September 06, 2008 Login | Register

About our Blogs

Blogs found on this website represent the opinion of the author. For more information please visit our terms of use.

Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

Location: Blogs Bud Burrell - Front and Center
Posted by: bburrell	6/17/2007 6:24 PM
I am amused to find that the parties raging against the dark of pump and dump abuses don't have the same passion for those raging at them for counterfeiting. They have quite a bit of time yet before they have to pay the piper, and I think they would be well advised to engage in some "work hardening" therapy to prepare them for what they will face in prison, particularly those who have supported terrorism. It won't matter whether or not they knew what they were doing. Some key lawyers in this equation are rolling like rock embedded snowballs blasting down a steep mountain side. These clowns will force their co-conspirators to have to face more than simple disbarment. I don't think there is enough Propalol in the world to repair the financial PTSD of their victims, nor should they have access to it for their uglier memories of the Prison time they will face.
Copyright ©2007 Bud Burrell
Permalink \| Trackback


Comments (29)

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By rtway on 6/18/2007 3:48 AM

Bud the time for talking is over. It now has to be proactive. Please read my response in Bob's blog. I'm tired of being the bulls eye in the eye of the SEC. What the fu---k happened to this country that we are afraid to fight for our rights and demand justice and transparency. Let's all band together and rekindle the American spirit and take back what is ours.

Reply: There are several cases pending that will get jury trials, as opposed to arbitrary, if not influenced, Federal Judges ruling to protect their own interests and in particular their workload.

Unfortunately, there are those who continue to talk of quick fixes from the legal system, and that simply isn't going to happen. You are one of the more responsible commentors, and you should know that the opposition now accuses the SEC of "taking our side" in the NSS/Counterfeiting issue.

The SEC needs to know that we will be keeping a close eye on them. Believe me when I tell you that the ruing of last week would never have happened if we had not been all over them. One of the killer clowns actually accused Dave Patch of being an internally supported shill for the SEC, when in fact he has been anything but.

No one has paid me this compliment, but then again it would not have been approprirate. I have taken a bit of time to recharge my batteries, but now we have to focus on the Ex-Clearing arena, and on getting appropriate disclosure from this space.

The fact is corruption has gone pandemic in this beloved Country of ours, and we are looking at just one very narrow space. It is literally everywhere. I see nothing short of declared War acting as even a band-aid to cause some clean up.

Maybe too it is that as I get older, like any good craftsman, I am getting better at ferreting out this corruption, and recognizing it where I encounter it. H. L. Mencken said in the late 1930's that "Corruption is the substance holding together American society." In a variant of that statement, he called Corruption the "Glue" holding it together. No one could tell me today it is any different.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Robert on 6/18/2007 5:32 AM

The only thing different about it is that it is now more of an art form. The days of envelopes full of cash (unless you are a stupid congressman from Louisiana) are going to the wayside. They don't have to risk the exposure anymore. All the powers-that-be need to know is what stocks are residing in the judge du jour's portfolio. Too close to the judge? No problem. Make it a family member or other close confidant. Simply have your money market buddies run the stock price up for a few days on some of the holdings and there is your payoff. It would be a completely innocent stock transaction by taking advantage of a surprising surge in stock price. And please, everyone try to refrain from telling me that running a stock price up on a whim is not that simple. If the stakes are high enough and the payoff will benefit the big boys, we know it can happen.

I could not agree more that something needs to happen. The average American does not stand a chance against the power players. We are sheep waiting for the slaughter. The question is, "How do you organize something like this?" Public awareness on the scale we are talking about costs money. Lot's of money. You have guys like Byrne, Burrell, Patch, Faulk, and Altomare trying to get the word out, but they are fighting an uphill battle. For every item they publish explaining the problem, you have mainline press publishing 10 articles claiming there is no issue at all. Who is Joe Public going to believe? Primetime news, The Wallstreet Journal, and countless financial magazine articles, or a handful of guys that are described as whiners and bad CEO's by those same news services?

If anyone has direct access to Warren Buffet, ask him one simple question. How would he like to be remembered? How great of a legacy would it be that he spent his fortune on cleaning up the American Market? It would be a lot better to do something truly constructive with his money instead of going around playing like the Easter Bunny leaving little nest eggs of cash at the front doors of charities. Do I honestly expect somebody like him to concern himself with that, especially when it would likely have a negative effect on some of his close buddies? No, not really. But it sure would be nice to see someone who has an interest in doing the RIGHT THING with his fortune instead of waiting to pose for photo ops with the poster sized checks so that everyone can oooh and aahhh over how great and what a wonderful philanthropist they are.

Anybody have Buffet's cell number?

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By HarryK on 6/27/2007 11:37 AM
Bud, PVTM is trading on the pink sheets and traded 20,000 shares according to yahoo. I though PVTM is now trading on the plus market? Confused Reply: PVTM is trading on the Grey Market, not the Pinks. We are not reporting. PVTM does not trade on the Plus, rather PTSP (Private Trading Systems Plc), a unit dividended from PVTM is trading there.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By musketrifle on 6/28/2007 11:10 AM
Everyone please help in the fight against the SEC's illegal acts in protecting their rich criminal buddies. http://www.petitiononline.com/usxp123/ The peitition is named, Usxp. Please go to the link above, it will record your signature digitally. Your email address will be kept private. I urge you each to contact everyone you know, and get them to sign on.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By rob on 7/12/2007 8:43 AM

Bud, Dave Patch tells me to question Universal Express being a reputable company. While he does not come straight out and call them corrupt, he has indicated to me twice that the naked short scenario that Mr. Altomare claims, is really no longer a factor, since Mr. Altomare has diluted with plus 40 billion shares.

