Solicitations of Interest Prior to an Initial Public Offering

FederalRegulations

Ask Donna

How this section applies to your facts.

Federal Register › Vol. 60 › 60 FR 35648

This text was captured on Aug 14, 2026. It is a snapshot, not a live feed, so check the official code before relying on it.

Text

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 230 and 232

[Release No. 33-7188; File No. S7-18-95]

RIN 3235-AG52

Solicitations of Interest Prior to an Initial Public Offering

AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is

publishing for comment a proposed rule that would allow issuers

contemplating initial public offerings to solicit indications of

investor interest in their companies prior to the filing of a

registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933. The proposed

rule would allow an issuer to assess potential investor interest in the

company before incurring possibly significant costs associated with the

preparation of offering disclosure documents. The proposals are

intended to reduce the regulatory impediments and cost of accessing

public markets consistent with investor protection interests.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 8, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted in triplicate to Jonathan G.

Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. Comment letters should refer to File No.

S7-18-95. All comments received will be available for public inspection

and copying in the Commission's public reference room, 450 Fifth

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20549.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard K. Wulff, Office of Small

Business Policy, Division of Corporation Finance, at (202) 942-2950 or

James R. Budge, Office of Disclosure Policy, Division of Corporation

Finance, at (202) 942-2910.

mments received will be available for public inspection

and copying in the Commission's public reference room, 450 Fifth

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20549.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard K. Wulff, Office of Small

Business Policy, Division of Corporation Finance, at (202) 942-2950 or

James R. Budge, Office of Disclosure Policy, Division of Corporation

Finance, at (202) 942-2910.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is publishing for comment a

rule 1 that would permit an issuer prior to its initial public

offering (``IPO'') to solicit indications of interest in the company's

securities before filing a registration statement under the Securities

Act of 1933 (the ``Securities Act'').2 The Commission also is

proposing to amend the ``test the waters'' provision 3 under

Regulation A 4 to permit issuers that ``test the waters'' under

Regulation A and decide to have a registered offering instead to do so

without a 30 day waiting period, as well as permitting issuers to use

Regulation A if, after ``testing the waters'' under the proposed new

rule, they determine to go forward with a Regulation A offering instead

of a registered offering.5 In addition, Securities Act Rule 100

6 would be amended to add a definition of direct participation

investment program for purposes of the new rule, and Regulation S-T

7 would be amended to provide that the ``test the waters''

document for registered offerings may be submitted to the Commission in

electronic format via the EDGAR system, at the option of the issuer.

\1\ Proposed Rule 135d.

\2\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.

\3\ Securities Act Rule 254 [17 CFR 230.254].

\4\ 17 CFR 230.251-230.263.

\5\ Proposed amendments to Rule 254(d) [17 CFR 230.254(d)] and

Rule 254(b)(4) [17 CFR 230.254(b)(4)].

\6\ 17 CFR 230.100.

\7\ 17 CFR Part 232.

I. Background

gs may be submitted to the Commission in

electronic format via the EDGAR system, at the option of the issuer.

\1\ Proposed Rule 135d.

\2\ 15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.

\3\ Securities Act Rule 254 [17 CFR 230.254].

\4\ 17 CFR 230.251-230.263.

\5\ Proposed amendments to Rule 254(d) [17 CFR 230.254(d)] and

Rule 254(b)(4) [17 CFR 230.254(b)(4)].

\6\ 17 CFR 230.100.

\7\ 17 CFR Part 232.

I. Background

In 1992, as part of its Small Business Initiatives, the Commission

introduced new procedures into Regulation A that allow issuers

considering whether to undertake a public offering to ``test the

waters'' for potential investor interest before undertaking a full-

scale offering that requires the preparation, Commission filing and

delivery to investors of the mandated offering documentation.8 The

initiative was intended to provide a cost-effective means for an

issuer, with no established market for its securities, to determine

whether there is any investor interest in its securities before

undertaking an offering and incurring the full costs of compliance with

the applicable disclosure requirements. If, after the solicitation, the

issuer concludes there is insufficient or no investor interest, it can

avoid significant, unnecessary compliance costs. If the issuer

determines to proceed with the offering, it is required to provide

potential investors with the full mandated disclosure documents. Since

adoption of the ``test the waters'' procedures, 61 issuers have

submitted solicitations to the Commission, 26 of which have proceeded

to file Regulation A or registered offerings.

\8\ Release No. 33-6949 (July 30, 1992) [57 FR 36442]; Release

No. 33-6996 (April 28, 1993) [58 FR 26509].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ted disclosure documents. Since

adoption of the ``test the waters'' procedures, 61 issuers have

submitted solicitations to the Commission, 26 of which have proceeded

to file Regulation A or registered offerings.

\8\ Release No. 33-6949 (July 30, 1992) [57 FR 36442]; Release

No. 33-6996 (April 28, 1993) [58 FR 26509].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1993, the North American Securities Administrators Association,

Inc. (``NASAA'') 9 undertook a two-year pilot program to consider

and evaluate ``test the waters'' approach under state securities

laws.10 Nine states 11 have been participating in the pilot.

The NASAA pilot procedures differ from those adopted under Regulation A

in several respects, the most significant of which are: (a) a pre-use

filing requirement; (b) more mandated information in the solicitation

document; 12 (c) a requirement that the written solicitation

document be delivered to those directly contacted; and (d) delivery of

the prospectus at least seven days prior to sale. Several classes of

issuers are disqualified from using the NASAA pilot ``test the waters''

procedures.

\9\ NASAA is an association of securities commissioners from

each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Mexico

and several of the Canadian provinces.

\10\ See NASAA's Proposed Statement of Policy on Solicitation of

Interest (Test the Waters)(``NASAA's Statement'') which is set forth

in an Appendix to this release.

\11\ Colorado, Kansas, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Oregon,

Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington

missioners from

each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Mexico

and several of the Canadian provinces.

\10\ See NASAA's Proposed Statement of Policy on Solicitation of

Interest (Test the Waters)(``NASAA's Statement'') which is set forth

in an Appendix to this release.

\11\ Colorado, Kansas, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Oregon,

Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington.

\12\ The NASAA Statement requires, in addition to the

information set forth in Rule 254, (1) the date of the issuer's

organization as well as a statement of its stage of development; (2)

a more specific description of the issuer's business, products and

services and the manner in which the issuer intends to carry out its

activities; (3) a general indication of the manner of using proposed

proceeds from the offering; and (4) a complete listing of the

issuer's officers and directors, their locations, employment history

and educational background. See Solicitation of Interest Form in the

NASAA Statement in the Appendix to this release.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Various commenters have suggested that the Commission explore

extending the benefits of the ``test the waters'' process beyond

Regulation A.13 Most recently, the Subcouncil on Capital

Allocation of the Competitiveness

Policy Council 14 recommended that in the interest of facilitating

small business capital raising, these issuers be permitted to ``test

the waters'' in advance of undertaking a registered IPO.

s have suggested that the Commission explore

extending the benefits of the ``test the waters'' process beyond

Regulation A.13 Most recently, the Subcouncil on Capital

Allocation of the Competitiveness

Policy Council 14 recommended that in the interest of facilitating

small business capital raising, these issuers be permitted to ``test

the waters'' in advance of undertaking a registered IPO.

