CrowdCheck Blog
Online securities platforms should be paying attention to the Lorenzo case, which the Supreme Court decided last month concerning the scope of Rule 10b-5 fraud liability.
The case involved a broker who sent out a couple of emails at the direction of his boss. The boss created the content of the emails and approved them. All Mr. Lorenzo did, in effect, was add his name and press send. But he knew that there were misstatements in those emails.
It’s already clear that anyone who makes a false…
This entry is filed under Disclosure, Fraud, Liability
Online securities platforms should be paying attention to the Lorenzo case, which the Supreme Court decided last month concerning the scope of Rule 10b-5 fraud liability.
The case involved a broker who sent out a couple of emails at the direction of his boss. The boss created the content of the emails and approved them. All Mr. Lorenzo did, in effect, was add his name and press send. But he knew that there were misstatements in those emails.
It’s already clear that anyone who makes a false…
This entry is filed under Disclosure, Fraud, Liability
Online securities platforms should be paying attention to the Lorenzo case, which the Supreme Court decided last month concerning the scope of Rule 10b-5 fraud liability.
The case involved a broker who sent out a couple of emails at the direction of his boss. The boss created the content of the emails and approved them. All Mr. Lorenzo did, in effect, was add his name and press send. But he knew that there were misstatements in those emails.
It’s already clear that anyone who makes a false…
This entry is filed under Disclosure, Fraud, Liability
We’ve noticed something interesting recently: Regulation A filings by companies that used to be SEC-reporting companies with quotes on the OTC Pink market, who have ceased to file reports with the SEC and whose trading activity on OTC has flatlined. Why would such companies file for a Reg A offering? Especially since so many of them are complete losers with weird agglomerations of business lines resulting from multiple reverse mergers (“We are a holding company operating in the mattress, muffin…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation, Regulation A, Securities Law
We’ve noticed something interesting recently: Regulation A filings by companies that used to be SEC-reporting companies with quotes on the OTC Pink market, who have ceased to file reports with the SEC and whose trading activity on OTC has flatlined. Why would such companies file for a Reg A offering? Especially since so many of them are complete losers with weird agglomerations of business lines resulting from multiple reverse mergers (“We are a holding company operating in the mattress, muffin…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation, Regulation A, Securities Law
We’ve noticed something interesting recently: Regulation A filings by companies that used to be SEC-reporting companies with quotes on the OTC Pink market, who have ceased to file reports with the SEC and whose trading activity on OTC has flatlined. Why would such companies file for a Reg A offering? Especially since so many of them are complete losers with weird agglomerations of business lines resulting from multiple reverse mergers (“We are a holding company operating in the mattress, muffin…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation, Regulation A, Securities Law
We’ve noticed something interesting recently: Regulation A filings by companies that used to be SEC-reporting companies with quotes on the OTC Pink market, who have ceased to file reports with the SEC and whose trading activity on OTC has flatlined. Why would such companies file for a Reg A offering? Especially since so many of them are complete losers with weird agglomerations of business lines resulting from multiple reverse mergers (“We are a holding company operating in the mattress, muffin…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation, Regulation A, Securities Law
Well, actually nothing of the sort, but did I get your attention? The SEC is continuing to bring suit against ICO scammers. This one got my attention because (a) the scammers stuck the SEC seal on their website and tried to make out that they were a regulated entity and (b) said they could sell under Regulation A, when they hadn’t filed a Form 1-A with the SEC.
Two things here: First, these are dumb criminals. If you can’t work out that the SEC really likes its seal and takes it terribly…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation A, SEC
Well, actually nothing of the sort, but did I get your attention? The SEC is continuing to bring suit against ICO scammers. This one got my attention because (a) the scammers stuck the SEC seal on their website and tried to make out that they were a regulated entity and (b) said they could sell under Regulation A, when they hadn’t filed a Form 1-A with the SEC.
Two things here: First, these are dumb criminals. If you can’t work out that the SEC really likes its seal and takes it terribly…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation A, SEC
Well, actually nothing of the sort, but did I get your attention? The SEC is continuing to bring suit against ICO scammers. This one got my attention because (a) the scammers stuck the SEC seal on their website and tried to make out that they were a regulated entity and (b) said they could sell under Regulation A, when they hadn’t filed a Form 1-A with the SEC.
Two things here: First, these are dumb criminals. If you can’t work out that the SEC really likes its seal and takes it terribly…
This entry is filed under Fraud, Regulation A, SEC