Bud, I thought you said Universal was the most heavily naked shorted stock in the market, and that you had consulted with Richard?

Bud, would you please explain to me if you agree with Dave regarding USXP, or if you stand firm with Richard? And if you stand with Richard, why do you think Dave is so anti-usxp?

Reply: I have provided Litigation Support to USXP, and I cannot comment further.

This is not what Dave has concluded is going on. It may be something else entirely.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/18/2007 12:21 PM

Bud, if these guys are this powerful how can we ever win??

UPDATE 3-U.S. top court rules for underwriters on IPO suit
Reuters - June 18, 2007 2:48 PM ET

Related Quotes
Symbol Last Chg
BSC Trade 148.14 -1.95
C Trade 54.06 +0.08
GS Trade 227.07 +0.88
JNS Trade 28.86 +0.73
JPM Trade 50.52 -0.04
LEH Trade 80.60 +1.53
Quotes delayed at least 15 minutes

(Adds more reaction)

By James Vicini and Martha Graybow

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK, June 18 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court handed Wall Street underwriters a major victory on Monday by ruling that an antitrust lawsuit against them over the pricing of initial public stock offerings (IPOs) cannot go forward.

By a 7-1 vote, the justices reversed a ruling by a U.S. appeals court in New York that the lawsuit by buyers of Internet and technology stock issues in the late 1990s could proceed.

"We must interpret the securities laws as implicitly precluding the application of the antitrust laws to the conduct alleged in this case," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the 20-page majority opinion.

The lawsuit accused the big investment banks of conspiring to impose anti-competitive charges on prospective buyers and inflating share prices in the post-IPO aftermarket for some 900 initial public offerings.

The ruling was a victory for the big investment banks, including Credit Suisse Group CSGN.VX, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. (MER) and Morgan Stanley (MS), which had appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's ruling said the underwriters should be immunized from such an antitrust lawsuit because the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission regulates the conduct at issue.

Had the IPO investors prevailed, "the industry would have faced massive legal exposure and a major engine of American growth would have been unnecessarily damaged," Marc Lackritz, president and CEO of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, a financial industry trade group, said.

"This is just one more example of insatiable trial lawyers abusing the courts to target a successful American industry," Lackritz said. "Sadly, we are fighting many such battles."

In the ruling, Breyer said that to permit antitrust lawsuits such as this one threatened serious securities-related harm. He said the SEC has the expertise to distinguish what is forbidden from what is allowed.

Breyer also said any enforcement-related need for an antitrust lawsuit is unusually small. The SEC actively enforces the rules and regulations for the conduct at issue, he said.

Also, investors harmed by underwriters' unlawful practices may bring lawsuits and obtain damages under the securities law.

"We also note that Congress, in an effort to weed out unmeritorious securities lawsuits, has recently tightened the procedural requirements that plaintiffs must satisfy when they file those suits," Breyer said.

Thomas Dubbs, a partner at law firm Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff LLP, which represents plaintiffs in class-action litigation but did not have a role in this case, said that the ruling shuts down an avenue for investors in trying to get recoveries through U.S. antitrust laws.

"What the decision strongly suggests is that investors should put their eggs in the basket of the securities laws, not the antitrust laws," he said. "The opinion posits that there is active continuing enforcement action by the SEC, which unfortunately varies from administration to administration."

A federal judge initially dismissed the class action lawsuit on the grounds federal securities laws preempt federal and state antitrust laws.

But the appeals court disagreed in reinstating the lawsuit. It ruled there was no evidence Congress intended to repeal the antitrust laws and immunize "tie-in" agreements on IPOs.

Other financial firms involved in the lawsuit included units of Bear Stearns Cos. (BSC); Citigroup (C); Fidelity Investments; Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) and Janus Capital Group Inc. (JNS)

"Credit Suisse is pleased with this decision," spokeswoman Victoria Harmon said.

Merrill declined to comment, as did Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan.

Bear Stearns and Citigroup did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

Joel Mitnick, a lawyer for Deutsche Bank Securities, another defendant in the case, called the ruling "an important decision that helps to settle law in an area where plaintiffs' antitrust cases threaten to disrupt the ability of the securities markets to raise capital."

Justice Clarence Thomas was the only dissenter and said the lawsuit should be allowed to proceed.

(Additional reporting by Joseph Giannone and Jonathan Stempel in New York)

Reply: They will be most powerful just before they are indicted. RICO is a natural course for the complaints shut off from anti-trust remedies.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Robert on 6/18/2007 5:20 PM

I am at a complete loss for words (almost).

"The Supreme Court's ruling said the underwriters should be immunized from such an antitrust lawsuit because the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission regulates the conduct at issue."

- What happens when the SEC fails or refuses to act?

"Had the IPO investors prevailed, "the industry would have faced massive legal exposure and a major engine of American growth would have been unnecessarily damaged," Marc Lackritz, president and CEO of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, a financial industry trade group, said."

- God forbid they be held accountable or have their practices exposed to the public. We would never want that.

"Also, investors harmed by underwriters' unlawful practices may bring lawsuits and obtain damages under the securities law.