\13\ The comment letter prepared by members of the Committee on

Federal Regulation of Securities, the Committee on State Regulation

of Securities and the Small Business Committee of the Section of

Business Law of the American Bar Association on the Small Business

Initiatives suggested in 1992 that the Commission explore extending

use of ``test the waters'' beyond the Regulation A context to other

offerings. See letter dated July 8, 1992 in response to request for

comment on the Small Business Initiatives (Release No. 33-6924

(March 12, 1992) [57 FR 9768]).

\14\ See Forthcoming Report to be used by the Subcouncil on

Capital Allocation of the Competitiveness Policy Council, March 31,

1995.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Experience under Regulation A suggests that the ``test the waters''

initiative provides issuers of small offerings a useful and cost-

effective means of assessing whether there is sufficient potential

interest in the company as an investment to proceed with a Regulation A

offering. To date, these solicitations do not appear to have raised

significant investor protection concerns. Accordingly, the Commission

today is soliciting comment on the appropriateness of providing a

similar ``test the waters'' option for registered IPOs. 15

ive means of assessing whether there is sufficient potential

interest in the company as an investment to proceed with a Regulation A

offering. To date, these solicitations do not appear to have raised

significant investor protection concerns. Accordingly, the Commission

today is soliciting comment on the appropriateness of providing a

similar ``test the waters'' option for registered IPOs. 15

\15\ The Commission has established the Advisory Committee on

the Capital Formation and Regulatory Processes (the ``Advisory

Committee''), chaired by Commissioner Steven M.H. Wallman. The

Advisory Committee is considering fundamental issues relating to the

regulatory framework governing the capital formation process,

including whether the current system of registering securities

offerings should be replaced with a company registration system. The

recommendations of the Advisory Committee may result in rule

proposals or legislative recommendations that, if implemented, may

also address the matters discussed in this release. While some of

the company registration models under consideration generally would

not change the requirements by which a company that was not filing

reports with the SEC conducts an IPO, certain company registration

models could facilitate solicitations of interest by registered

companies with respect to repeat offerings, by eliminating the

requirement for registering each public offering of securities.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

change the requirements by which a company that was not filing

reports with the SEC conducts an IPO, certain company registration

models could facilitate solicitations of interest by registered

companies with respect to repeat offerings, by eliminating the

requirement for registering each public offering of securities.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In considering whether to provide a ``test the waters'' process for

registered IPO's, the Commission is committed to assuring that the

interests of investors are not compromised. The release solicits

comment on a number of limitations or conditions that go beyond those

currently required in connection with Regulation A offerings. These

comments are intended to provide a basis for the Commission to assess

the need for any or all of these provisions to assure that investors

have the full opportunity to review and consider the information

mandated by the Securities Act in making their investment decision, and

that the solicitation of interest communications are not such as to

cause investors to overlook the mandated disclosures. 16

\16\ A discussion of the legal basis for the proposed rule is in

Section C of the release; comment is specifically solicited on this

issue.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The IPO market is one of the great strengths of the U.S. capital

markets, and its breadth and depth is unique. 17 In the first five

years of the 1990's, $114.8 billion have been raised in the common

equity IPO market. 18 Continued investor confidence is key to

maintaining the strength and vitality of this market, and any ``test

the waters'' process implemented by the Commission will have to be

consistent with maintaining this confidence.

the U.S. capital

markets, and its breadth and depth is unique. 17 In the first five

years of the 1990's, $114.8 billion have been raised in the common

equity IPO market. 18 Continued investor confidence is key to

maintaining the strength and vitality of this market, and any ``test

the waters'' process implemented by the Commission will have to be

consistent with maintaining this confidence.

\17\ See, e.g. Foreign Firms Flock to U.S. for IPOs, Wall Street

Journal, June 23, 1995, at C1.

\18\ Securities Data Company. This includes foreign companies'

first common equity offerings in the U.S.; it does not include

asset-backed securities.

II. Proposals

A. Description of proposed Rule 135d

Under the proposal, an eligible issuer considering a registered IPO

would be permitted to solicit indications of interest prior to filing a

registration statement under the Securities Act, subject to the

conditions and limitations of proposed new Rule 135d. While assuring

that investors receive information mandated by the Securities Act

before making an investment, the proposed rule would allow companies to

gauge investor interest before incurring the significant expense

required in the preparation of IPO disclosure documents. If market

interest is not reflected by the response to the solicitation,

companies may turn to other capital-raising plans. 19

\19\ Limitations on general solicitation under Regulation D [17

CFR 230.501-230.508] and case law under Section 4(2) of the

Securities Act [15 U.S.C.77d(2)] may limit companies' flexibility in

pursuing such alternatives. Comment is requested in the discussion

hereinafter as to what steps the Commission should take to address

these issues. In a companion release published today, the Commission

is soliciting comment on various possible approaches to allowing

general solicitations in some form in Regulation D offerings. See

Release No. 33-7185.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

is requested in the discussion

hereinafter as to what steps the Commission should take to address

these issues. In a companion release published today, the Commission

is soliciting comment on various possible approaches to allowing

general solicitations in some form in Regulation D offerings. See

Release No. 33-7185.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under the current system, this would only be determined after

preparation of all required compliance materials, which may involve

significant expense. The efficiency of the capital markets, and the

fiscal health of developing enterprises, is not benefited by issuers'

finding out later rather than sooner that the public markets are not

the most appropriate forums for their capital raising. On the contrary,

the efficiency of the capital raising process is enhanced when issuers

that spend the large sums required for an IPO have some indication as

to how an offering will be received. The proposal would allow issuers

to structure their offerings with consideration for their particular

needs as well as the needs of investors, since issuers would be able to

receive indications from potential investors concerning what offering

structure may be of interest, and could then use that information in

structuring their offerings.

Communications meeting the requirements of the proposed rule would

not be deemed to offer any security for sale 20 for purposes of

Section 5 of the Securities Act.21 As proposed, those eligible to

use the new rule would include any issuer not reporting under Section

13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange

Act''), 22 but not: 23

\20\ Proposed Rule 135d(a). This provision would be similar to

that contained in Rule 135 [17 CFR 230.135].

\21\ 15 U.S.C. 77e.

\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78m(a) and 15 U.S.C. 78o(d).

\23\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(1).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

orting under Section

13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange

Act''), 22 but not: 23

\20\ Proposed Rule 135d(a). This provision would be similar to

that contained in Rule 135 [17 CFR 230.135].

\21\ 15 U.S.C. 77e.

\22\ 15 U.S.C. 78m(a) and 15 U.S.C. 78o(d).

