|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.71.1712.3"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Any commodity traders in RT? If yes, I'll be
interested to start a discussion on upcoming opportunities.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>I trade the softs market, mostly the
sugar.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Thu Dec 18 13:59:59 1997
Received: from smtp1.nwnexus.com (smtp1.nwnexus.com [198.137.231.16])
by mail1.halcyon.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA12534
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 13:50:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from accessone.com (list.listserver.com [198.68.191.15])
by smtp1.nwnexus.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA03080
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 13:50:04 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id NAA19251;
Thu, 18 Dec 1997 13:48:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out1.ibm.net (out1.ibm.net [165.87.194.252])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id NAA19045
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 13:46:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ezhvuvqo (slip-32-100-113-27.ny.us.ibm.net [32.100.113.27]) by out1.ibm.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA302178; Thu, 18 Dec 1997 21:46:18 GMT
Message-Id: <3499A858.6E10@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 16:48:56 -0600
Reply-To: droex@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: THE DOCTOR <droex@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Norman, help me out.
References: <01BD0BB9.A50EAE60@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3499ADE1.4C34@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-To: nwinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Cc: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.02 (Win95; I)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
Status: O
I said I won't beat this to death so I won't but Leeb lost on the 1st
amendment issue. The issue wasn't over the registration of newsletter
writers at all. That issue has been upheld on the SEC level...it the
states that have a problem with that. What Leeb lost on was the issue
of a 1st amendment protection as it applies to regulated commerce and
that appears to be how the SEC is going to try to get these guys
stopped.
The CFTC case relates to the S & P timing service and registration under
CFTC rules and a general fraud case(since my posting I've had about two
dozen private e mails from folks looking to join the case...again this
debate can become one's life work and it ain't gonna happen again). The
CFTC was still deposing his former traders as of preThanksgiving and
that case is still pending. The CFTC is looking at the issue of
registration as I understand it and what Leeb did in the interim was
move from futures to securities option because of the perception that
the CFTC is no an uglier dog than the SEC..this is a huge change of
mindset..because in the past the CFTC was viewed as a pushover and the
SEC was viewed as tough. This is ironic given what I do for a
living(work for CBOE), because much of the issue of spinning off the
CBOE by the CBOT was the issue of not having the SEC as their watchdog.
Having said that the real issue will not, IMHO, end up with the the CFTC
or the SEC, the real issue will be the enforcement by the states. They
are becoming the real ugly dogs. Blue sky changed dramatically over the
last few years so that many instruments, such as options, are no longer
subject to state blue sky issues. They are now looking for, I've been
told, new revenue from the advisory business. That states seem to make
the case that they have the right to regulate various forms of commerce
the occurs from or into their state...and this is the new Ugly dog. The
states are the ones going after Wade Cook as an example. The securities
industry had very little authority to go after an author for his
writings(as, IMHO, they shouldn't)but they claim the ability to go after
the internet, fax, mail business. And they are going after enforcement
like banshees. Their activity is driven by customer complaints and the
"costs" of the services provided. Most states have some real vague
"fair practice" laws and this is the stuff their using.
In the end the issue is there are some good people out there and some
bad people.......it's kinda like the pornography....I know it when I see
it. It's too bad that some of the worst people use the 1st amendment
defense...and good ethically people worry about the 1st amendment issue
as we all should.
|