"We also note that Congress, in an effort to weed out unmeritorious securities lawsuits, has recently tightened the procedural requirements that plaintiffs must satisfy when they file those suits," Breyer said."

- Ok, so let me see. The Highest Court (most expensive) Judges in the land say that IF the underwriter's did anything unlawful, then the investors should go after them through the remedies afforded by the securities laws. The SEC regulates what happens under securities laws which sounds like that the justices are saying the SEC should have autonomy in those cases. Then, on top of that, Congress has tightened the procedural requirements to limit even further a plaintiff's ability to have his day in the kangaroo court. A day I might add that would likely be appealed all the way to the Supreme court and then reversed to the favor of whoever the investor isn't. Almost a perfect Catch 22.

This is disgusting!

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By SteveM on 6/18/2007 5:20 PM
BINGO, RICO! When the SEC is also a named co-conspirator, federal preemption seems like a hard sell!

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Robert on 6/18/2007 9:58 PM

So, who would preside? If there are no clean hands anywhere, then who will hold the gavel? The money is too big. The corruption goes to high.

The gavel has to be handed down to the people that are being governed and their decision must be upheld without appeal. Has the government built such an impenetrable barrier that the average citizen cannot fight back? I do not want to come off as some whacko anarchist, but it sure looks like it is time to dump some tea in the harbor. Again, we go back to Mr. Buffet or Mr. Gates. Who has the resources and is willing to take on the historical task of taking down the giant?

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/18/2007 9:59 PM

Bud, it just seems to me that even the investigative arm of the DOJ may be compromised. The Supreme Court definitely proved that that are more supportive of Big business than they are of the individual investor. So where do we seek justice if NOT from the SEC, FBI or the DOJ, The Supreme Court??Where? I believe these Departments believe RICO is some spanish guy that they can get rid of easily no offense to anyone with this joke). So why should these miscreants fear this Statute? So far the looting and pillaging has not and wll not stop. Where do we eventually seek justice?

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Robert on 6/19/2007 5:58 AM

Exactly my point, Sean. Where do we go? People back in the 1700's were seen as patriots for fighting injustice through acts of civil disobedience. Nowadays if you even look like you want to dump tea, you get tagged as some khaki wearing, Montana living, gun toting bubba that wants to bomb something (no offense to folks in Montana). Is that where we are? Does it have to be a choice between complete compliance to the government and the will of the rich versus becoming a whacko anarchist? I am sorry, but I have to believe there is another choice.

But what is it? Where do we go to get justice when it is the justice that is oppressing us?

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By bbhindyou on 6/19/2007 5:58 AM

There is no justice.
There is no protection.
The money you put in any bank ,brokerage,or any investment you can't eat or stand on will be taken from you because you are poor and weak and they are rich and strong.
Take whatever money you can get out of all banks,brokerages and bonds before its all gone.
Find a place to stand.
Get ready to defend your life and any assets you have left.
There is no protection.
There is no justice.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By Robert on 6/19/2007 6:25 AM
Be careful where you are standing too. Imminent domain can pull that out from underneath you as well.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By ginger on 6/19/2007 9:22 AM
Judge Judy... we'll get limited coverage, and from there to YouTube.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By Mike on 6/19/2007 1:27 PM
DTCC Supports SEC Initiative to Make Trade Failure Data Publicly Available http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/070619/20070619005832.html?.v=1

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/20/2007 9:15 AM

Bud , I am not sure if you have noticed this but the pinksheets website have delisted your company's price quote. I think they are going to try to mess with you now. Be careful please, these guys don't play fair!!

Reply: Sean, we listed on the PLUS Market Group Exchange in London last Thursday, under the symbol PTSP, quoted in UK Pence. Shares of PTSP will be issued as a stock dividend to PVTM shareholders of record as of the 12th. PVTM Shareholders must present evidence of their ownership by presentation of their stock certs to the UK Transfer Agent, Computershare.

We will reconcile ownership based on our records and the certs. UK law prohibits issuance of dividend shares to holders in excess of the legally outstanding shares the dividend is declared on.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By captdale on 6/21/2007 12:21 PM
Dud, Re the ex-clearing. If the FTD's are handled via shuffleing between brokers, it seems that they would very quickly become a hot potato that no body wants to get stuck with. If that is so then I would suspect that the broker with the FTD's would forced to move them around somehow within their own organization. Is that how it works ?

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/21/2007 12:23 PM

Bud, this is why our stocks can't move...Goldman Sachs is to blame!!! We can't say were were'nt told!!!

Dave Patch speaks on today's bear raid:

Friends,

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but one of those Bear Raids that don’t exist is taking place as we speak. It is also taking place in a security where the market has no uptick rule so the raid has become rather easy. In fact, Goldman Sachs has offered up this raid to institutional investors for free.

Goldman is offering the lending of Jag Media shares to short sellers at no cost according to one institutional client who clears through Goldman. Imagine that, Goldman is offering up free shares in a penny stock company to their institutional clients. Is this standard practice? Is this an offer to manipulate? Isn’t this like getting a zero interest mortgage from your mortgage company?

Jag Media is one of those companies that Wall Street and Regulators love to hate. It is a company that seems to have nine-lives so it is a company that can cause major market disturbance.