\23\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(1).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(a) Issuers of asset-backed offerings; 24

\24\ ''Asset-backed securities'' is defined in General

Instruction I.B.5 of Form S-3 [17 CFR 239.13].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Partnerships, limited liability companies and other direct

participation investment programs; 25

\25\ ''Direct participation investment program'' would be

defined in a proposed amendment to Rule 100. Comment is requested as

to whether the scope of the proposed definition is appropriate or

whether an alternative definition would meet the goals of the

exclusion.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Investment companies registered or required to be registered

under the Investment Company Act of 1940; 26 or

\26\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Blank check or penny stock issuers.27

\27\ A ``blank check'' company is defined at Securities Act Rule

419(a)(2) [17 CFR 230.419(a)(2)]; and ``penny stock'' is defined at

Exchange Act Rule 3a51-1 [17 CFR 240.3a51-1].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Blank check or penny stock issuers.27

\27\ A ``blank check'' company is defined at Securities Act Rule

419(a)(2) [17 CFR 230.419(a)(2)]; and ``penny stock'' is defined at

Exchange Act Rule 3a51-1 [17 CFR 240.3a51-1].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The first three exclusions apply to those issuers that appear

unsuited to a ``test the waters'' concept, given the complex and

contractual nature of the issuer. Blank check and penny stock issuers

are excluded because of the substantial abuses that have arisen in such

offerings. Comment is requested as to the appropriateness of the

proposed exclusions. Are there any issuers proposed to be excluded that

should be provided the benefits of the ``test the waters'' process? Are

there additional classes of issuers that should be excluded either

because of the nature of the investment vehicle or potential for abuse?

Should any of the exclusions in the NASAA draft policy statement be

specifically incorporated into the proposal? 28 Should the rule be

limited to small business issuers? 29

\28\ See Section 1 of NASAA Statement in the Appendix to this

release.

\29\ ''Small business issuer'' is defined in Securities Act Rule

405 [17 CFR 230.405].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As in the case of Regulation A, the proposed IPO ``test the

waters'' solicitation may include both oral and written solicitations,

provided that a written solicitation document is submitted to the

Commission at or prior to the time the solicitation is first

r'' is defined in Securities Act Rule

405 [17 CFR 230.405].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As in the case of Regulation A, the proposed IPO ``test the

waters'' solicitation may include both oral and written solicitations,

provided that a written solicitation document is submitted to the

Commission at or prior to the time the solicitation is first

made.30 Unlike Regulation A, however, the submission of the ``test

the waters'' written materials would be a condition to reliance on the

rule. Comment is requested as to whether the rule should require that

the written ``test the waters'' solicitation material be submitted and

subject to Commission staff review prior to use. Comment also is

requested as to whether submission should be a condition to reliance

upon the rule.

\30\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(3) and (4).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any written solicitation or broadcast would be required to include

the following:

A statement that the solicitation is not an offering of

securities for sale, and that any public offering to be made will be

made by means of a prospectus that may be obtained from the issuer and

that will contain detailed information about the company and

management, as well as financial statements;

A statement that no money is being solicited, or will be

accepted;

A statement that no sales will be made or commitments to

purchase securities will be accepted until a registration statement is

filed with the Commission and becomes effective or an appropriate

exemption from registration is available and utilized;

A statement that indications of interest involve no

obligation or commitment of any kind; and

An identification of the issuer's chief executive officer

and a brief and general description of its business and

products.31

\31\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(2).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d-looking statements). All

such information, of course, would be subject to antifraud

prohibitions. Comment is requested as to whether information with this

level of specificity about the possible offering should be permitted,

or, instead, whether the information should be more limited, such as to

information about the company generally and its intention to conduct an

initial public offering.

The issuer would be permitted to include a coupon that could be

returned to the company indicating interest and requesting a prospectus

in the event the company determines to undertake a public

offering.33 The coupon would be required to state clearly and

separately that the indication of interest is not binding and that no

money should be sent. Under the proposed rule, issuers would not be

permitted to include questions in the coupon soliciting information

about the investors' financial profile, such as income, assets and

investment history. Comment is requested as to whether this limitation

is appropriate.34

\33\ Proposed Rule 135d(b).

\34\ Rule 254 of Regulation A does not prohibit requests for

such information in the coupon.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under the rule as proposed, there is no restriction on the means of

dissemination of the ``test the waters'' solicitation.35 Thus, the

issuer could send the solicitation material to prospective investors,

or publish it in a newspaper or other print media. Use of broadcast

media, whether radio or television, would be permitted, as would

electronic dissemination through such media as the Internet or other

data networks. To come within the protection of the proposed safe

harbor, the mandated disclosure provisions would have to be met with

respect to each publication or transmission. Comment is requested as to

whether there should be restrictions on this type of solicitation

her radio or television, would be permitted, as would

electronic dissemination through such media as the Internet or other

data networks. To come within the protection of the proposed safe

harbor, the mandated disclosure provisions would have to be met with

respect to each publication or transmission. Comment is requested as to

whether there should be restrictions on this type of solicitation.

While unsolicited telephoning of investors could be conducted, should

such telephoning be prohibited by the issuer, by broker/dealers, and

other non-issuer personnel altogether? Should the rule require that any

person directly contacted be given a copy of the written solicitation

material required to be submitted to the Commission? Should the rule

contain additional limitations on the statements allowed? Should the

rule prescribe what information is permitted to be included?

\35\ If an issuer wants to maintain full flexibility to proceed

with an offering under Regulation D and Section 4(2) of the

Securities Act, the means of dissemination of the ``test the

waters'' solicitation would have to be consistent with the

limitations under the regulation and statute. See the companion

release issued today, soliciting comment on the use of general

solicitation in Regulation D offerings. Release No. 33-7185.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should oral solicitations be limited or precluded? For example,

should oral solicitations be limited to certain statements, or limited

to the information set forth in the written solicitation material?

Should oral solicitations be limited to accredited investors 36 or

qualified institutional buyers? 37

\36\ See Rule 501(d) of Regulation D [17 CFR 230.501(d)].

\37\ See Rule 144A(a)(1) [17 CFR 230.144A(a)(1)].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

limited to certain statements, or limited

to the information set forth in the written solicitation material?

Should oral solicitations be limited to accredited investors 36 or

qualified institutional buyers? 37

\36\ See Rule 501(d) of Regulation D [17 CFR 230.501(d)].

\37\ See Rule 144A(a)(1) [17 CFR 230.144A(a)(1)].

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The proposed rule also would require that the writing or script be

submitted to the Commission. Unlike the current Regulation A ``test the

waters'' provision, however, the submission would be made only at the

Commission's Washington, D. C. headquarters.38 Also, as noted

above, unlike the current Regulation A ``test the waters'' provision,

this submission would be a condition to reliance upon the rule.39

Following the submission of the written document or script of the

broadcast, oral communications with prospective investors and other

broadcasts would be permitted. All communications would be subject to

the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws.40 As is

the case with Regulation A,41 the proposed rule could not be

relied upon after the filing of a registration statement.42 Thus,

under the proposal, all ``test the waters'' solicitations, written or

oral, must terminate at the time a registration statement for the

offering is filed. Also, the proposal would, like Regulation A,43

require that 20 days elapse between the last publication or delivery of

the solicitation document or broadcast and any sales of

securities.44 Should this apply to oral ``test the waters''

solicitations as well?

