<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Score another point for Mark Cuban in SEC battle]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/scandals/" rel="tag">Scandals</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/05/mark_cuban.jpg" alt="" />The SEC's insider trading case against Mark Cuban is proving to be quite different from the usual open and shut matters we've come to expect from the commission. As Jonathan Berr <a href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/05/29/mark-cubans-battle-with-the-sec-will-be-nasty-mc-ready-needs/">reported yesterday on DailyFinance</a>, some major legal experts have defended Mark Cuban's insistence that he didn't qualify as an insider when engaged in the trades in question.<br /><br />Worse news for the SEC: Cuban has taken the unusual step of <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/05/29/mark-cuban-sues-sec-over-insider-trading-probe/">suing the SEC</a> for denying him proper access to documents that detail the SEC's allegations and evidence against him.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Score another point for Mark Cuban in SEC battle</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/">Score another point for Mark Cuban in SEC battle</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19055405/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/02/score-another-point-for-mark-cuban-in-sec-battle/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>mama.com</category><category>mark cuban</category><category>MarkCuban</category><category>sec</category><category>sec enforcement</category><category>SecEnforcement</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Why E*Trade shareholders should worry about the $1 million SEC fine]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/press-releases/" rel="tag">Press Releases</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/etfc/" rel="tag">E*TRADE (ETFC)</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/07/dollarsign-at150-02blog.jpg" /><a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/e-trade-financial-corporation/etfc/nas">E*Trade</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/e-trade-financial-corporation/etfc/nas">ETFC</a>) was fined $1 million by the <a href="http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/etrade-to-pay-1-million-for-money/n20080730115309990025">Securities and Exchange Commission </a>for failing to comply with federal anti-money laundering laws. The company, which did not admit guilt in the enforcement action, will pay an even steeper price over the long term, which is a good reason to avoid the company's stock.<br /><br />What many investors and members of the press forget about government fines is that the dollar amount does not tell the full story. E*Trade will likely spend far more than $1 million upgrading its computer systems after it failed to verify the identities of more than 65,000 of its customers as required by SEC rules and the USA Patriot Act. Moreover, the company could face countless legal headaches from people whose stolen identities may have been used to set up phony E*Trade accounts. Let's not forget about the money laundering cases involving drug dealers and terrorists whose funding sources were not properly verified because of E*Trade.
<p>The SEC, for one, has found no excuse for E*Trade's inaction to correct the problem, which it knew about for years.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Why E*Trade shareholders should worry about the $1 million SEC fine</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/">Why E*Trade shareholders should worry about the $1 million SEC fine</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:33:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/etrade-to-pay-1-million-for-money/n20080730115309990025>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1271012/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/30/why-e-trade-shareholders-should-worry-about-the-1-million-sec-f/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>ETFC</category><category>etrade</category><category>inthenews</category><category>money laudering</category><category>MoneyLaudering</category><category>sec</category><category>sec enforcement</category><category>SecEnforcement</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Berr]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:33:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
