Easy Equities good or bad?

[Toothless]

Typical response.

Just a quick quote to show your ignorance:

A beneficial interest is an interest in the economic benefit of property, which is also known as beneficial ownership. Legal ownership and beneficial ownership are separate and a legal owner will not always be the same as the beneficial owner. The beneficial owner will have the right to income and proceeds of sale of a property which will be held ‘on trust’ by the legal owner. Of course, this is a very simple explanation as to the difference between the two types of interest in property and there are many ways of establishing a beneficial interest whether expressly or not.

 

[Toothless]

Typical response.

And just another quick note in terms of your ignorance, the company is indeed allowed, legally to sell shares, buy more, move shares if it required by the company. Since you are the beneficial owner, you only stand to benefit from your purchase and the share(s). Legally they are only obliged to pay you your profits when you require them. They do not have to sell your shares, they can simply pay you your withdrawal amount and keep the shares in their portfolio.

 

[whatwhat]

The amount of people that are jumping on Toothless and showing their ignorance is astounding.

Take the time to read, and understand. It's not really difficult.

 

[Toothless]

The difference between the two ownerships - nicely explains by this US trading company:

What Is The Difference Between Holding Shares As A "Registered Owner" And As A "Beneficial Owner"?

Most of the Company's stockholders hold their shares through a broker, bank or other nominee rather than directly in their own name. As summarized below, there are some distinctions between registered shares and those owned beneficially:

•
Registered Owners – If your shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, Computershare Trust Company N.A., you are the stockholder of record. As the stockholder of record, you have the right to grant your voting proxy directly to the Company or to vote in person at the annual meeting.

•
Beneficial Owners – If your shares are held in a brokerage account, bank or by another nominee, you are the "beneficial owner" of shares held in street name. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or other nominee on how to vote or to vote in person at the annual meeting. However, since you are not a stockholder of record, you may not vote these shares in person at the annual meeting unless you obtain a "legal proxy" from your broker, bank or other nominee (who is the stockholder of record), giving you the right to vote the shares.

 

[Toothless]

Since SA companies don't want to be clear about it, here is more. This will also answer the questions above over whether your name will appear in Naspers' registers:

A “shareholder”, “member” or “holder” of a share (the terms are interchangeable) is only the person whose name is registered in the company’s register of members i.e. the person with legal title to the shares.

This is confirmed, among other things, by the definition of “member” in the CA06 which refers to persons whose names are entered in the company’s register of members. For example, these phrases do not include a person who only has a:

(a) beneficial interest in a share (e.g. beneficiary under a trust or persons holding shares through nominees); or
(b) purely economic interest in a share (e.g. through dividend payment rights contractually agreed between that person and the legal registered owner).

In this case, the private individuals each had an account with a bank or other financial institution which itself had a Clearstream account and held CIs in the company. The Clearstream account holders were able to trade CIs representing shares. The shares themselves were in turn registered in the name of BNY as depositary agent. Only BNY was capable of qualifying as a “holder” or “member” for the purposes of deciding who could apply to overturn the re-registration resolution. The company’s articles did not themselves confer any rights on the Clearstream account holders’ customers (i.e. the claimants). So, the only rights the claimants had were derived from the terms of their contracts with the Clearstream account holders. This was the case even though the company had from time to time blurred the distinction between the registered holders, the Clearstream account holders and the individuals concerned, such as by allowing those individuals to vote at some annual general meetings on producing a statement from one of the Clearsteam account holders.

You are not and nor will you ever be seen as legal owner of a share, no matter how the company or any other person tries to spin it.

 

[Swa]

Just a quick quote to show your ignorance:

NOTHING in that says the two must be mutually exclusive.

The difference between the two ownerships - nicely explains by this US trading company:

Nothing there says you don't own the shares.

The amount of people that are jumping on Toothless and showing their ignorance is astounding.

Take the time to read, and understand. It's not really difficult.

The amount of people just lapping up what he says when this is a tightly regulated industry both by the JSE and FSB with strict rules is astounding.

 

[Toothless]

NOTHING in that says the two must be mutually exclusive.


Nothing there says you don't own the shares.


The amount of people just lapping up what he says when this is a tightly regulated industry both by the JSE and FSB with strict rules is astounding.

No need to argue with these people, they will just drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

Besides, I am sure you simply do not know how the platform works and what rights they have in terms of the shares registered by them.

