點解美國呢D會出事，香港唔會呢?
1 :
GS(14)@2012-04-26 22:29:01用技術分析做偽裝，實際同D老細...，唉
http://sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2012/comp-pr2012-72.pdf
2.
The defendants' story was persuasive. Approximately 75,000 investors, the vast majority ofwhom lived in the United States, paid at least $1,200,000 for annual subscriptions to the Doubling StockS newsletter and copies ofthe robot software.
3.
In reality, the "stock picking robot" was a work of fiction. The stock r~commendations the defendants sent to their subscribers were not generated by any technical analysis. The stocks were instead those that the defendants had been paid by other promoters to tout. Unknown to their subscriber victims, the defendants maintained a separate web-based business under the name equitypromoter.com in which they offered their services as stock touters. On the equitypromoter.com website, the defendants claimed that their investor newsletters could cause a stock's price and volume to "rocket." The defendants received at least $1,865,000 in fees from stock promoters for their stock touting services. The defendants never disclosed to their investor victims the relationship between their two lines ofbusiness.
2 :
GS(14)@2012-04-26 22:30:0919.
On doublingstocks.com, the defendants claimed that Cohen "developed the famous 'Global Alpha' computer stock trading model" as a contractor for the Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. ("Goldman Sachs"). The Global Alpha program, the defendants claimed, in "most years is responsible for $4,000,000,000+ Annual Trading Profit."
20.
The defendants' representations about "Michael Cohen" were false. No such employee or contractor worked in that capacity at Goldman Sachs.
21.
On doublingstocks.com, the defendants described how Marl arrived at its stock picks. Defendants made the following claims:
•
Marl works by analyzing each stock using "technical analysis;"
•
Marl analyzes each OTCBB and Pink Sheet stock, predicting future price direction based on past performance;
•
Marl looks for companies that are fOI111ing bullish trading patterns;
•
Marl identifies "in split second timing" distinct trading patterns "from a vast range of6578, held in Marl's internal database";
•
Marl can process 1,986,832 mathematical calculations per second;
•
When Marl identifies a "clean, uncongested chart pattern that is proven to yield a good risk/reward," Marl adds the stock to its "watch list";
•
Marl is programmed on an "evolutionary framework," meaning that as Marl is watching hundreds ofstock patterns it actually learns the most likely direction ofstock prices under thousands ofsituations -"The longer Marl is allowed to run on a computer ... The More Advanced He Becomes!"; and
•
"While monitoring hundreds ofstocks in the watch list ... Marl may notice that a stock has been hitting resistance [at a particular price] .... Ifthe stock breaks that level (meaning there is a good chance it will 'breakout' and run much higher) the bot will start analyzing the stock in more detail ... looking at its longer term weekly trading pattern and applying its vast range of criteria. Any stocks that reach this stage have been under close scrutiny and passed a variety ofcomplex tests. Marl will then analyze the best entry point (at which to buy the stock) with the lowest risk to potential reward."
22. The defendants' characterization ofthe software led investors to believe
that they were receiving stock recommendations based on a complex, statistically-driven
analysis.
23. To lend further credence to Marl's claimed analytical abilities, the
defendants on doublingstocks.com provided a list ofMarl's supposed past stock picks,
claiming that the prices increased in value by 200-400% after Marl selected them.
24. The defendants' claims about the Marl newsletter and software were
untrue.
In truth, the newsletters and software sold by the defendants neither contained
nor performed any real analysis ofsecurities or their trading patterns. The stocks
"recommended" by the newsletters and software were simply those that promoters had
paid the defendants to tout.
B. Payments Made by Stock Promoters
25.
The defendants' activities followed a predictable pattern. They received payments from stock promoters. The defendants issued newsletters touting the stocks owned by those promoters. The promoters then took advantage ofthe increased prices and liquidity by selling their own shares.
26.
The defendants received at least $1,865,000 in payments from stock promoters who, in most cases, sold large numbers of shares into the defendants' stock promotions.
27.
The stock promoters wired payments to the defendants' bank account in the United Kingdom.