But if people aren't allowed to flip, wouldn't trading volume be lower (actually zero, if everybody respected the rule). And low volume stocks are known to be more volatile. So, can anybody explain me the mechanism of this restriction?
Yeah, you're right. The "letter" states more or less clearly what the restrictions are. However many of us started undertaking steps to transfer their accounts long before they got their letter. Indeed, when the first rumors came out by end of may, it was not yet clear whether the IPO would finally take place in July, August, or whenever. And E-Trade warned that it could take up to 6 weeks to transfer an account. So the "careful" person better undertook the necessary steps right away, in order not to miss the deadline.
However, you could just go to your friendly neighborhood bank and fill out a form to participate in the IPO. Your local bank will then work together with Goldman Sachs to get your order filled. Even if you are a furriner. Even if you are piss poor. This morning, I asked my bank about it, and they told me "no problem". Hey, my bank has even lower fees ($25) for these kinds of deals than it has for regular trades ($75)!
There is a catch though: you probably wouldn't be able to leverage your "letter" that way, and without it the probability of getting any stock would be extremely low. Or does anybody know a way to get the RHAT letter acknowledged via this channel?
Ya know, the odd thing about these supposed SEC rules is that the SEC ignores that they exist...
Here's what happened to me: Got the letter, transferred my existing brokerage account from TradingDirect to E*Trade, only to learn later on that "securities industries regulations" prevented me from participating because of my nationality. This information was not given to me prior to transfering my account despite a specific question about the subject. At E-Trade, I not only pay higher transaction fees than I did at TradingDirect, but I also get a worse service (no limit prices expressed in 1/32), for no compensation (the possibility of doing IPOs was a lure)
Puzzled, I called the SEC at 202 942 7040. There I spoke to Mr Jack Hardy, who confirmed to me that no such regulation exists. Apparently E*Trade is just limiting eligibility for their own convenience, and are cowardly hiding behind phantasy regulations.
Actually, by claiming the existence of these phony regulations, E*Trade may not only be misleading potential investors, but they may also be misrepresenting the SEC's position. Mr Hardy recommended me to fax a written complaint to 202 942 9634 (attn. Jack Hardy) and cc it to 650 331 6806 (attn. Henri Carter, Vice President of Compliance Department E*Trade Securities Inc.), which I did. So far, no change yet apart from a clearer message on their subscription page. However, I noted that the deadline has been moved to August 4th. This gives us another week, and if enough people make their voices heard, the SEC might lean on E*Trade hard enough to get us furriners our part of the cake too.
Yeah, like the car dealership not selling you the car on pretense that you must be 36 to own one. Except, as everyone knows, there is no such law. Yeah, Redhat isn't responsible, but E-Trade certainly is!
Here's what happened to me: Got the letter, transferred my existing brokerage account from TradingDirect to E*Trade, only to learn later on that "securities industries regulations" prevented me from participating because of my nationality. This information was not given to me prior to transfering my account despite a specific question about the subject. At E-Trade, I not only pay higher transaction fees than I did at TradingDirect, but I also get a worse service (no limit prices expressed in 1/32), for no compensation (the possibility of doing IPOs was a lure)
Puzzled, I called the SEC at 202 942 7040. There I spoke to Mr Jack Hardy, who confirmed to me that no such regulation exists. Apparently E*Trade is just limiting eligibility for their own convenience, and are cowardly hiding behind phantasy regulations.
Actually, by claiming the existence of these phony regulations, E*Trade may not only be misleading potential investors, but they may also be misrepresenting the SEC's position. Mr Hardy recommended me to fax a written complaint to 202 942 9634 (attn. Jack Hardy) and cc it to 650 331 6806 (attn. Henri Carter, Vice President of Compliance Department E*Trade Securities Inc.), which I did. So far, no change yet apart from a clearer message on their subscription page. However, I noted that the deadline has been moved to August 4th. This gives us another week, and if enough people make their voices heard, the SEC might lean on E*Trade hard enough to get us furriners our part of the cake too.
I understand that by "cryptographically blessed", you mean a client that sends a "secure" hash based on its own binary and on a challenge from the server.