Last week, as a reported deadline approached for the proposed reverse merger between Jag Media and a private company called Cryptometrics, an article was published in Swing Trader that highlighted Jag Media as the ‘Play of the Year’. The article highlighted the trading patterns in Jag Media and offered up a price target that could reach $10.00 due to a possible short squeeze. The result was an explosion in trading volume (965,000 shares on 6/15 and 2.6Million on 6/18) as the stock reached new highs by Monday. On Monday the stock peaked at $1.59 and closed at $1.46.

But Tuesday morning, with the rally on Monday still in play, the stock opened to a collapse sending the market down 15% in the first 10 minutes of trading. Pre-market signs of a market open of $1.50 X $1.51 were wiped out with trades executed and cancelled and by Market open the Bid of $1.50 was reduced to $1.45. Did the investor offering the $1.50 suddenly get some market news that pulled the offer away?

Despite trading into the offer, the market collapsed on 500 share trades into the bid and by mid day Tuesday the stock was trading at $1.28. With 1 Million shares traded, the stock closed at $1.36.

Wednesday was no different and within the first 5 minutes of trading the $1.36 stock was reduced to $1.18 on less than 100,000 shares. By 12:00 Jag was suddenly sitting at $0.93 on 1.5 million shares traded, the stock now trading down 37% in two days on no news.

The uptick rule was put in place to protect against bear raids induced by short sellers who sell into bid when the imbalance between supply and demand through the short sale will dictate a market change. In this case, market making activities and free shares provided by Goldman Sachs and most likely others may be attributed to this sudden change in the JAGH Market.

Regulators must rationalize a few basic questions:

Why would an investor open up the Tuesday market in a massive raid on the bid after the trading the previous two days was nothing short of a bull run, the market makers executing these trades not in the market the previous days? The Bull Run was precipitated off a news article, what precipitated the desire to sell down an investment and sell it down hard?

I am sure the geniuses who monitor these markets will rationalize this as profit taking but…with 2.7 Million shares trading Monday and nearly 2 Million of it taking place between $1.45 and $1.55, selling the stock down to $1.35 on minimal shares is hardly a way to profit take. It would be a loss and not a profit.

The real question is, how much short selling and market making naked shorts were in play during these raids? Any bona-fide sell side market making taking place would be manipulative based on the already collapsing nature of the stock. With net settlement systems in place however, early sell side market making could be used to panic out investors so that market makers with out-of-money positions from the previous two days could cover those positions at a profit and not a loss.

The DTCC fail to deliver data for this week will be extremely telling if a spike in fails is witnessed off Friday and Mondays trading but the positions evaporated through Tuesday and Wednesday trading.

Manipulating markets to protect market making fails is likewise illegal. I can only wonder whether this is the counter party to the fear the SEC has about possible short squeezes. The SEC allowing Brokerage firms and Market makers to raid markets in order to protect liabilities. Some 2.0 Million shares traded hands between $1.45 and $1.55 on Monday resulting in $3 Million worth of trading revenues. While the Tuesday and Wednesday volume now exceeds that total ever so slightly, it was approx 200,000 shares traded that brought the $1.46 stock to $1.18 with the rest of the volume trading around the initial collapses.

The undeniable data…The Bull Run can be rationalized through an event, The Bear Run can not; while regulators typically contact companies on the Bull run, it would appear nobodyy cares about the ever damaging Bear. By my calculation, this panic induced raid drew some $20 Million in market cap out of investor portfolio’s.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By anthony kalantzis on 6/21/2007 2:35 PM

bud, if a company wanted to exit otcbb and be listed on the PLUS market group ,how much time would it take ?
Can a company who is involved in litigation against the SEC still move to the PLUS market without interferance ??

Reply: A Company can exit the OTCBB tactically. There is a proper way to do this without impairing rights of the Company and its shareholders AGAINST the SEC.

As to listing on the PLUS, that is a separate issue. Depending on the nature of the problem, four to six months would be needed to get through a listing process if the Company had no other issues.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/21/2007 2:36 PM

Bud, we need more CEO's like Altomare of USXP read this!!!

Universal Express CEO Requests Investigation Into Ex-Clearing Portfolios
NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwire - June 21, 2007) - Universal Express, Inc. (OTCBB: USXP) CEO, Richard A. Altomare, today requested a Federal financial and tax investigation into the Ex-Clearing accounts between brokers where the naked short sellers hide their daily short settlements and fail to deliver and receive by not entering those numbers into the existing depository system.

"This broker to broker loan system exceeds one trillion dollars, according to the New York Stock Exchange Focus Report. After the failure of the REG SHO program and its recent grandfather clause reversal, those naked short sellers now have only two choices: either cover or hide those positions in this process where brokers trade with each other without entering the depository system," said Mr. Altomare. "On July 24th it will be eight years since the ill thought out REG SHO program was created. During this period our stock control groups have been eliminated, accountability of market makers has deteriorated even further, and American shareholders have lost trillions of shareholder equity through trading scams, yet this Ex-Clearing process remains unsupervised and exceeds a trillion dollars!"

Grandfather Clause reversal: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-114.htm

"Has our government received the tax payments? What are the interest rates, durations and tax expense deductions of these transfers? Are they loans? Who supervises these transactions? Let us always remember if a Company stock is naked shorted and after the shorting the company fails -- there is no taxable revenue recognition event for the broker or account that shorted the stock," continued Mr. Altomare.

"Today, I call upon the appropriate committees of Congress and even the Courts hearing our case to seize those funds pending the outcome of Universal Express' $700,000,000 existing judgment lawsuit or to institute a thorough federal criminal and tax investigation into those accounts. The American trading system demands a level playing field, by a regulatory agency that is both capable and willing to create that type of environment.

