RE:RE:RE:RE:wowTheoldmariner wrote:
Off for a late evening, walk..before i leave..An Insider MUST? smiling here as the wonderful fall sun sets.
My friend, today is saturday the 6th September , of the year 2014...please place your insight on the very real hard fact that this new world has many levels .. the term .....MUST.....you for you another for them..
This illusion is still feed to sheeple.......
the small value investors which are still standing ....still with wool they have not been yet harvested.
NOW..the rules as solid as the illusion of you actually holding your shares in your account ....well you understand..can the house short them ....must..honor? trust?
An insider must report if he sold his shares. If an insider does not and the price falls, he can be sued for "insider trading", especially if it is proved they knew the information before publishing.
It's beautiful theoldmariner write beautiful texts to lull the newbies on the forum and show you're in control of everything, but the rules are there.
Yes, we regularly hear that the market is controlled, that action is controlled, the big investors knew something. All this is difficult to prove if an insider is not involved monetarily.
Yes, the law can be difficult to apply. There are many people traveling at 115 km / h in an area of 100 km / h and go unpunished. By cons, if an insider own 16 million shares and sell without saying so, one day, the financial statements will be filed and questions will be posed. Here, the facts is the facts. If someone says 16 million purchases, you can be sure that it is expected to see 16 million sales one day. Purely accounting!
You can say what you want, because nothing here implies you. It's easy to look over everything!
Again, an insider must report purchases and sales!