Bill Singer

It's not just the holiday season for shoppers -- cyber-criminals look forward to this period of increased retail activity as a way to steal our money and personal information.

Two guys entered into contracts with investors by telling them they had collectively purchased over 4,000 ATMs. Doesn't sound like a bad opportunity. Of course, why would I be writing about it if something hadn't gone wrong?

You ever wonder where so many popular but annoying sayings come from? How do these things even get started? You know? So, like, you know, just sayin',...

As a participant in a number of online forums where folks seek help with potential legal problems involving brokerage firms, I cringe when I see the detailed background information that users share.

Moore and Netschi made $80 million claiming that ATMs would generate revenue streams for investors. Talk about something going wrong, how about a majority of the machines sold not even existing?

Robert Ingram was the Director of a FRNIP. Or so you were supposed to think. Starting in 2005, Ingram told potential FRNIP investors that they would realize huge returns within a few weeks. Wow, sign me up!

Rodman & Renshaw and other Claimants filed a FINRA Arbitration Statement of Claim (initially in October 2006 and thereafter as amended) against Respondent Matthew N. Murray.

If we value families, then why is the economic burden of raising them always pressed upon women at the cost of fair pay and career opportunities? Whatever happened to the concept of shared sacrifice?

For those of you who still desperately cling to the belief that allowing Wall Street to self regulate itself works, perhaps this case may yet change your mind.

The WG Trading case represents yet another long-term fraud that went undetected by our nation's many regulators and prosecutors for far too long with disastrous consequences.

According to some in the press, the settlement with Goldman was a major victory for the SEC. Initial stories would have you believe that the government ground Goldman to its knees. Almost a blockbuster summer movie.

While I may criticize the motivation and timing of the SEC's case, I applaud the long overdue recognition by Wall Street's regulators that they have coddled the mighty and powerful for far too long.

My wife and I were having lunch at a local diner and saw the above sign on the wall at the end of our table. She read it. I read it. She laughed. I laughed.

It used to be sex, drugs, and rock 'n roll -- now it's sex, drugs, rock 'n roll, politics and Wall Street. For some reason, a lot of folks just get hung up about that sex thing.

We are saddled with legislators and regulators who belatedly cobble together ineffective solutions for yesterday's problems. In the end, we get neither an ounce of prevention nor a pound of cure.

On June 15, 2010, Samuel Solanky pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud in connection with a scheme by which he caused individuals to invest approximately $3 million in a non-existant jewelry business.

The fear of excessive regulatory reprisal contributes to cover-ups that inflict far more danger on our society.

In the SEC's suit, it is alleged that beginning in 2006, in order to finance his struggling jewelry businesses, Perez began offering investors no-risk collateralized promissory notes promising annual returns of 18% to 36% a year.

Just like Martha Stewart's case, the alleged Pequot/Samberg insider trading happened in 2001. So why was Stewart at trial in 2004 but Pequot/Samberg's case is still being resolved in 2010?

They do quite a bit of surveillance at most casinos. Frankly, those paid to watch the games of chance do a better job than those paid to watch our stock markets. Take this recent case.

I'm sorry, but enough with these SEC public meetings and fanciful panels. Fix the mess. Do something. Talk is cheap -- and yours seems to be endless.