"I have often spoken of naked short selling, its avoidance of Federal taxes, and the protection of our shareholders. We have openly lobbied against the unconstitutional grandfather clause initiated to protect market makers during the last 3 years of naked short selling. Why must I now point out a trillion plus dollar broker to broker non-transparent account process? Isn't that what we expect of a functioning regulating agency?

"I request that the SEC deal with this question rather than malign the whistle blower. We've played that game before when the SEC actually denied that naked short selling existed and attacked those of us who revealed it. Today sadly the SEC admits that criminal naked short selling exists. Let's not today deny this trillion plus dollar process. Solve this loophole! Acknowledge the oversight! Protect the dignity of our capitalistic electronic trading system!

"This press release will be distributed to the appropriate members of Congress and the Justice Department.

"As the criminal naked short sellers scurry to find non-transparent loopholes, this Ex-Clearing account must be closed or seized.

"Denials, delays, defensiveness and now deceptive accounts. Is it any surprise, our regulatory agency's grade should be a 'D'?" concluded Mr. Altomare.

About Universal Express

Universal Express, Inc. is a 23-year-old logistics and transportation conglomerate with multiple developing subsidiaries and services. For additional information please visit www.usxp.com

Safe Harbor Statement under the Private securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: The statements contained herein, which are not historical, are forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements including, but not limited to, certain delays beyond the Company's control with respect to market acceptance of new technologies, products and services, delays in testing and evaluation of products and services, and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

http://www.marketwirecanada.com:80/2.0/release.do?id=744620

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/21/2007 12:24 PM

Stock lending, the new name for naked shorting and stock manipulation!!!

Criminal Probe Snares Morgan Stanley VP
A stock-loan investigation has prompted one executive to resign. Individuals at Bear Stearns and Janney Montgomery Scott are also under scrutiny
by Matthew Goldstein
The fallout from a long-running criminal investigation into improprieties in the stock-lending business is starting to hit some of Wall Street's biggest firms. Earlier this week, a Morgan Stanley (MS) vice-president resigned after his name arose in conjunction with the inquiry into a complex kickback scheme involving the lending of stock to hedge funds and other short-sellers. Resignations at other Wall Street investment houses could soon follow as federal prosecutors get closer to filing criminal charges, according to people familiar with the matter.

In May, BusinessWeek reported that federal investigators are nearing the end of an 18-month probe of the murky world of stock lending. Investigators are examining allegations that employees working on the stock-loan desks of some of the biggest Wall Street firms accepted improper cash payment and other gratuities for referring work to so-called stock-loan finders—middlemen who help firms get their hands on hard-to-borrow shares (see BusinessWeek.com, 5/17/07, "The Crackdown on Stock-Loan Schemes").

The investigators believe that many of these middlemen did little work to justify their fees. But to keep the referrals coming, the middlemen would split their fees with the employees of the Wall Street firms who had hired them.

Resignation Confirmed
So far, federal prosecutors have secured guilty pleas from three confidential witnesses in the case and are expected to file charges in July against as many as a dozen current and former Wall Street employees, say sources familiar with the investigation. The individuals drawing the most scrutiny are ones who either currently or formerly worked at Bear Stearns (BSC), Janney Montgomery Scott, and Morgan Stanley.

The Morgan Stanley vice-president, Peter Sherlock, a 13-year veteran, resigned on June 18, say people familiar with the investigation. Telephone calls for Sherlock were referred to a Morgan Stanley spokesman, who declined to comment. Sherlock's lawyer, John Wallenstein, a Mineola (N.Y.) criminal defense attorney, confirmed his client had resigned, but declined to say why. Wallenstein pointed out that Sherlock has not been charged with any wrongdoing. "I know there is an investigation by the Eastern District of New York," Wallenstein says, referring to federal prosecutors in Brooklyn, N.Y. "I know the SEC is looking at it too." A spokesman for Roslynn Mauskopf, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, declined to comment. An SEC spokesman also wouldn't comment.

Stock Loans' Mysterious Ways
Securities lending is a large, but little-understood business for Wall Street. Investment banks rake in roughly $10 billion a year on the fees they collect for lending stocks and bonds to short-sellers, hedge funds, and other professional traders who bet on falling prices. But the prices charged by Wall Street firms for borrowing stock—particularly for shares of small-cap securities—has been something of a mystery. Hedge fund managers often complain about the lack of predictability in the prices big Wall Street firms charge for borrowing stock. Investigators believe the alleged kickback scheme drove up the borrowing costs for hedge funds and may have cost the funds millions of dollars in additional fees.

In a classic short sale, a trader borrows shares from an investment firm and sells them. If the stock falls as expected, the short-seller can pay back the loan and make a profit by repurchasing the shares at a lower price. When the investment firms don't have enough shares in their inventory, they sometimes seek out independent finders, who work the phones, calling friends, relatives, and buddies at other stock-loan desks to make up the difference. But investigators believe finders often aren't providing a legitimate service.

Matthew Goldstein is an associate editor at BusinessWeek, covering hedge funds and finance.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2007/db20070620_430560.htm?chan=rss_topStorie...