, all ``test the waters'' solicitations, written or

oral, must terminate at the time a registration statement for the

offering is filed. Also, the proposal would, like Regulation A,43

require that 20 days elapse between the last publication or delivery of

the solicitation document or broadcast and any sales of

securities.44 Should this apply to oral ``test the waters''

solicitations as well?

\38\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(3). Under the proposed rule, the

document would be submitted to the Commission, but not officially

filed, and, like Rule 254 material, would be available for public

inspection. The ``test the waters'' submission could be submitted

either in paper or via the Commission's EDGAR system. See proposed

amendment to Rule 101(b) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.101(b)].

The proposed rule would contain a note stating that only

solicitation of interest material that contains substantive changes

from or additions to previously submitted material need be

submitted.

\39\ Rule 254 of Regulation A provides that submission of the

materials to the Commission is not a condition to the exemption.

\40\ Proposed note to proposed Rule 135d(a)(4).

\41\ Rule 254(b)(3) [17 CFR 230.254(b)(3)].

\42\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(5).

\43\ Rule 254(b)(4) [17 CFR 230.254(b)(4)].

\44\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(6).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the proposed rule, like Regulation A,45 would deem

``test the

ommission is not a condition to the exemption.

\40\ Proposed note to proposed Rule 135d(a)(4).

\41\ Rule 254(b)(3) [17 CFR 230.254(b)(3)].

\42\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(5).

\43\ Rule 254(b)(4) [17 CFR 230.254(b)(4)].

\44\ Proposed Rule 135d(a)(6).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the proposed rule, like Regulation A,45 would deem

``test the

waters'' material submitted to the Commission and otherwise in

compliance with the rule not to be a ``prospectus'' as defined in

Section 2(10) of the Securities Act,46 and therefore not subject

to Section 12(2) of the Securities Act.47 Comment is requested as

to the appropriateness of removing these materials from Section 12(2)

liabilities. Should ``test the waters'' soliciting material be required

to be filed as part of the registration statement for the IPO and

subjected to Sections 11 48 and 12(2) liabilities if the

registered offering is conducted within a specified time period of the

solicitation, e.g. 2, 6 or 12 months?

\45\ The Commission amended Rule 254 to provide that a written

``test the waters'' solicitation document complying with Regulation

A will not constitute a ``prospectus'' as defined in Section 2(10)

of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77b(10)]. See Release No. 33-6996

(April 28, 1993) [58 FR 26509]. The antifraud provisions of the

federal securities laws (Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15

U.S.C. 77q(a)] and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of

1934 [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)]), however, continue to apply to any

Regulation A ``test the waters'' material.

\46\ 15 U.S.C. 77b(10).

\47\ 15 U.S.C. 77l(2).

\48\ 15 U.S.C. 77k.

In Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc., 49 the Supreme Court

concluded that the written instruments there at issue did not

constitute a ``prospectus'' as that term is used in Section 12(2) of

the Securities Act, notwithstanding the broad coverage of the statutory

definition of the term ``prospectus'' in Section 2(10) of the

Securities Act

.S.C. 77b(10).

\47\ 15 U.S.C. 77l(2).

\48\ 15 U.S.C. 77k.

In Gustafson v. Alloyd Co., Inc., 49 the Supreme Court

concluded that the written instruments there at issue did not

constitute a ``prospectus'' as that term is used in Section 12(2) of

the Securities Act, notwithstanding the broad coverage of the statutory

definition of the term ``prospectus'' in Section 2(10) of the

Securities Act. The Commission believes that its determination that

written documents of the type referred to in proposed Rule 135d should

not be deemed a prospectus, or part of a prospectus, is an appropriate

use of its authority both under Sections 2(10) and 19(a). It also

believes that its proposal to limit the breadth of the term

``prospectus'' is not inconsistent with the Supreme Court's decision in

Gustafson.

\49\ ______ U.S. ______, 115 S. Ct. 1061, 131 L. Ed. 2d 1

(1995).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As noted above, the proposed rule requires that no sales of

securities occur until at least 20 days after the last publication or

delivery of the solicitation document or broadcast.50 Comment is

requested as to whether or not pre-confirmation prospectus delivery

requirements 51 should be revised to permit investors a longer

period of time than they have currently, e.g., seven days (instead of

the current 48 hours) to consider prospectus information where the

``test the waters'' process has been used. Comment is requested as to

the need for additional procedures to assure investors a sufficient

opportunity following a ``test the waters'' solicitation to review and

assess the full information about the issuer, its management, the

securities and the offering provided by the registration statement and

prospectus. Comment also is requested as to whether or not there is a

need to require that all ``test the waters'' solicitations, written or

oral, cease at some period of time prior to the filing of a

registration statement for an IPO

citation to review and

assess the full information about the issuer, its management, the

securities and the offering provided by the registration statement and

prospectus. Comment also is requested as to whether or not there is a

need to require that all ``test the waters'' solicitations, written or

oral, cease at some period of time prior to the filing of a

registration statement for an IPO. Given the purpose of the proposed

rule, allowing issuers to determine whether to undertake a registered

IPO before incurring the costs of complying with the disclosure and

other related requirements, would such a cooling-off period be

consistent with financing schedules? Due diligence and preparation of

documents typically takes 60 to 90 days.52 Comment is requested as

to the need for a cooling-off period prior to the commencement of a

registered offering, and the period of time that would be appropriate,

e.g. 30 days or 60 days.

\50\ Of course, if the issuer were to comply with both proposed

Rule 135d and Rule 505 (or 506) of Regulation D, [17 CFR 230.505 and

230.506, respectively] and it were decided not to proceed with an

IPO, it could sell immediately under Rule 505 (506). Similarly, if

an issuer were to comply with both Rule 135d and Rule 504 [17 CFR

230.504] (which does permit general solicitation), sales could

proceed immediately without waiting 20 days in the event the issuer

determines not to go the IPO route.

\51\ See Rule 15c2-8 [17 CFR 240.15c2-8].

\52\ C. Schneider, J. Manko, and R. Kant, Going Public:

Practice, Procedure and Consequences, 36 (1995).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CFR

230.504] (which does permit general solicitation), sales could

proceed immediately without waiting 20 days in the event the issuer

determines not to go the IPO route.

\51\ See Rule 15c2-8 [17 CFR 240.15c2-8].

\52\ C. Schneider, J. Manko, and R. Kant, Going Public:

Practice, Procedure and Consequences, 36 (1995).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under Regulation A, failure to comply with the terms and conditions

of the ``test the waters'' procedures can result in a Commission order

suspending a Regulation A exemption. Under proposed Rule 135d, just as

with Rule 135, full compliance with the terms and conditions of the

rule is required to come within the safe harbor provisions of the rule.

Comment is requested as to whether there should be a provision

addressing failures to comply with the provisions that would provide

adequate protection to investors, preclude undue conditioning of the

market, allow timely oversight of the contents of the written

solicitation material, and avoid loss of the safe harbor for technical,

immaterial deviations from the specific requirements of the safe

harbor.