 

[Toothless]

All I want to point out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Global

Even though clients' shares were sold off (client money used from the nominee account) not a single person was charged criminally. Why? Because of legal aspects that the company is the legal owner of the shares and could sell or move as they find fit.

Besides, cannot find any SA law. So, in effect, the only thing that is happening here is that you are instructing GT247.com to buy shares in a specific company and appoint you as beneficial owner so that you can benefit financially from that share. You are not the owner of the share. They can do with those shares as they wish, as long as they owe you the financial benefit of that share and is able to pay you.

Long and the short is that you do not really own anything at all, other than a financial benefit in which you are speculating in share price.

If you want to buy shares and own shares in companies, legally, EE is not the right platform for this.

 

[whatwhat]

The amount of people just lapping up what he says when this is a tightly regulated industry both by the JSE and FSB with strict rules is astounding.

You seem salty. Spend some time putting together a post that shows why you think he is wrong, with links and proof, instead of foaming at the mouth with how you feel the system should work.

 

[Deleted member 83147]

You guys check the blonde with the party hat on the EE home page? Wow

 

[Swa]

You seem salty. Spend some time putting together a post that shows why you think he is wrong, with links and proof, instead of foaming at the mouth with how you feel the system should work.

I did.

 

[Swa]

Read this whatwhat

When you purchase Whole Securities, you become the beneficial (true) owner of all those Whole Securities, which will be held by FWT Nominees on your behalf. FWT will ensure that you are reflected as the beneficial owner of your Whole Securities in our books of account.

What do you think true owner means? According to Toothless GT247 is the true legal owner. No they aren't. You are the true legal owner contractually and it has to be reflected like that on their books. They only hold the shares in their companies' name. They can't just sell them off as they would be breaking the contract and committing fraud plus they are regulated by the JSE and FSB which would have a lot to say if they saw any such practices going on. Think for a moment. This isn't monopoly money. We have a tightly regulated financial market.

 

[Toothless]

Read this whatwhat

What do you think true owner means? According to Toothless GT247 is the true legal owner. No they aren't. You are the true legal owner contractually and it has to be reflected like that on their books. They only hold the shares in their companies' name. They can't just sell them off as they would be breaking the contract and committing fraud plus they are regulated by the JSE and FSB which would have a lot to say if they saw any such practices going on. Think for a moment. This isn't monopoly money. We have a tightly regulated financial market.

Okay that's it. I am sure you are drunk. Because if not, this has to be sheer stupidity. From their website:

EasyEquities has to comply with certain regulations regarding the requirement to have adequate net capital and asset protection.

GT247.com segregates your securities holdings and cash in your account, meaning it keeps your assets separate from the company's own assets.

In addition, EasyEquities will hold all client assets in First World Trader Nominees (Proprietary) Limited, which is a ring fenced, private, limited liability company with registration number 2013/091397/07, registered in accordance with the company laws of South Africa and approved as a nominee company to hold assets in its name on behalf of clients by the FSB.

When you purchase Whole Securities, you become the beneficial (true) owner of all those Whole Securities, which will be held by FWT Nominees on your behalf. FWT will ensure that you are reflected as the beneficial owner of your Whole Securities in our books of account.

You can only become the legal owner if the share is registered in your name, which it is not. It is in GT247.com's name as per their website above. They make you the beneficial owner. There is a massive difference between a beneficial owner and a legal owner of a share.

Legally, they can sell the shares, move it to accounts as required by the company, also stipulated in their founding statement, which nobody obviously saw this far nor cared to question. The same happened at the exact same company - MF Global, where client shares where sold to pay company debts. This quickly escalated to theft and plundering of accounts. Hundreds of thousands of people lost billions of dollars. Not a single person was charged criminally, as the company was allowed to do this, due to the fact that they were the legal owners of the shares.

I posted links a few pages back where financial experts warn people on this, and clearly stating that your money is not protected from theft and fraud.

You need to go see someone with experience to explain these things and the risks associated with it.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Read this whatwhat

What do you think true owner means? According to Toothless GT247 is the true legal owner. No they aren't. You are the true legal owner contractually and it has to be reflected like that on their books. They only hold the shares in their companies' name. They can't just sell them off as they would be breaking the contract and committing fraud plus they are regulated by the JSE and FSB which would have a lot to say if they saw any such practices going on. Think for a moment. This isn't monopoly money. We have a tightly regulated financial market.