Not that this'll have any effect on us!IMO Elrac

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By Steve V. on 6/21/2007 12:26 PM
Bud, Does that mean that PVTM will cease to exist? My brokerage fiim never heard of the Plus Market Group exchange and they are not sure they can get my stock dividend for me. Reply: Plus has 600 stocks listed. All the major firms know the exchange. Our transfer agent is a major player, Computershare. It has both US and UK units. Your broker is either ignorant or lying.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By Valueinvestor on 6/22/2007 11:02 AM
Bud...would greatly appreciate your comments on the SEC motion to disbar Altomare of USXP...specifically, legally speaking can the Judge impose the sanction and disbar the CEO before the appeal has a chance to wotk its way through the 2nd circuit... Link to SEC motion: http://jimewescamp.250x.com/USXP/receiver.pdf Reply: The Judge's order is stayed pending hearing the appeal.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Seahag on 6/22/2007 11:04 AM

Bud, is this the company you stated had a good busines plan?

Resilience of fraud

By FLOYD NORRIS

Thursday, June 21, 2007
NEW YORK: In its latest quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Universal reports that its suit against the SEC, and an SEC suit "against certain officers" of Universal, "are pending."

It does not mention that the company itself is also a defendant in the SEC suit, nor that during the quarter in question a U.S. judge in New York ruled that the company and the officers had violated securities laws, and ordered them to pay $21.9 million.

The judge described Universal's chief executive, Richard Altomare, and its general counsel, Chris Gunderson, as "repeated and remorseless violators" of the securities laws. He barred Altomare from being an officer or director of any public company, and barred both men from being involved in sales of penny stocks. None of that is mentioned in the quarterly report.

As for the company's suit against the SEC, it does not appear to be pending at all. A U.S. judge in Miami dismissed it in 2005, and that judgment was affirmed by an appeals court in 2006. If there is a further appeal pending, it is not mentioned in the court docket.

The case of Universal Express, a small company that loses money even faster than it issues news releases, is not very important on its own merits. But it shows how hard it can be for the SEC to halt what it views as a fraud. The agency filed suit against Universal in 2004, but the company is still funding itself by issuing billions of unregistered shares.

In Universal's world, it is the victim. It says the SEC only investigated it in retaliation for its criticism of the agency.

Universal says the only issue worth noting is its claim that its stock price fell because of "naked short selling," where shares were sold by traders who neither owned nor borrowed them.

Altomare calls the SEC a "bully" and says the commissioners "will have to answer for their treatment of us whistle-blowers." He is dismissive of Judge Gerard Lynch of the U.S. District Court in New York, who ruled that Universal had violated the law when it issued a series of news releases that were "at best misleading and sometimes wholly fantastical" and used them to sell 500 million shares that were illegally issued from 2002 to 2004.

All New York federal judges, Altomare said, "tend to support the SEC whether or not they read the depositions or research the laws." He said Universal would prevail on appeal. In one news release, the company forecast $9 million in revenue annually from 9,000 private postal stores. But, the judge said, "there is no evidence that Universal Express actually had a relationship with any such store."

Nothing much has changed after the ruling. The latest quarterly report says those 9,000 stores are "members" of its "network." The news releases the judge found to be false are still on the Universal Web site.

If the SEC was upset that Universal Express issued 500 million unregistered shares over 33 months, imagine how it feels about the 5.4 billion unregistered shares issued in the first three months of this year, of which 660 million were sold and the rest issued for "deferred services," which, one supposes, means services the recipients are supposed to provide sometime in the future.

Universal claimed its old stock issues were allowed by a bankruptcy court ruling permitting it to issue stock options when it came out of bankruptcy in 1994. Lynch found that claim baseless and dismissed the company's justifications for some news releases as "flatly ludicrous."

Billions of shares in Universal Express now trade each week on the over-the-counter bulletin board. Calling it a penny stock may be a compliment, since you can get about 20 shares for a penny. But last year it traded as high as 40 cents.

Big numbers are a staple of Universal announcements, but not of its financial statements. The SEC suit cited news releases claiming a total of $885 million in financing, none of which seems to have arrived.

For years Universal has said it hopes to collect hundreds of millions of dollars in judgments from investment bankers involved in a 1997 Universal Express financing.

In 2006, Universal lost $18.9 million, on revenue of just $1.1 million. The board, of which Altomare is the sole member, gave Altomare a $50,000 raise, to $650,000 a year. It also forgave part of $1.6 million in loans to Altomare and his wife. The cash to pay that salary came from the sale of unregistered stock.

In Altomare's view, the issues that bothered the judge are irrelevant. "Long and short of it," he said in a statement, "this is a naked short hallmark case in the making."

Or it is proof that it can take a long time for the SEC to stop a fraud.

Reply: Norris is a prejudiced schmuck. He knows that the Bankruptcy Court Ruling trumps the SEC, and he also knows the trial is scheduled for November, and that pleadings were completed by May 22.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba	By Sean on 6/22/2007 12:55 PM
Bud, I am not the sharpest tool in the draw, but could you enlighten me as to how Blackstone IPO (BX) could be up 15% or thereabouts when the overall market is dowm 150pts the Dow Nasd is down 25pts? I doubt it could be manipulation ..right. The opposite happened to Vonage by the way!!LOL!!!

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Steve V. on 6/22/2007 12:58 PM

Bud,

My broker is neither ignorant nor lying, but he is Canadian. He's trying hard to locate a firm in Canada that is able to trade on the plus exchange (for his client's)even though he will probably not be paid for any of the work he's done for us the last couple years. Apparently the company is not giving him any suggestions either.