The problem with this approach is that it can be defeated easily by keeping both the correct and the broken clients around. The broken client would be the one that actually runs, and the correct one would merely be used as data to compute the "secure" hash.
Re:They're Cute and all....
on
Penguin Pets
·
· Score: 1
>So if your happy little penguin takes to using that open computer on the floor as a toilet.... ... a well behaved penguin will only do that if said computer runs Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
No, other people can participate as well 1 week later, but they have a far lower probability of getting any shares.
But if people aren't allowed to flip, wouldn't trading volume be lower (actually zero, if everybody respected the rule). And low volume stocks are known to be more volatile. So, can anybody explain me the mechanism of this restriction?
Sure. Here it is.
Yeah, you're right. The "letter" states more or less clearly what the restrictions are. However many of us started undertaking steps to transfer their accounts long before they got their letter. Indeed, when the first rumors came out by end of may, it was not yet clear whether the IPO would finally take place in July, August, or whenever. And E-Trade warned that it could take up to 6 weeks to transfer an account. So the "careful" person better undertook the necessary steps right away, in order not to miss the deadline.
There is a catch though: you probably wouldn't be able to leverage your "letter" that way, and without it the probability of getting any stock would be extremely low. Or does anybody know a way to get the RHAT letter acknowledged via this channel?
Here's what happened to me:
Got the letter, transferred my existing brokerage account from TradingDirect to E*Trade, only to learn later on that "securities industries regulations" prevented me from participating because of my nationality. This information was not given to me prior to transfering my account despite a specific question about the subject. At E-Trade, I not only pay higher transaction fees than I did at TradingDirect, but I also get a worse service (no limit prices expressed in 1/32), for no compensation (the possibility of doing IPOs was a lure)
Puzzled, I called the SEC at 202 942 7040. There I spoke to Mr Jack Hardy, who confirmed to me that no such regulation exists. Apparently E*Trade is just limiting eligibility for their own convenience, and are cowardly hiding behind phantasy regulations.
Actually, by claiming the existence of these phony regulations, E*Trade may not only be misleading potential investors, but they may also be misrepresenting the SEC's position. Mr Hardy recommended me to fax a written complaint to 202 942 9634 (attn. Jack Hardy) and cc it to 650 331 6806 (attn. Henri Carter, Vice President of Compliance Department E*Trade Securities Inc.), which I did. So far, no change yet apart from a clearer message on their subscription page. However, I noted that the deadline has been moved to August 4th. This gives us another week, and if enough people make their voices heard, the SEC might lean on E*Trade hard enough to get us furriners our part of the cake too.
Here's what happened to me: Got the letter, transferred my existing brokerage account from TradingDirect to E*Trade, only to learn later on that "securities industries regulations" prevented me from participating because of my nationality. This information was not given to me prior to transfering my account despite a specific question about the subject. At E-Trade, I not only pay higher transaction fees than I did at TradingDirect, but I also get a worse service (no limit prices expressed in 1/32), for no compensation (the possibility of doing IPOs was a lure)
Puzzled, I called the SEC at 202 942 7040. There I spoke to Mr Jack Hardy, who confirmed to me that no such regulation exists. Apparently E*Trade is just limiting eligibility for their own convenience, and are cowardly hiding behind phantasy regulations.
Actually, by claiming the existence of these phony regulations, E*Trade may not only be misleading potential investors, but they may also be misrepresenting the SEC's position. Mr Hardy recommended me to fax a written complaint to 202 942 9634 (attn. Jack Hardy) and cc it to 650 331 6806 (attn. Henri Carter, Vice President of Compliance Department E*Trade Securities Inc.), which I did. So far, no change yet apart from a clearer message on their subscription page. However, I noted that the deadline has been moved to August 4th. This gives us another week, and if enough people make their voices heard, the SEC might lean on E*Trade hard enough to get us furriners our part of the cake too.
The problem with this approach is that it can be defeated easily by keeping both the correct and the broken clients around. The broken client would be the one that actually runs, and the correct one would merely be used as data to compute the "secure" hash.
>So if your happy little penguin takes to using that open computer on the floor as a toilet....
... a well behaved penguin will only do that if said computer runs Windows.