Now that, you know, certain information has come to light, and given the nature of all this new shit? It has occurred to FINRA that perhaps running fingerprints and politely requesting that member firms poke around a bit deeper into their potential hires’ disciplinary history will not suffice to keep The Wall Street Journal from running extremely embarrassing exposes about its impotence. Read more »

It turns out that scrupulousness is not an attribute that can be claimed by all members of the brokering class. Or, rather, it can be and often is claimed, albeit with a singular and spectacular disregard for the truthfulness of said claim. Read more »

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority put out its annual list of New Year’s resolutions yesterday, and one of them is a pledge to keep an eye on the brokers on its naughty list and the people who hire them (often en masse). Read more »

  • 21 Aug 2013 at 3:07 PM

Pot Stock Pitches Might Be Illegal In Two Ways

FYI: Read more »

  • 12 Aug 2013 at 3:46 PM

E*Trade Has A Problem

It wants/needs to sell its market-making unit to appease regulators, but also needs to stop giving the unit quite so much business to appease regulators. Read more »

  • 12 Aug 2013 at 10:53 AM

Research Analysts Are Talking To Companies Again

Apparently FINRA is looking into whether sell-side research analysts are doing some naughty things, which is an evergreen topic, though you might almost imagine that the current round is being prompted by the return to public life of Eliot Spitzer, who gets a quote in the DealBook article. Eliot Spitzer: not a fan of research-analyst naughtiness.

It’s hard to tell if the analysts are doing naughty things but, probably, right? Basically the analysts are meeting with potential issuers before those issuers’ IPOs, which is fine. But at those meetings, which tend to be arranged by “so-called I.P.O. advisers” like Solebury, Rothschild or Lazard,1 they might be talking about the IPO and the analysts’ views of the issuers, which is not fine. They’re “supposed to discuss only broad industry trends at these meetings” and defer to their bankers for “specific views on a company, like earnings models or potential I.P.O. pricing,” because the idea is that the analyst meetings are not supposed to be used by the issuers to select underwriters. They’re just a chat! It’s like, hey, I’m in this industry, you cover this industry, let’s talk about broad industry trends! For my general education! Because while, yes, me and my IPO advisers sitting next to me are picking underwriters for our IPO, and while your bankers are pitching us “within hours” of this meeting, right now I’m entirely focused on a general chat about broad industry trends. That’s all this is. Read more »

  • 09 Aug 2013 at 11:47 AM

Fired FINRA Employee Was Nothing If Not Persistent

She reapplied for her jobs (and a couple others where the regulator had openings) 574 times, sent the object of her affection LinkedIn requests, love letters, coffee mugs, and golf balls, and sent the object of her scorn a bunch of menacing messages about looking both ways before crossing, as well as unsolicited gay and straight porno mags. Read more »