Don't bother. He keeps asking others to contribute, while adding no value of his own in order to protect his hero Toothless aka House who was banned from this forum for a reason...

 

[whatwhat]

Read this whatwhat

What do you think true owner means? According to Toothless GT247 is the true legal owner. No they aren't. You are the true legal owner contractually and it has to be reflected like that on their books. They only hold the shares in their companies' name. They can't just sell them off as they would be breaking the contract and committing fraud plus they are regulated by the JSE and FSB which would have a lot to say if they saw any such practices going on. Think for a moment. This isn't monopoly money. We have a tightly regulated financial market.

Ok, so lets just look at the terms.

http://www.thesait.org.za/news/1041...ifying-the-Beneficial-Owner-of-a-Dividend.htm

"The term ‘beneficial owner’ is defined in section 64D of the Act as "the person entitled to the benefit of the dividend attaching to the share”. Therefore, the beneficial owner will not necessarily be the registered owner of the share. A share is essentially a mere bundle of rights to which a shareholder is entitled. As such, one person may hold the right to registration, another may hold voting rights, while another may hold the right to dividends."

So the term beneficial has nothing to do with who owns it, just the person who is responsible for declaring the dividends and the associated tax on it.

In the last sentence you'll see that there is also a person that holds the registration. That is what we were discussing. There is nothing in EE that says that you are the registered owner. That seems to be the holding/3rd party company. With PSG you get a certificate with your name and the shares on it.

As for the JSE and FSB rules, well, we've had a couple of cases where fraud like this has occurred even with all the rules in place. That it not to say that it will happen, but it can. By the time it has been picked up the people will be long gone.

No one is saying that EE is bad, and that they should be avoided. Just that you have to put trust in the company and the policies that you won't get screwed by it.

 

[whatwhat]

Don't bother. He keeps asking others to contribute, while adding no value of his own in order to protect his hero Toothless aka House who was banned from this forum for a reason...

I've reported you for trolling, you really aren't contributing to this thread but keep posting insults.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

I've reported you for trolling, you really aren't contributing to this thread but keep posting insults.

Find the posts where I wasn't contributing. It's a helluva lot more of a contribution than yours, which is just to complain about a lack of contribution and how everyone should go easy on Toothless. Practise what you damn well peach ffs. Maybe I should report you for trolling too, let's see how that works out...

 

[midnightcaller]

/grabs popcorn

 

[Toothless]

Ok, so lets just look at the terms.

http://www.thesait.org.za/news/1041...ifying-the-Beneficial-Owner-of-a-Dividend.htm

"The term ‘beneficial owner’ is defined in section 64D of the Act as "the person entitled to the benefit of the dividend attaching to the share”. Therefore, the beneficial owner will not necessarily be the registered owner of the share. A share is essentially a mere bundle of rights to which a shareholder is entitled. As such, one person may hold the right to registration, another may hold voting rights, while another may hold the right to dividends."

So the term beneficial has nothing to do with who owns it, just the person who is responsible for declaring the dividends and the associated tax on it.

In the last sentence you'll see that there is also a person that holds the registration. That is what we were discussing. There is nothing in EE that says that you are the registered owner. That seems to be the holding/3rd party company. With PSG you get a certificate with your name and the shares on it.

As for the JSE and FSB rules, well, we've had a couple of cases where fraud like this has occurred even with all the rules in place. That it not to say that it will happen, but it can. By the time it has been picked up the people will be long gone.

No one is saying that EE is bad, and that they should be avoided. Just that you have to put trust in the company and the policies that you won't get screwed by it.

You are 100% correct.

In fact, EE makes it quite clear in their terms that you are made the beneficial owner and that the shares are registered in the nominee company's name.

Also right again, those who are willing to take the risk, fair enough. I myself prefer to have shares registered on my name and the actual share certificate bearing my name. At least I know that I am the registered and legal owner.

If you do not mind not owning the share, then EE is perfect. Else, you should be aware of this and make a responsible decision.

I also find it strange that EE does not explain this in proper, easy to understand terms to people. On the other hand, they probably realize that they will lose more than half of their clients if people knew and understood this.

 

[Sinbad]

Share certificate? Really?
Lol
Those disappeared in around 1999