Should analysts be allowed to be whistleblowers?

In your opinion, in what circumstances (if at all) should investment analysts working for hedge funds be allowed to “double dip” by shorting a stock and then collecting a bounty under the new Dodd Frank whistleblower program? Read this article for additional background (describing Einhorn/Allied incident): Also see from the proposed rules for section 922 of Dodd Frank: Under Section 21F(a)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act,22 the original information provided by a whistleblower can include information that is derived from independent knowledge and also from independent “analysis.” Proposed Rule 21F-4(b)(3) would define “independent analysis” to mean the whistleblower’s own analysis, whether done alone or in combination with others. The proposed rule thus recognizes that analysis – which may include academic or professional studies – can be the product of collaboration among two or more individuals. “Analysis” would mean the whistleblower’s examination and evaluation of information that may be generally available, but which reveals information that is not generally known or available to the public. This definition recognizes that there are circumstances where individuals can review publicly available information, and, through their additional evaluation and analysis, provide vital assistance to the Commission staff in understanding complex schemes and identifying securities violations.

I thought the Russians screwed you dude?

I didn’t read that, but it seems fair for someone to short a stock if they suspect fraud, and then report the fraud (the bounty seems irrelevant). I don’t see any conflict of interest provided the information they whistleblow is accurate and they are not merely smearing the company in press. Yeah dude, what happened with the Russians?

In russia whistle blows you!

jcole21 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In russia whistle blows you! Haha the Russia reversal joke rarely gets me, but that one did the trick.