Chillin' out till it needs to be funded
On how long “soft dollars” have been peddled to entice insider trading
Well, it is Preet Bharara’s show and he has decided to give it a specific shape to focus on another little something which may be debatable as a practice but I am not sure it is legally tenable to prosecution or something which needs moral stricture against it. And believe me, I never needed to be soft to those who were in he wrong. In fact the so called dollars like frequent flyers have always been enticement and thus in fact for the consumer they offer power in his hand to influence the future of the business.
I like to allocate these rewards back into things that tell future analysts that there is a specific reason ( especially when you can avoid being churlish about it) and when market research itself does not give you that one on one reprieve to get your point on the game and get a 78 yard touchdown.
In fact browsing habits and the so called internet play that starts with eye balls has always had a crucial leg where the receipt of those rewards becomes the ultimate objective of the browsing where there is a likelihood of mis-use.in the current context, soft rewards were even informally contracted to select people in lieu of information where it may have crossed a big line but the ramifications of the action have to stay within the confines of battling the issue without throwing the baby out with the bath water
(WSJ) SAC Capital Advisors, a $12 billion hedge-fund firm run by Steven Cohen, told clients this past week that federal authorities appear focused on soft-dollar payments. SAC said it was basing that impression on a subpoena the firm received Monday afternoon, which it called “extraordinarily broad.”
Federal criminal charges filed Wednesday against Don Ching Trang Chu, who worked for a California expert-network firm called Primary Global Research LLC, highlighted soft-dollar payments his firm earned for hooking up alleged tipsters with hedge-fund clients.
Also in as far as participants on all sides are concerned, consumers can to an extent come to love the feeling of control over features and thence the future of that business with such rewards making their mundane armchair life enticing. The same should never have been allowed to become a tool for such a greedy profession of ours especially one that loves to make some long term arrangements every year and there lies the magic of having a Bear, a lehman and a Dan Chu sell the farm or give an impression of doing so. And that gives an option to regulators to meaningfully contribute by nothing else than clamping down on soft dollars themselves..which wold be a pity.
Network users would remain in play in most business models from here as also soft dollars. Is there a way anyone can propose to control the same?
P.s. The portfolio of the said funds is quite in the public domain itself (Google is the best, tickerspy.com has detailed lists) and the finds have been hard midcaps where the whole canvas has the research guy and the PE very much needed as insiders. What would be insider trading here? And the others are those in retail and finance with weekly reports related to GDP and contributions affecting the outcome..It would be very difficult to attribute trades to inside information for worth while prosecution?