With respect to investor protection, today's proposals would not

alter the type and amount of information available to investors in

connection with an IPO. Issuers making use of the proposed ``test the

waters'' procedure would continue to be subject to all the current IPO

disclosure requirements, and IPO registration statements would continue

to be subject to Commission staff review if the issuer determined to

proceed with a registered offering after soliciting investor interest.

Comment is requested generally on whether the proposed ``test the

waters'' rule is appropriate and in investors' interest in the context

of registered IPOs

ect to all the current IPO

disclosure requirements, and IPO registration statements would continue

to be subject to Commission staff review if the issuer determined to

proceed with a registered offering after soliciting investor interest.

Comment is requested generally on whether the proposed ``test the

waters'' rule is appropriate and in investors' interest in the context

of registered IPOs. Will the proposed process effectively accomplish

the Commission's goal of allowing businesses to assess the capital

market's potential interest in their businesses on a cost-effective

basis, without causing investors to overlook the full disclosures

mandated by the federal securities laws?

B. Relationship of Exempt Offerings to ``Test the Waters'' Activity

After an issuer has engaged in a ``test the waters'' procedure

under the proposed rule, it might conclude that, rather than having a

registered offering, it would be desirable to raise capital by means of

a Regulation A, private 53 or Regulation D offering. In order to

accommodate the issuer's flexibility to use Regulation A, that

Regulation's ``test the waters'' rule would be amended to make it clear

that ``testing the waters'' under the proposed new rule could be

followed by a Regulation A offering,54 just as an issuer that

``tests the waters'' under Regulation A could ultimately determine to

have a registered offering instead.55 Comment is solicited on

whether proposed Rule 135d should be used for ``testing the waters''

with a view to either a registered or a Regulation A offering, thus

replacing Rule 254.

ters'' under the proposed new rule could be

followed by a Regulation A offering,54 just as an issuer that

``tests the waters'' under Regulation A could ultimately determine to

have a registered offering instead.55 Comment is solicited on

whether proposed Rule 135d should be used for ``testing the waters''

with a view to either a registered or a Regulation A offering, thus

replacing Rule 254.

\53\ Section 4(2) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77d(2)].

\54\ Proposed Rule 254(b)(4).

\55\ See Rule 254(d). This provision would be amended to

eliminate the 30 day waiting period currently required before filing

a registration statement.

With respect to offerings relying on an exemption other than

Regulation A, it is noted that under Rule 502(c) of Regulation

D,56 any form of general solicitation or general advertising would

preclude availability of the exemptions provided by Rules 505 and

506.57 Thus, if the issuer's ``test the waters'' activity was done

in a way that involved general advertising or other activities

constituting general solicitation,58 it could not proceed directly

to an offering relying on an exemption that precluded general

solicitation, even if the parties expected to purchase in the exempt

offering were accredited investors.59 Just as with any other party

relying on such an exemption, the issuer would have to ensure that the

exempt offering would not be integrated with the ``test the waters''

activity,60 either by relying on the safe harbor afforded for

transactions occurring more than six months before and after the

Regulation D transaction,61 or by otherwise ensuring that the

transactions were distinct enough so that they would not be integrated

under the five-factors test.62 This is comparable to the treatment

of Regulation A ``test the waters'' activity.63

``test the waters''

activity,60 either by relying on the safe harbor afforded for

transactions occurring more than six months before and after the

Regulation D transaction,61 or by otherwise ensuring that the

transactions were distinct enough so that they would not be integrated

under the five-factors test.62 This is comparable to the treatment

of Regulation A ``test the waters'' activity.63

\56\ 17 CFR 230.502(c).

\57\ Because public offerings are permitted under Rule 504, the

following discussion about ``general solicitation'' would not apply

to transactions pursuant to that exemption.

\58\ This would depend upon the manner and scope of the

dissemination of the ``test the waters'' communication. The

determination as to whether the activities constituted a general

solicitation would hinge upon the particular facts and circumstances

of individual situations.

\59\ 17 CFR 230.501(a).

\60\ See Rule 502(a) of Regulation D [17 CFR 230.502(a)], which

enumerates factors to be considered in determining whether offers

and sales should be integrated for purposes of the exemptions under

Regulation D.

\61\ Rule 502(a).

\62\ The five-factors integration test is set forth in

Securities Act Release No. 4552 (November 6, 1962)[27 FR 11316].

\63\ See Release No. 33-6949, Part II.B.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission recognizes that the possibility of integrating

``test the waters'' activity with private or Regulation D offerings

could impair the usefulness of proposed Rule 135d

integration test is set forth in

Securities Act Release No. 4552 (November 6, 1962)[27 FR 11316].

\63\ See Release No. 33-6949, Part II.B.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission recognizes that the possibility of integrating

``test the waters'' activity with private or Regulation D offerings

could impair the usefulness of proposed Rule 135d. In a companion

release that proposes a new exemption from registration for offerings

made in compliance with a recently enacted California exemption,64

the Commission is soliciting public comment on a variety of approaches

to general solicitation, including whether the prohibition against

general solicitation for Rules 505 and 506 offerings should be

rescinded, whether it would be feasible to reduce restrictions but

limit the information allowed to be disseminated or the manner of

dissemination, and other approaches. Would another approach be to

provide a special integration safe harbor for private placements

following a Rule 135d ``test the waters'' solicitation?

\64\ Release No. 33-7185.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

For example, would the 20 day period proposed between the last

``test the waters'' document or broadcast and any sale be an

appropriate safe harbor for non-integration of a sale to accredited

investors following a ``test the waters'' solicitation?

C. Communications That Are Not ``Offers''

\64\ Release No. 33-7185.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

For example, would the 20 day period proposed between the last

``test the waters'' document or broadcast and any sale be an

appropriate safe harbor for non-integration of a sale to accredited

investors following a ``test the waters'' solicitation?

C. Communications That Are Not ``Offers''

As noted, proposed Rule 135d would provide that any communication

meeting the conditions of the rule, as described above, is not deemed

to offer any securities for sale, for purposes only of Section 5 of the

Securities Act. Thus, ``test the waters'' activity could take place

without the filing of a Securities Act registration statement or an

available exemption from registration.

The Commission is cognizant that rulemaking in this area is

circumscribed by the statute's prohibition of conduct constituting an

``offer'' prior to the filing of a registration statement.65 The

application of this definition to differing forms of pre-filing

communications will, of course, vary. In proposing Rule 135d for

comment, it is the Commission's intention to examine further the

elements of the types of pre-filing activity that would be most

constructive for IPOs and investors, as well as the appropriate

limitations or parameters of such activity.

\65\ Section 2(3) [15 U.S.C. 77b(3)] provides, in pertinent

part:

The term ``offer to sell'', ``offer for sale'', or ``offer''

shall include every attempt or offer to dispose of, or solicitation

of an offer to buy, a security or interest in a security, for value.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

propriate

limitations or parameters of such activity.

