Geller Law
When I review trade confirmations, I am reminded of a magician. With a mere slight of hand, the magician distracts their audience and then "Walla" - the transaction is completed. But what your advisor puts on the trade slips (trade confirmations) is important. Take care.
The slight of hand is that the trade slips make a bald statement about whether the trade was "solicited" or "non-solicited".
It means did the advisor make the recommendation for the trade (solicited) or did the investor (non-solicited).
A common finesse used by rogue and negligent advisors is to misrepresent trades recommended by the advisor as the idea of the investor. This is most common among the those advisors with low (no) standards. To avoid scrutiny and responsibility advisors commonly misdirect that trades are your idea (non-solicited).
The concept is that the investor is to fault for non-solicited trades. Strictly speaking, there is more to the analysis, but dealers when trying to avoid responsibility conflate the nuances in an effort to shift blame to the investor.
Dealers often take this box as checked by the rogue and negligent advisor as gospel.
Unquestioning so-called plausible deniability for the dealer. Dealers turn a blind eye to these same holdings showing up at the same time in many of the advisor's accounts as the magic trick was reality and all those investors magically came up with the same idea at the same time. Regulators should be sweeping dealers to look for this systemic abuse. If there is this abuse, then what else is misdirection and magical untruths.
As investors, take heed. If you see this misdirection in your accounts, then how can you trust the advisor and the dealer? There is nothing innocent about these types of misdirection. Furthermore, it is a sign of rot. Rot in your advisor, your dealer and the regulatory oversight. Take care!
