Talk:Security (finance)

message: I've noticed that in several of these "security" related articles the grammar is lacking.  I'd love to go in and change things (I have in a few cases) but am wary of changing meaning in an arena where I am far from an expert.  Any takers? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.143.162.40 (talk) 05:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar issues 

message: Could someone clarify whether or not securities are the same, or similar to common stock?
:Common stock is a type of security.  Other examples of securities include preferred stock and bonds. Bond Head 12:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some context to make the relationship clearer. - Taxman Talk 12:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synonym 

message: Securities may be represented by a certificate or, more typically, by an electronic book entry interest. Is the word, "interest," an orphaned word? Brian Pearson 01:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned word? 

message: The very first line of this article defines a security as a "fungible, negotiable instrument". However, the article on negotiable instruments explicitly defines securities as _not_ being negotiable instruments according to Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial Code. This seems like a contradiction to me.140.247.159.144 04:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction in definitions 

message: The article requires contributions in terms of pricing elaborations of various security types like equity, mutual funds & exchange traded funds.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahidmbakshi (talk • contribs) 14:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Security Pricing 

message: If an investment company collects investors to buy shares so that they can develop land and buidings are they required to file with the SEC?
Is there an amount of money required before falling under the eye of the SEC?
I have reason to believe that a particular company might be working a Ponzi Scheme, but fear that if I am wrong I may be subjest to a libel lawsuit.  How can I check on this company to see if they have filed with the SEC. and can they be policed for fraud by the SEC?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.7.124 (talk) 05:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ponzi schemes in themselves don't have anything to do with securities, unless the scheme itself deals or pretends to deal in securities.  I believe you are misinterpreting basic corporate finance to be some sort of SEC violating "ponzi scheme".  A ponzi scheme is a fraudulent system where a member's input (investment) is used to directly pay off outputs (other investors withdrawals) without any true business activity.  Unless you count buildings and land to be fellow investors, you are not witnessing a ponzi scheme, what you are describing is a simple real estate purchase.  Anyways, make sure you know what you're doing, and the procedure is to report the case to the SEC or other regulatory agency and not directly litigate.--138.16.88.11 (talk) 08:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ponzi schemes??  SEC?? 

message: I have been asked if Gold can be prt of a Security not futures but real pure Gold.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.207.140.90 (talk) 09:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can Gold be part of a security and why ? 

message: Obviously this article covers a very complex topic.
I have read and re-read the main article, and I'm still baffled.
How is anyone supposed to understand what a security actually is?  Yes it describes them superficially, but what are they? How do they originate? If a security for, say, $1,000,000 is issued, where does the $1,000,000 come from? Does it even exist? Or is 'money' being generated out of nowhere?
Perhaps the article can draw together salient points in a way that leaves the reader with a better understanding of what a security actually is and how it works. Or perhaps someone proficient could include a working example.
Sorry to sound really dim. I'm not, honest!
21stcenturypolitix (talk) 22:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur. Some more clarification would be greatly appreciated. TurboChan (talk) 02:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Understanding the article 

message: Having read the introductory paragraph, I expected the article to describe three different broad groups of securities: debt securities, equity securities and derivative contracts. It was confusing, therefore, when in the section titled 'classification', not one of these terms were used. They do re-appear in the section titled 'Debt and Equity' and confusingly, the first sentence in this section runs as follows: 'Securities are traditionally divided into debt securities and equities (see also derivatives)'. Huh? I thought we had already covered how securities are classified?
Overall, I find the tone too technical for the casual reader. However, I don't expect each article to explain every piece of jargon it uses or to explain financial concepts upon which the topic 'securities' would be based. Rather, I think the onus is on Wikipedia to arrange the articles in some kind of 'conceptual order' so that interested readers can move from basic ideas to more advanced ones. 
72.27.107.89 (talk) 08:48, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This article's style is way too technical, especially in the introduction, which is supposed to be the most accessible segment. I would recommend whittling down the introduction to more closely resemble something like Investopedia's article, and then describe in more technical depth deeper in the article. →ozhu (talk·contribs) 07:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Understanding the article: A further opinion

message: The Banknote as described in Banknote page of Wikipedia is no longer a tradable asset, all the countries of the world have taken Banknote as Fiat Money, so it can not be exchanged for gold or coins, so I think it is no more a viable example for Debt Security.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aman.kharbas (talk • contribs) 08:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: @Aman.kharbas, I checked briefly Banknote and don't see that is no longer tradable. Just wondering if there is a wp:rs that supports your assertion? X Ottawahitech (talk) 00:51, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the Banknote a right example for Debt Security ? 

message: I don't know if a British v. Amercian English thing, but "tradable" is not a word that is used in security definitions.  The more common word is "transferable".  "Trade" implies an an exchange of assets or rights.  Some transfers are done without a exchange. patsw (talk) 00:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tradable?