Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 491 posts

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#391

Post by red-iron-pine »

paulsutter wrote: post #386
mcoliver wrote: post #120

Simultaneously they are opening up 0DTE options on certain stocks starting with large market caps but don't be surprised when this expands. Currently this was limited to large etfs like SPX. They are also extending trading hours towards 24/7 and eventually 365. How they square increasing liquidity with delaying information is insane. I know there is a lot of manipulation to make quarterly numbers and the tax code is…

Don't invest in companies that disclose enough information. They aren't banning quarterly reporting, they'd just no longer require it.

there is no F500 company that likes quarterly filing.

this is why they've been lobbying for it, and with Trump in power they pushed and got it.

once it is gone none of them will do it, or at best will do it half-heartedly for a while.

5 years after its repeal there will be no large company doing it regularly

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#393

Post by red-iron-pine »

GolfPopper wrote: post #317
SilverElfin wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a manipulation enabler. I’m surprised no one is mentioning this, but it’ll allow companies like SpaceX and Tesla to avoid scrutiny. The other changes the SEC and NASDAQ are rushing all have donors behind them. That’s how this openly corrupt administration works but it’s also how America has generally operated in the past, only to a smaller degree.

> This is a manipulation enabler. One facet of the Trump administration that still manages to surprise me is now some action that is nakedly corrupt, or stupid, or destructive will be undertaken, and people will scramble to come up with explanations for why it might be done in good faith, or as part of some clever plan. We've been watching Donald Trump operate in national politics for over a decade (and seen him in b…

rubes gonna rube

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#394

Post by fc417fc802 »

hannasanarion wrote: post #365
fc417fc802 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If everyone is legally required to share it then we're all in the same boat.

Financials aren't like technology or IP where having the information open to all (perhaps with limited monopolies on usage a la patents) is essentially for the betterment of all mankind, they can be more like order of battle in a war zone. If your competitors know that your Florida subsidiary is running inefficiently and being subsidized by your successful business elsewhere, they can target their own operations in F…

Sure, but others can also do that to your competitor. Hence my comment that everyone's in the same boat. The playing field would be level and the players would adapt to the new environment.

Of course I realize it's possible it might introduce systemic problems that I'm unaware of.

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#395

Post by philipwhiuk »

bostik wrote: post #284
gzread wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw this as a serious proposal somewhere but I can't remember where. There are exchanges out there that run continuously but with delayed information feeds.

The best known (at least in the tech circles - in good part thanks to HN and Matt Levine) is probably IEX. The exchange guarantees that every participant is behind the exact same time delay. And they do that by having a sufficiently long spool of optic fibre between the exchange "broadcast switch" and the market maker computers. Simple and effective. Relies only on laws of physics to create the delay. There are also…

More than tech circles - it's one of the key parts of Flash Boys (by Michael Lewis [of Big Short, Liar's Poker, etc])

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#396

Post by fc417fc802 »

vannevar wrote: post #389
fc417fc802 wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought in that case nvidia was (approximately) purchasing stock in exchange for hardware? Which AFAIK is the entire point of stock - selling it to raise needed capital.

And if they actually constructed the deal that way, it would be fine. But by essentially creating a sham sale where they return the cash back to the customer in return for equity, Nvidia can book revenue and claim non-existent cash flow. The key is that the sale would not have happened without the corresponding equity deal. Nvidia had no discretion to use that cash any other way, so the "cash flow" in that case is il…

I don't see the issue. Goods valued at that amount changed hands. Why shouldn't bartering be booked as cash flow? The regulator is going to require you to value it for them regardless.

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#397

Post by giantg2 »

The article is sparse on details. I think large companies should continue to report quarterly. I think semi-annual reporting for small caps could be a good thing since it would reduce the costs associated with preparing the reports. Some states allow for this type of lower frequency reporting for taxes based on the size of the obligation.

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#398

Post by fc417fc802 »

withinboredom wrote: post #360
fc417fc802 wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For it to not be fraud you'd have to actually exchange services proportional to the line items. That isn't what was described. Falsifying line items to juice your numbers is fraud plain and simple.

The company I'm a director for licenses IP from my company. The company wouldn't exist without my IP (I'm one of the founders). Yet, I'm also a customer of the same. Dollars in/out, we're all kosher. This isn't fraud, it's just how companies work.

So long as the prices are fair and reasonable, sure. But that doesn't enable you to run up an arbitrarily large bill without either doing an arbitrary amount of actual work or committing fraud.

Re: US SEC preparing to scrap quarterly reporting requirement

#400

Post by KK7NIL »

anonu wrote: post #358
ginkoleaf wrote: post #83

This seems like bad news for regular investors, and good news for insiders. Reporting is burdensome, sure, but being listed on public exchanges is not a requirement.

> being listed on public exchanges is not a requirement it used to be raise money. now that money is done privately. the result exacerbates the gap between private and public markets and ultimately between rich and poor. Private market participation is usually for accredited investors where you need $1m net worth. Public markets are one of the best ways to create wealth in the US, if the historical record is any hint…

> it used to be raise money.

What in heavens gave you that idea? A well developed public stock market is such a new (and American thing) and it still makes up a small amount of the capital raised by businesses.

Even within large public companies, there's significant use of bank/private debt.

Post reply on HN