can not revoke the GF clause ?
Hopefully Richard Altomare can beat those guys like a rented mule very soon !

Reply: Altomare is a former Marine, and proud of it. Weiss could use a Come to Jesus beating, figuratively speaking of course. I doubt he can back up his mouth.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By briguy331 on 4/17/2007 2:34 PM
Here's a thought, why dont we invite him "Weisshole" over to discuss the matter?

Reply: I have been rather studious in avoiding engaging with scum like Weisshole and getting their stink on any part of you.

The only thing that results, even if you win, is that your shoe stinks like hell.

I would like to debate him face-to-face, but none of his ilk have taken this challenge, nor do I expect them to anytime in the future.

He is a gutless twat who never does his complete homework, and that is really all anyone needs to say about him.

Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By Robert on 4/17/2007 7:31 PM
Hi Bud,

Both you and Mr. Altomare have been strong proponents of requesting certificates for shares. I am very interested to know what you see on the horizon that makes you feel having certificates is a must. I see the following possibilities:

1. A very flimsy market that is supported in part by phantom shares. As such, it is best to pull your certs before something terrible happens marketwide.
2. Pulling certs forces the NSS to cover any phantom shares that might be in your account.
3. The "Plan" that Mr. Altomare has in store for the SEC and NSS will require stock certificates to be held by shareholders at the time of execution (pun intended).

I would never ask you to divulge anything that would breech your confidentiality agreements with USXP, but I do know that many of the shareholders are uncertain of whether to order certs because they are not completely aware of the volatility that exists and how that volatility will impact their ability to take advantage of any plans USXP might have and execute. Many think that the brokers will protect them in the event of a short squeeze or a corner. The notion is that there is some sort of insurance that will cover them completely if suddenly their shares are found to be counterfeit. Could you please take a moment and explain the situation as you know it and either allay or elevate the fears that many might have.

Even those of us who have pulled our certs have a nagging feeling in the back of our minds that we will need to be ready at a moments notice to get our certs back in to the market. Any information you could provide would be very much appreciated.

Thank you,

Robert

Reply: Except for IRA accounts, you are never wrong to order certs.

On Jan 1, 2008, all certs are supposed to be disappeared/dematerialized.

Until then, no one has real proof they own legitimate shares except as evidenced by certificates. They don't exist for counterfeit longs created by naked short selling. Under most non-US law, no cert, no dividend entitlement.

You can put the certs back when it is appropriate, such as when you need proof of ownership to get a dividend, whether stock or cash.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By bbhindyou on 4/18/2007 10:27 AM
Bud I own certificates in stocks I purchased .
This is my property.
I dont want anyone to 'hold' it for me .
I paid for it I dont want to sell it why would I want someone to 'hold' it for me?
Especially someone I don't trust.
Bud Jan,8,2008, are the certificates worthless?
Do they steal my property rights via decree with nothing I can say or do?
If so what property of ours do you think they will want to 'hold' for us next?


Reply: Your certificates will never be worthless, but you will have to turn them in to your broker. What happens after that will be an open question.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By bbhindyou on 4/18/2007 11:59 AM
Bud I no longer have a broker .
I do not want a broker.They charge fees to hold your stock account while using your property to make money for themselfs.
I purchased property I have posession of this property and I don't intend to give it up.
What will happen if I don't?
I don't intend to surrender MY property rights.

Reply: You will need to insure the Company's Transfer Agent acknowledges your position, as of their records.
Re: The More Things Change, the More They Stay The Same: Observations on "Grandfathering" as an Ex Post Facto Issue. By anthony kalantzis on 4/18/2007 9:34 PM
bud , what if your holding certs in canada ,and the brokers dont accept them to be deposited .what would you do ?
search for one who does ?

Reply: I believe the CDS is adopting the same policy as DTCC here, going completely de-materialized, certificateless. You would have to check first with your Company's Transfer Agent, then with your broker.
Copyright © 2006 The Sanity Check   |   Privacy Statement   |   Terms Of Use