I have forwarded this to the UK CEO of PTSP, the plus symbol.

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By anthony kalantzis on 6/23/2007 9:20 AM

A OPEN LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR MR. RICHARD A. ALTOMARE, UNIVERSAL
EXPRESS CEO, FROM HIS SHAREHOLDERS AS THE SEC ATTEMPT TO DESTROY HIM
AND OUR COMPANY.

We are shareholders of Universal Express, symbol USXP.OB, and we are
rising up to have our voices collectively heard in support of our
leader, the CEO of USXP, who we believe has our best interests at
heart, and who has become the target of a despicable attack by the
Securities And Exchange Commission for daring to speak out on the
subject of Naked Short Selling, an illegal criminal activity. Over
the years, the SEC has profited enormously by turning a blind eye on
this practice and failing to enforce the law, thereby becoming a
party involved in this criminal endeavor themselves.

Mr. Altomare has been subject to brutal attacks by the SEC, who is
trying to force him out as CEO. It is our firm belief that Mr.
Altomare is being railroaded by this regulatory agency so the extent
of the criminal activity on naked short selling will not be revealed
to the general public and the ill-gotten gains of those involved
including the aggregate millions (perhaps billions) of dollars the
SEC accumlated with each transaction processed or fee charged, will
never see the light of day in a United States Court of Law.

As shareholders, we are fed up with the little guy being not just
pushed around, but for all intensive purposes killed off, in effect
by the one governing body that the people of the United States expect
to watch over their markets, the SEC, without acquiesence to
greed of the powerful on Wallstreet and the elite of the world who
attempt to play by their own rules, rules that place them above the
law and out of reach of the American judicial system.

We have watched for years as the SEC allowed, and indeed participated
in this illegal activity, first by denying its very existence. We
waited for them to enforce the law, rather than place themselves
above it as modern-day gangsters, instead they seek to oust the one
man we shareholders believe truly speaks for us and our best
interests, Mr. Richard Altomare, and take over themselves our company
through a court appointment, and thereby crush any hope shareholders
have of exposing the SEC and other criminals involved.

Furthermore, we shareholders greatly resent how the United States
Senate, United States Congress, and President of the United States
have ignored this matter, abdicated their responsibility to provide
oversight that is effective, and allowed the SEC to ignore illegal
criminal acts including the practice of naked short selling, to
destroy several thousand small and developing U.S. companies during
the past ten years and is now on the verge of destroying the
strongest voice in America to speak out against this corruption, the
Universal Express CEO, Mr. Richard Altomare, who served this country
as a Marine and member of the U.S. Army.

We shareholders ask, that the case of the SEC versus Universal
Express, Mr. Richard Altomare, and his general counsel Mr. Chris
Gunderson, be brought to the forefront of the American political
scene and that this case be tried in a open court with an open jury
which will prevent the SEC from sweeping this matter under the rug
and getting away with what every day Americans would end up in prison
for.

We further ask that the U.S. and International media pick up our
story. This is a fight of David versus Goliath, and we need your
help. We need CBS, CNBC, Lou Dobbs, The Wallstreet Journal, USA
Today, Dateline, and let us add the bloggers of America who can help
us expose this injustice which our legal system allows to persist and
go unregulated, because the regulators themselves have been behaving
no different than foxes watching the hen house.

We shareholders of Universal Express support Mr. Richard Altomare and
ask you join our campaign to allow him to have his day in court
against the SEC, to allow our nation's justice system to work, to
allow a jury trial before their peers, and let the American people
make the ruling that justice denied to Mr. Altomare on this matter is
justice denied to us all.

And to Mr. Richard Altomare, our CEO, our leader, Richard may you
find the strength to go on and endure this battle and remember when
you carry a just burden, you are a just man.

Sincerely,

XXXX XXXXXXX
Universal Express Shareholders

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Sean on 6/24/2007 10:20 AM

Bud , I thought you and the other readers would like to see this...

H.R. 2755: To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to...

HR 2755 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2755

To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 15, 2007

Mr. PAUL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

A BILL

To abolish the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act'.

SEC. 2. FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD ABOLISHED.

(a) In General- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and each Federal reserve bank are hereby abolished.

(b) Repeal of Federal Reserve Act- Effective at the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Reserve Act is hereby repealed.

(c) Disposition of Affairs-

(1) MANAGEMENT DURING DISSOLUTION PERIOD- During the 1-year period referred to in subsection (a), the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System--

(A) shall, for the sole purpose of winding up the affairs of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks--

(i) manage the employees of the Board and each such bank and provide for the payment of compensation and benefits of any such employee which accrue before the position of such employee is abolished; and

(ii) manage the assets and liabilities of the Board and each such bank until such assets and liabilities are liquidated or assumed by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance with this subsection; and

(B) may take such other action as may be necessary, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to wind up the affairs of the Board and the Federal reserve banks.

(2) LIQUIDATION OF ASSETS-

(A) IN GENERAL- The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall liquidate all assets of the Board and the Federal reserve banks in an orderly manner so as to achieve as expeditious a liquidation as may be practical while maximizing the return to the Treasury.

(B) TRANSFER TO TREASURY- After satisfying all claims against the Board and any Federal reserve bank which are accepted by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and redeeming the stock of such banks, the net proceeds of the liquidation under subparagraph (A) shall be transferred to the Secretary of the Treasury and deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury.