\65\ Section 2(3) [15 U.S.C. 77b(3)] provides, in pertinent

part:

The term ``offer to sell'', ``offer for sale'', or ``offer''

shall include every attempt or offer to dispose of, or solicitation

of an offer to buy, a security or interest in a security, for value.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission has previously had occasion to consider the

application of the statute to other types of public communications made

prior to the filing of a registration statement, both in rules and in

interpretive positions.66 The Commission has also cautioned that

certain publicity efforts in advance of a proposed public offering,

although not couched in terms of an express offer, may raise questions

under the statute if they contribute to conditioning the public market

or arousing public interest in an issuer or its securities before a

registration statement is filed.67 In the context of exempt public

offerings for small businesses under Section 3(b) and Regulation A, the

Commission has indicated that ``test the waters'' activities pursuant

to Rule 254 are considered offers for purposes of Section 2(3).68

The Commission intends to examine these and other interpretations of

the relevant statutory provisions in considering the historical scope

of permissible ``test the waters'' activities and the appropriateness

of the provisions of proposed Rule 135d.

n A, the

Commission has indicated that ``test the waters'' activities pursuant

to Rule 254 are considered offers for purposes of Section 2(3).68

The Commission intends to examine these and other interpretations of

the relevant statutory provisions in considering the historical scope

of permissible ``test the waters'' activities and the appropriateness

of the provisions of proposed Rule 135d.

\66\ The Commission has indicated that the Securities Act allows

the following public communications, among others, prior to the

filing of a registration statement:

Rule 135 [17 CFR 230.135] (notice given by an issuer

that it proposes to make a registered public offering of securities,

if the notice states that the offering will be made only by means of

a prospectus and contains only specified information).

Rule 135a [17 CFR 230.135a] (certain generic investment

company advertising).

Rule 135b [17 CFR 230.135b] (certain standardized

options disclosure materials).

Rule 135c [17 CFR 230.135c] (notice by an issuer that

it proposes to make, is making, or has made an offering of

securities not registered or required to be registered under the

Securities Act, provided that the notice is not for the purposes of

conditioning the U.S. securities market, the notice states that the

securities may not be offered or sold in the U.S. absent

registration or an exemption, and the notice contains only specified

information).

Rules 137 [17 CFR 230.137], 138 [17 CFR 230.138], and

139 [17 CFR 230.139] (certain broker-dealer research reports).

Rule 145(b)(1) [17 CFR 230.145(b)(1)] (certain

communications regarding Rule 145(a) transactions).

Release 33-5927 (April 24, 1978) [42 FR 18163]; United

Technologies Corporation (April 24, 1978) (interpretive release and

letter, permitting disclosure by a bidder in a cash tender offer of

information required by the Williams Act about previous negotiations

or agreements with the subject company regarding a merger without a

registration statement being on file)

g Rule 145(a) transactions).

Release 33-5927 (April 24, 1978) [42 FR 18163]; United

Technologies Corporation (April 24, 1978) (interpretive release and

letter, permitting disclosure by a bidder in a cash tender offer of

information required by the Williams Act about previous negotiations

or agreements with the subject company regarding a merger without a

registration statement being on file).

\67\ See, e.g., Release No. 33-3844 (Oct. 8, 1957) [22 FR 8359]

(discussing publication of information prior to and after the

effective date).

\68\ See Release No. 33-6996 (April 28, 1993) [58 FR 26509]. The

Commission is considering the extent to which the rationale

underlying Rule 254 should guide its present inquiry.

Recognizing these statutory limitations, the Commission requests

comment as to whether alternative means are available to permit issuers

to gather data efficiently to assist them in assessing the likelihood

that a contemplated offering will be successful. For example, could a

simplified registration procedure be adopted in which ``test the

waters'' practices are made pursuant to a filed, but extremely

simplified, registration statement, with normal, extensive information

to be filed by amendment if an offering proceeds? Would this approach

be consistent with Sections 7 and 10 of the Securities Act,69

which allow the Commission to define the contents of a registration

statement and a prospectus, respectively? Would the modest additional

burden of filing ``test the waters'' materials as a technical

registration statement render the procedure substantially less useful

for issuers? Would issuers use a process that requires the inclusion of

the ``test the waters'' materials in a registration statement subject

to Section 11 or a prospectus subject to Section 12(2) of the

Securities Act?

\69\ 15 U.S.C. 77g and 77j, respectively.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Request for Comment

dure substantially less useful

for issuers? Would issuers use a process that requires the inclusion of

the ``test the waters'' materials in a registration statement subject

to Section 11 or a prospectus subject to Section 12(2) of the

Securities Act?

\69\ 15 U.S.C. 77g and 77j, respectively.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Request for Comment

Any interested persons wishing to submit written comments on the

proposed expansion of the ``test the waters'' procedure to IPOs, as

well as on other matters that might have an impact on the proposals

contained herein, are requested to do so. Comments are requested on the

impact of the proposals on issuers, investors, and others. The

Commission also requests comment on whether the proposed rules, if

adopted, would have an adverse impact on competition that is neither

necessary nor appropriate in furthering the purposes of the Securities

Act.

Comments will be considered by the Commission in complying with its

responsibilities under Section 23(a) of the Exchange Act.70

Comment letters should refer to File No. S7-18-95. All comments

received will be available for public inspection and copying in the

Commission's Public Reference Room, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20549.

\70\ 15 U.S.C. 78w(a).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Cost-Benefit Analysis

ibilities under Section 23(a) of the Exchange Act.70

Comment letters should refer to File No. S7-18-95. All comments

received will be available for public inspection and copying in the

Commission's Public Reference Room, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20549.

\70\ 15 U.S.C. 78w(a).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Cost-Benefit Analysis

To assist the Commission in its evaluation of the costs and

benefits that may result from the proposals, commenters are requested

to provide views and data relating to any costs and benefits associated

with these proposals. The proposals, which are intended to reduce

complexity and potentially significant costs to an issuer in connection

with the planning for an IPO, while not sacrificing investor

protection, are expected to reduce the costs associated with IPOs. The

Commission is not proposing to increase the burdens on any issuer that

chooses to engage in an IPO. Use of the proposed ``test the waters''

procedure would be optional. Further, any cost associated with the

preparation of the proposed ``test the waters'' document would be

offset by the significant benefits that issuers would receive in the

reduction of costs. Those benefits also include a higher degree of

assurance that a particular offering will find a receptive market.

V. Summary of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

An initial regulatory flexibility analysis has been prepared in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603 concerning the proposed new rule and

amendments. The analysis notes that the amendments are intended to

reduce costs associated with IPOs.

As discussed more fully in the analysis, the proposals would affect

persons that are small entities, as defined by the Commission's rules,

but would affect small entities in the same manner as other

registrants. The proposed rule and amendments, however, are designed to

decrease potential costs to all issuers, including small businesses

ents are intended to

reduce costs associated with IPOs.

As discussed more fully in the analysis, the proposals would affect

persons that are small entities, as defined by the Commission's rules,

but would affect small entities in the same manner as other

registrants. The proposed rule and amendments, however, are designed to

decrease potential costs to all issuers, including small businesses.

A copy of the analysis may be obtained by contacting James R.

