二级市场关于投资者保护的奇特案例

A. Osovsky
{"title":"二级市场关于投资者保护的奇特案例","authors":"A. Osovsky","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2364542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The primary mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors. However, current securities regulation clearly separates between public markets and private markets with respect to investor protection. While the federal securities laws impose strict and costly disclosure and anti-fraud requirements on issuers that offer their securities to the public, they exempt private offerings from such rigid regime. The liberal approach toward private offerings is based on the assumption that investors in private markets are sophisticated and thus can \"fend for themselves\". This Article explores the validity of such traditional dichotomy between the public market and the private market in a relatively new, organized secondary market for ownership interests in private companies with retail investor access (the \"Secondary Market\"). The Secondary Market provides investors and employees with an opportunity to sell their holdings even before the first exit event. It also allows greater flexibility in capital formation, which may enhance productivity and job growth. However, the Secondary Market raises serious problems with regard to investor protection. As this Article shows, the rise of the Secondary Market has revealed conspicuous cracks in the wall traditionally separating the public and the private markets and the two markets’ participants – the sophisticated investors versus the unsophisticated investors. This separation was undermined by the penetration of unsophisticated investors to the private market sphere and by the erosion of the assumptions regarding the ability of Secondary Market’s participants to fend for themselves. The Article suggests that the erosion of the sophistication presumption deems the classic dichotomy between the heavily regulated public market and the lightly regulated private market artificial. It calls for a reexamination of the current regulatory regime with respect to investor protection. Such reexamination is of particular importance in light of the new Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act that would enable private companies to stay private longer, and the Secondary Market to thrive.","PeriodicalId":309706,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Curious Case of the Secondary Market with Respect to Investor Protection\",\"authors\":\"A. Osovsky\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2364542\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The primary mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors. However, current securities regulation clearly separates between public markets and private markets with respect to investor protection. While the federal securities laws impose strict and costly disclosure and anti-fraud requirements on issuers that offer their securities to the public, they exempt private offerings from such rigid regime. The liberal approach toward private offerings is based on the assumption that investors in private markets are sophisticated and thus can \\\"fend for themselves\\\". This Article explores the validity of such traditional dichotomy between the public market and the private market in a relatively new, organized secondary market for ownership interests in private companies with retail investor access (the \\\"Secondary Market\\\"). The Secondary Market provides investors and employees with an opportunity to sell their holdings even before the first exit event. It also allows greater flexibility in capital formation, which may enhance productivity and job growth. However, the Secondary Market raises serious problems with regard to investor protection. As this Article shows, the rise of the Secondary Market has revealed conspicuous cracks in the wall traditionally separating the public and the private markets and the two markets’ participants – the sophisticated investors versus the unsophisticated investors. This separation was undermined by the penetration of unsophisticated investors to the private market sphere and by the erosion of the assumptions regarding the ability of Secondary Market’s participants to fend for themselves. The Article suggests that the erosion of the sophistication presumption deems the classic dichotomy between the heavily regulated public market and the lightly regulated private market artificial. It calls for a reexamination of the current regulatory regime with respect to investor protection. Such reexamination is of particular importance in light of the new Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act that would enable private companies to stay private longer, and the Secondary Market to thrive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":309706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"63 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2364542\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2364542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

美国证券交易委员会的主要任务是保护投资者。然而,目前的证券监管在保护投资者方面明确区分了公开市场和私人市场。虽然联邦证券法对向公众发行证券的发行人施加了严格且代价高昂的披露和反欺诈要求,但它们却使私募不受这种严格制度的约束。对私募发行的开明做法是基于这样一种假设,即私募市场的投资者是老练的,因此能够“自谋生路”。本文探讨了在一个相对较新的、有组织的二级市场(二级市场)中,公开市场和私人市场之间的这种传统二分法的有效性,二级市场是为零售投资者进入私营公司的所有权利益而设立的。二级市场为投资者和员工提供了一个机会,甚至在第一次退出事件发生之前出售他们的持股。它还允许资本形成更大的灵活性,这可能会提高生产率和就业增长。然而,二级市场在保护投资者方面提出了严重的问题。正如本文所显示的,二级市场的兴起已经揭示了传统上区分公开市场和私人市场以及两个市场参与者(成熟投资者和不成熟投资者)的明显裂缝。由于缺乏经验的投资者渗透到私人市场领域,以及二级市场参与者自我保护能力的假设受到侵蚀,这种分离被破坏了。本文认为,对复杂假设的侵蚀认为,监管严格的公共市场和监管宽松的私人市场之间的经典二分法是人为的。它呼吁重新审查有关投资者保护的现行监管制度。鉴于新的《启动创业公司法案》(Jumpstart Our Business Startups,简称JOBS),这种重新审查尤其重要,该法案将使私营公司能够保持更长时间的私有状态,并使二级市场蓬勃发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Curious Case of the Secondary Market with Respect to Investor Protection
The primary mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors. However, current securities regulation clearly separates between public markets and private markets with respect to investor protection. While the federal securities laws impose strict and costly disclosure and anti-fraud requirements on issuers that offer their securities to the public, they exempt private offerings from such rigid regime. The liberal approach toward private offerings is based on the assumption that investors in private markets are sophisticated and thus can "fend for themselves". This Article explores the validity of such traditional dichotomy between the public market and the private market in a relatively new, organized secondary market for ownership interests in private companies with retail investor access (the "Secondary Market"). The Secondary Market provides investors and employees with an opportunity to sell their holdings even before the first exit event. It also allows greater flexibility in capital formation, which may enhance productivity and job growth. However, the Secondary Market raises serious problems with regard to investor protection. As this Article shows, the rise of the Secondary Market has revealed conspicuous cracks in the wall traditionally separating the public and the private markets and the two markets’ participants – the sophisticated investors versus the unsophisticated investors. This separation was undermined by the penetration of unsophisticated investors to the private market sphere and by the erosion of the assumptions regarding the ability of Secondary Market’s participants to fend for themselves. The Article suggests that the erosion of the sophistication presumption deems the classic dichotomy between the heavily regulated public market and the lightly regulated private market artificial. It calls for a reexamination of the current regulatory regime with respect to investor protection. Such reexamination is of particular importance in light of the new Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act that would enable private companies to stay private longer, and the Secondary Market to thrive.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Are M&A Lawyers Really Better? Hidden Agendas in Shareholder Voting A Right For Retirement: Unconscionable Contracts, The Right (Not) to Associate, and Citizens United Will Nasdaq's Diversity Rules Harm Investors? A Trans-Atlantic Doctrinal Orientation Made Concrete: Ohio’s First 'Modern' Business Corporation Act (1927)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1