Re: Loyal3
tokyogai
6/25/2011 9:19:34 AM
With good reason. With so little editing you could be led far astray before a correction was made.
Re: Loyal3
driven
6/25/2011 12:31:48 AM
I still don't trust Wikipedia.
Way back when wikipedia first hit my radar, I was completely dumbfounded as to how it could ever possibly work - the whole public posting of encyclopedic articles by potential laypeople and then counting on the system to self correct errors made my head spin. Likewise, being a software developer in the 80's, open source seemed like an idea that would be DOA. Given the care we took to control source code versions, test for bugs, etc. how could it ever work to count on what must be a free-for-all? My point is that somehow both wiki and open source seem to work - somehow. I have the same cringing feeling at the idea of social media trading, and can think of all sort of concerns, but I've been wrong before and perhaps somehow, the concerns will work themselves out.
I agree. Great story Noreen. This is what journalism should be all about. Oh' for the good old days before talking heads and personality-driven commentators.
Re: Nasdaq Social Partner Was Called on the Carpet
tokyogai
6/24/2011 8:01:48 PM
I think this really points out that Nasdaq really, really needs better due diligence. Oversights like these are just not excuseable. Maybe somebody from Nasdaq will read this article and realize what a bad light this puts them in.
Nasdaq Social Partner Was Called on the Carpet
Street Smart
6/24/2011 5:41:19 PM
Yes, great digging #Noreen! This just keeps getting better and better--I mean worse and worse...
As I said in after your first Loyal3 post, WHERE is the SEC in all of this? Social Media is prone enough to trading bubble concerns for its legitimate incarnations, much less this hare-brained scheme...
If Nasdaq is so unable to do its due diligence on this matter, that it can't send the Schneiders packing, it bodes pretty poorly for its future as an exchange!
Loyal3
AskAsa
6/24/2011 2:45:23 PM
Major magazines, newspapers and the networks all did recent stories on Loyal3.
Not one of them seemed aware of or bothered to touch upon the concerns brought up in your article.
Thanks to Noreen for digging like a real reporter should always do - thanks to Investor Uprising
for giving us solid information.
Transparency and accountability
Phoenix
6/24/2011 12:28:56 PM
Selling shares through social media looks like a very good idea and would most probably be a potential gold mine. However, as I read through your post I couldn't help but wonder whether there is enough tranparency and accountability in this particular venture that Loyal3 is starting up. What do you think? What is their likely hood of success?
Noreen - Thanks for doing some due diligence for the rest of us on this one. It confirms that the investor uprising community saw this one pretty clearly after the Tuesday article -
http://www.investoruprising.com/author.asp?section_id=1296&doc_id=230613&piddl_msgorder=thrd#msgs
I agree with AskAsa that 'Fraudulent misrepresentation 20 years ago in Australia is not a total deal killer.'
But it does raise some red flags. Now that you've investigated the story, it just gets more sordid. With reporting and commentary like this, investor uprising will help save a lot of people a lot of money and trouble. Good job.
During the bull market (at least there is one for social network), you can see all kinds of low lives trying to make a quick buck from the new new idea. The lesson investors shall remember all the time: You can never cut a good deal with a bad guy.
The blogs and comments posted on Investor Uprising do not reflect the views of Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, or its sponsors. Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, and its sponsors do not assume responsibility for any comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Tweet This