Budge, Office of Disclosure Policy, Division of Corporation Finance,

Mail Stop 3-12, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549.

VI. Statutory Basis for Rules

The amendments to the Securities Act rules, Regulation A and

Regulation S-T are being proposed pursuant to Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and

19 of the Securities Act, as amended.71

\71\ 15 U.S.C. 77b, 77c, 77d, 77e, and 77s.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The amendment to Regulation S-T also is being proposed pursuant to

Sections 3, 12, 13, 14, 15(d), 23(a) and 35A of the Exchange Act, as

amended,72 Sections 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17 and 20 of the

Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended,73 Section

319 of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, as amended,74 and Sections

8, 30, 31 and 38 of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as

amended.75

\72\ 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a) and 78ll.

\73\ 15 U.S.C. 79c, 79e, 79f, 79g, 79j, 79l, 79m, 79n, 79q and

79t.

\74\ 15 U.S.C. 77sss.

\75\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30 and 80a-37.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 230 and 232

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities

Text of Proposed Amendments

In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 230--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

1. The authority citation for Part 230 continues to read in part as

follows:

of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 230 and 232

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities

Text of Proposed Amendments

In accordance with the foregoing, Title 17, Chapter II of the Code

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 230--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

1. The authority citation for Part 230 continues to read in part as

follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77b, 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 77sss, 78c,

78l, 78m, 78n, 78o, 78w, 78ll(d), 79t, 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30 and

80a-37, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

2. By adding a paragraph (a)(8) to Sec. 230.100 to read as follows:

Sec. 230.100 Definition of terms used in the rules and regulations.

(a) * * *

(8) The term direct participation investment program means any

program (other than an investment company registered or required to be

registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et

seq.)) that provides for flow-through tax consequences regardless of

the structure of the legal entity or vehicle for distribution,

including, but not limited to, partnerships, limited partnerships, real

estate investment trusts as defined in I.R.C. Sec. 856, and limited

liability companies.

* * * * *

3. By adding Sec. 230.135d to read as follows:

Sec. 230.135d Solicitation of interest document for use prior to an

initial public offering.

(a) For purposes only of section 5 of the Act, a written or oral

communication, or the making of scripted radio or television

broadcasts, to determine whether there is any interest in the issuer's

initial public offering of securities shall not be deemed to offer any

securities for sale if:

(1) The issuer of the securities:

of interest document for use prior to an

initial public offering.

(a) For purposes only of section 5 of the Act, a written or oral

communication, or the making of scripted radio or television

broadcasts, to determine whether there is any interest in the issuer's

initial public offering of securities shall not be deemed to offer any

securities for sale if:

(1) The issuer of the securities:

(i) Is not subject to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.)

immediately before the submission of solicitation material pursuant to

this section;

(ii) Is not a development stage company that either has no specific

business plan or purpose, or has indicated that its business plan is to

merge within an unidentified company or companies;

(iii) Is not an issuer of penny stock as defined in Section

3(a)(51) and Rule 3a51-1 under the Exchange Act;

(iv) Is not an investment company registered or required to be

registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et

seq.);

(v) Is not an issuer of asset-backed securities; and

(vi) Is not an issuer that after its initial public offering would

be a direct participation investment program;

(2) The written document or script of the broadcast:

(i) States that the solicitation is not an offering of securities

for sale, and that any public offering to be made will be made by means

of a prospectus that may be obtained from the issuer and that will

contain detailed information about the company and management, as well

as financial statements;

(ii) States that no money or other consideration is being

solicited, and if sent in response, will not be accepted;

(iii) States that no sales of the securities will be made or

commitment to purchase accepted until a registration statement is filed

with the Commission and becomes effective, or an appropriate exemption

from registration is available and utilized;

ell

as financial statements;

(ii) States that no money or other consideration is being

solicited, and if sent in response, will not be accepted;

(iii) States that no sales of the securities will be made or

commitment to purchase accepted until a registration statement is filed

with the Commission and becomes effective, or an appropriate exemption

from registration is available and utilized;

(iv) States that an indication of interest made by a prospective

investor involves no obligation or commitment of any kind; and

(v) Identifies the chief executive officer of the issuer and

briefly and in general its business and products;

(3) On or before the date of its first use, the issuer shall submit

a copy of

any written document or the script of any broadcast to be used in

reliance upon this section to the Commission's main office in

Washington, D.C. (Attention: Office of Small Business Policy). The

document or broadcast script shall either contain or be accompanied by

the name and telephone number of a person able to answer questions

about the document or the broadcast.

Note: Only solicitation of interest material that contains

substantive changes from or additions to previously submitted

material need be submitted.

(4) Oral communications with prospective investors and other

broadcasts are not made until after submission of the written document

or script of the broadcast to the Commission as provided in

subparagraph (a)(3) of this section; there is no solicitation or

acceptance of money or other consideration, nor of any commitment,

binding or otherwise, from any prospective investor in reliance upon

this section; and no sale is made until a registration statement is

effective pursuant to Section 8 of the Act with respect to the

securities offering, or an appropriate exemption from registration is

available and utilized;

Note: The written documents, broadcasts and oral communications

are each subject to the antifraud provisions of the federal

securities laws.

investor in reliance upon

this section; and no sale is made until a registration statement is

effective pursuant to Section 8 of the Act with respect to the

securities offering, or an appropriate exemption from registration is

available and utilized;

Note: The written documents, broadcasts and oral communications

are each subject to the antifraud provisions of the federal

securities laws.

(5) Solicitations of interest in reliance upon the provisions of

this section are not made after the filing of a registration statement

under the Act; provided, however, that receipt by the issuer after the

filing of a registration statement of a coupon from a potential

investor provided to such potential investor pursuant to paragraph (b)

of this section prior to the filing of a registration statement is

consistent with this subparagraph; and

(6) Sales pursuant to a registration statement are not made until

20 calendar days after the last publication or delivery of the document

or radio or television broadcast.

(b) Any written document used in reliance upon this section may

include a coupon, returnable to the issuer, indicating interest in a

potential registered offering, revealing the name, address and

telephone number of the prospective investor, and stating clearly and

separately that the indication of interest is not binding and that no

money should be sent. Such coupon may not request information about the

financial profile of the investor, such as income, assets or investment

history.

(c) Written solicitation of interest materials used in reliance

upon this section submitted to the Commission as provided in paragraph

(a)(3) of this section, and otherwise in compliance with this section

shall not be deemed to be a prospectus as defined in Section 2(10) of

the Act.

4. By amending Sec. 230.254 by revising paragraph (b)(4), to read

as follows:

Sec. 230.254 Solicitation of interest document for use prior to an

offered statement.

* * * * *

pon this section submitted to the Commission as provided in paragraph

(a)(3) of this section, and otherwise in compliance with this section

shall not be deemed to be a prospectus as defined in Section 2(10) of

the Act.

4. By amending Sec. 230.254 by revising paragraph (b)(4), to read

as follows:

Sec. 230.254 Solicitation of interest document for use prior to an

offered statement.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(4) Sales pursuant to an offering circular or registration

statement may not be made until 20 calendar days after the last

publication or delivery of the document or radio or television

broadcast pursuant to this rule or pursuant to Sec. 230.135d.