(3) ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITIES- All outstanding liabilities of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks at the time such entities are abolished, including any liability for retirement and other benefits for former officers and employees of the Board or any such bank in accordance with employee retirement and benefit programs of the Board and any such bank, shall become the liability of the Secretary of the Treasury and shall be paid from amounts deposited in the general fund pursuant to paragraph (2) which are hereby appropriated for such purpose until all such liabilities are satisfied.

(d) Report- At the end of the 18-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall submit a joint report to the Congress containing a detailed description of the actions taken to implement this Act and any actions or issues relating to such implementation that remain uncompleted or unresolved as of the date of the report.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2755

Re: Practicing for Patty Cakes with Bubba

By Stephen the Strong on 6/27/2007 11:34 AM

Hi Bud,

Bud can you comment on this article on Univesal Express? What edo you invision happening here with the sEC case against them, can they take over, can they shut the door, can they throw Mr. Altomare out? Are they just trying to save face? Please comment, thanks....

Universal Express Responds to SEC Request
Universal Express, Inc. (OTCBB: USXP) CEO Richard A. Altomare responded to the most recent SEC's revealing and inappropriate request for Receivership. "How can Receivership be requested for a company with a functioning chain of command, with ongoing acquisitions, with increasing valuation and with vibrant subsidiaries?" asked Mr. Altomare.

"Did Universal Express request Receivership to replace SEC management after we received a $700,000,000 judgment proving the existence of naked short selling and the awareness of the SEC's active participation in that illegal practice?" continued Mr. Altomare.

"Did Universal Express request Receivership when 6000 companies were damaged or failed due to the trading problems caused by naked short selling or when the SEC reversed its public statements on the existence of naked short selling or when the SEC issued a criminal counterfeiting grandfather clause and was recently forced to remove it?

"A 'before the appeal' grandstanding Receivership request reveals the SEC's fear of our jury trial appeal. Our entitled jury trial will determine not only if USXP did anything worthy of such attention, but if the SEC's naked short selling cover-up resulted in causing this case in the first place. That jury trial will also determine if the SEC owes the $700,000,000 judgment and has over-regulated, profited from, or damaged other public companies.

"Universal Express is much more than a court case with the SEC. Yet, with no jury trial, no criminal accusations, how does the opposing litigant in an existing legal matter attempt to seize and discredit a company with a proven $700,000,000 judgment against the process which has been permitted by the same litigant?

"Such a premature and legally unfounded press maneuver causes no concern, no capitulation and no docile acceptance of something that would take months to accomplish if there had been no jury trial planned.

"Naked short sellers first demean and bash a company's core business or CEO, then begins short selling the company's value and finally they try to destroy the stock value so that they will never have to pay for their criminal activity. In this case, the only additional ingredient added by the SEC is the avoidance of a jury trial. Apparently, the SEC has learned the pattern taught by professional naked short sellers. Fortunately, our justice department must permit a full jury trial appeal process.

"Throughout the centuries of human development, well-intended government employees, judges and even some journalists have blindly embraced unquestioned status quo practices until the collective intelligence of the common man finally understood that the status quo may have been incorrect.

"Segregation, women's rights, gay rights, fascism and even unpopular wars have taken intelligent and well-intended people decades to realize that the status quo may have been wrong. Naked short selling and today's SEC unchecked policies are part of that same critical thought process. When legal status quo is questioned, the individuals who question those practices must be persistent, resilient and believe the results are worth the battle.

"For 17 years, Universal Express' filings were approved by the SEC. Yet, days after suing the SEC for its naked short selling policy our entire capitalization was attacked by the opposing litigant in our trial. The only defense the SEC feels it has to present is one of immunity from prosecution. Our requested jury trial will question immunity, naked short selling, abuse of power and monies owed to failed public companies. Therefore, it is no surprise that the SEC wants to also run our company during that trial.

"This trial will examine, through full disclosure, the magnitude of the incompetence, abuse of power or criminal activities. The stakes of this case are much more complex than 'paid or friendly' reporters would want the collective intelligent reader to be told.

"I am sure that Rosa Parks, Susan B. Anthony and others, who questioned previously accepted 'legal' practices, were vilified, criticized and even demonized prior to the truth finally surfacing. When the cause is just, the enemy must be engaged. Naked short selling and the unchecked abuse of power of a governmental agency are such valuable causes worthy of the battle. We will help the truth to surface.

"Universal Express intends to vigorously defend the rights of its officers, employees, shareholders and all worldwide investors. We have requested a jury trial for full disclosure and let us not forget that all components of this company continue functioning and prospering.

"After all the facts are heard, Universal Express will have aided in improving our future trading system, create a healthier relationship between the regulatory agency and its member companies, as well as, receiving the funds its shareholders have earned during this ten year process of aiding in the surfacing of the truth," concluded Richard A. Altomare, CEO.

About Universal Express

Universal Express, Inc. is a 23-year-old logistics and transportation conglomerate with multiple developing subsidiaries and services. For additional information please visit www.usxp.com

Safe Harbor Statement under the Private securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: The statements contained herein, which are not historical, are forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements including, but not limited to, certain delays beyond the Company's control with respect to market acceptance of new technologies, products and services, delays in testing and evaluation of products and services, and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Add to Digg Bookmark with del.icio.us Add to Newsvine

Contact:
Chris Gunderson
Universal Express, Inc.
917-639-4157

Reply: The SEC is terrified of a Jury trial of any kind. These actions won't save them from that.