• Roger Young

    We use Thomson at Black & Decker, and our insider transactions site shows the issuer’s name. We don’t pay extra for this.

    Roger

  • http://www.irwebreport.com/ Dominic Jones

    Hi Roger,

    I didn’t mean to imply that you had to pay more. What I said was that Thomson’s clients usually don’t show the names in the list, while Shareholder.com’s mostly do. B&D is one of the exceptions.

    However, showing the name isn’t what I’m referring to as the “advanced insider reporting modules.” Those provide a summary of the transactions and easy access to each insider’s trading history. They are separate to the SEC filings.

    I guess my attempt to be fair all round by mentioning Shareholder.com in the same paragraph is confusing.

    Here’s the paragraph again:

    “I should also point out that Thomson and other vendors do sell advanced insider transaction modules for IR websites that are highly useful. And Shareholder.com typically does a better job with its standard SEC filings module than Thomson does because it usually shows insiders’ names in the lists of filings. However, few companies are using the advanced insider reporting modules, presumably because they can’t justify the cost.”

    I’m thinking I’ll change it to this:

    “I should also point out that Shareholder.com typically does a better job with its standard SEC filings module than Thomson does because it usually shows insiders’ names in the lists of filings. And Thomson and other vendors do sell advanced insider transaction modules for IR websites that are highly useful. However, few companies are using the advanced insider reporting modules, presumably because they can’t justify the cost.”

    What do you think?