Tuesday, July 05, 2005

Never A Dull Moment

Mark Faulk, in one of his latest installments of The Faulking Truth, does a follow-up on the Global Links story - a saga that highlights the depth of the Fail To Deliver problem, and raises troubling questions about the role that the SEC and the DTCC are playing. His piece can be seen here. I note with wry amusement that the reporter he takes on as being one of the greatest disseminator of misleading information is one of our favorites: Carol Remond. She also happens to be the reporter that the hedge fund drive to discover my identity was shifted to when the issue became too embarrassing for WSJ Jesse Eisinger to pursue.

Here are a few select quotations from Mark's outstanding piece:

"... It seems that Robert Simpson, CEO of a small company in Michigan called Zann Corp., had bought every available share of Global Links Corp after the company had reduced their outstanding shares to about 1.1 million shares from more than 350 millions shares in early February. Incredibly, over the next two days, over 50 million shares traded hands, even though Simpson owned every share, and there were only 1.1 million shares even in existence.

The Global Links story is one that, like the Stockgate scandal itself, just won't go away. While some articles have called it the "poster child" of the Stockgate scandal, others have been more concerned with discussing their lack of financial success over the past few years, while ignoring the more important issue of how brokers could buy and sell almost fifty times the total issued shares in only two days, especially since those shares were presumably in the account of just one shareholder.

The Faulking Truth has received numerous emails from other GLKC stockholders who held shares totaling over 400,000 during the same time period. In fact, Global Links representative Patrick Donahoo says that "During the month of February, we were literally besieged by stockholders who were digging for information. While we cannot confirm exactly how many shares were purchased and held, we believe that this number exceeds 20 million shares." Twenty million shares out of a total available float of 1,158,064. Where did the other nineteen million shares come from?"

Now, I may not be a mathematician, but even I can understand that the likelihood of all of this being innocent is nil. And yet the system keeps insisting that there's no problem, and the DTCC is pushing the states to eliminate requirements for any paper certificates, thereby eliminating the only mechanism with which investors can verify that they aren't being screwed by the participants. Does any of this seem a trifle alarming? The entire trading/regulatory framework is simply ignoring the elephant in the room, while the DTCC works frantically to eliminate the last of the proof of malfeasance.

What's wrong with this picture?

Read all of Mark's piece - it's a stunner.


Post a Comment

<< Home