* * * * *

5. By amending paragraph (d) of Sec. 230.254 by removing the

phrase: ``, if at least 30 calendar days have elapsed between the last

solicitation of interest and the filing of the registration statement

with the Commission,''.

PART 232--REGULATION S-T--GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR

ELECTRONIC FILINGS

6. The authority citation for Part 232 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77sss(a),

78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll(d), 79t(a), 80a-8, 80a-

29, 8a-30 and 80a-37.

7. By amending Sec. 232.101 by removing the word ``and'' following

the semicolon in paragraph (b)(4), by removing the period at the end of

(b)(5) and adding in its place ``; and'', and by adding paragraph

(b)(6) to read as follows:

Sec. 232.101 Mandated electronic submissions and exceptions.

77sss(a),

78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll(d), 79t(a), 80a-8, 80a-

29, 8a-30 and 80a-37.

7. By amending Sec. 232.101 by removing the word ``and'' following

the semicolon in paragraph (b)(4), by removing the period at the end of

(b)(5) and adding in its place ``; and'', and by adding paragraph

(b)(6) to read as follows:

Sec. 232.101 Mandated electronic submissions and exceptions.

(b) * * *

(6) Solicitation of interest documents or broadcast scripts

submitted to the Commission pursuant to Rule 135d (Sec. 230.135d of

this chapter).

* * * * *

Dated: June 27, 1995.

By the Commission.

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of

Federal Regulations.

Appendix To Release

Title: Resolution of the North American Securities Administrators

Association, Inc., Regarding the Testing-the-Waters Exemption

Whereas, NASAA recognizes the policy objectives underlying the

testing-the-waters exemption drafted by its working group, but has

substantial concerns as to whether it can adequately ensure that

investors are protected,

Therefore, be it resolved that NASAA will take no formal action

with regard to the proposal so that a two year pilot program may be

undertaken by those jurisdictions electing to do so and the results

of the program may be carefully considered.

Adopted by the membership of the North American Securities

Administrators Association on April 25, 1993 at its Spring Meeting

in Washington, D.C.

Proposed Statement of Policy on Solicitation of Interest (Test the

Waters)

gard to the proposal so that a two year pilot program may be

undertaken by those jurisdictions electing to do so and the results

of the program may be carefully considered.

Adopted by the membership of the North American Securities

Administrators Association on April 25, 1993 at its Spring Meeting

in Washington, D.C.

Proposed Statement of Policy on Solicitation of Interest (Test the

Waters)

Note: This proposed rule has not been adopted by the NASAA

membership by a resolution adopted April 25, 1993, the membership

voted to take no action on the proposal pending a study of its

effect in those jurisdictions that choose to adopt its use on an

experimental basis. It is being published solely to provide a

uniform basis for this pilot project that will attempt to determine

if such an exemptive rule can be implemented without jeopardizing

investor protection.

Solicitations of Interest prior to the Filing of the

Registration Statement:

(1) An offer, but not a sale, of a security made by or on behalf

of an issuer for the sole purpose of soliciting an indication of

interest in receiving a prospectus (or its equivalent) for such

security is exempt from section [301] of the Act if all of the

following conditions are satisfied:

(a) The issuer is or will be a business entity organized under

the laws of one of the states or possessions of the United States or

one of the provinces or territories of Canada, is engaged in or

proposes to engage in a business other than petroleum exploration or

production or mining or other extractive industries and is not a

``blind pool'' offering or other offering for which the specific

business or properties cannot now be described.

(b) The offerer intends to register the security in this state

and conduct its offering pursuant to either Regulation A or Rule 504

of Regulation D, as promulgated by the Securities and Exchange

Commission.

ation or

production or mining or other extractive industries and is not a

``blind pool'' offering or other offering for which the specific

business or properties cannot now be described.

(b) The offerer intends to register the security in this state

and conduct its offering pursuant to either Regulation A or Rule 504

of Regulation D, as promulgated by the Securities and Exchange

Commission.

(c) Ten (10) business days prior to the initial solicitation of

interest under this rule, the offerer files with the [Administrator]

a Solicitation of Interest Form along with any other materials to be

used to conduct solicitations of interest, including, but not

limited to, the script of any broadcast to be made and a copy of any

notice to be published.

(d) Five (5) business days prior to usage, the offerer files

with the [Administrator] any amendments to the foregoing materials

or additional materials to be used to conduct solicitations of

interest, except for materials provided to a particular offeree

pursuant to a request by that offeree.

(e) No Solicitation of Interest Form, script, advertisement or

other material which the offerer has been notified by the

[Administrator] not to distribute is used to solicit indications of

interest.

(f) Except for scripted broadcasts and published notices, the

offerer does not communicate with any offeree about the contemplated

offering unless the offeree is

provided with the most current Solicitation of Interest Form at or

before the time of the communication or within five (5) days from

the communication.

(g) During the solicitation of interest period, the offerer does

not solicit or accept money or a commitment to purchase securities.

es, the

offerer does not communicate with any offeree about the contemplated

offering unless the offeree is

provided with the most current Solicitation of Interest Form at or

before the time of the communication or within five (5) days from

the communication.

(g) During the solicitation of interest period, the offerer does

not solicit or accept money or a commitment to purchase securities.

(h) No sale is made until seven (7) days after delivery to the

purchaser of a prospectus. [Alternative: No sale is made until seven

(7) days after delivery to the purchaser of a final prospectus, or

in those instances in which delivery of a preliminary prospectus is

allowed hereunder, a preliminary prospectus.] 1

\1\ The bracketed subsection should only be used in those

jurisdictions that have or intend to adopt an applicable ``red

herring'' exemption. The ``red herring'' exemption should cross-

reference this rule to avoid confusion.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(i) The offerer does not know, and in the exercise of reasonable

care, could not know that the issuer or any of the issuer's

officers, directors, ten percent shareholders or promoters:

1. Has filed a registration statement which is the subject of a

currently effective registration stop order entered pursuant to any

federal or state securities law within five years prior to the

filing of the Solicitation of Interest Form.

2. Has been convicted within five years prior to the filing of

the Solicitation of Interest Form of any felony or misdemeanor in

connection with the offer, purchase or sale of any security or any

felony involving fraud or deceit, including, but not limited to

forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses,

larceny, or conspiracy to defraud.

3

the Solicitation of Interest Form.

2. Has been convicted within five years prior to the filing of

the Solicitation of Interest Form of any felony or misdemeanor in

connection with the offer, purchase or sale of any security or any

felony involving fraud or deceit, including, but not limited to

forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses,

larceny, or conspiracy to defraud.

3. Is currently subject to any federal or state administrative

enforcement order or judgment entered by any state securities

administrator or the Securities and Exchange Commission within five

years prior to the filing of the Solicitation of Interest Form or is

subject to any federal or state administrative enforcement order or

judgment entered within five years prior to the filing of the

Solicitation of Interest Form in which fraud or deceit, including,

but not limited to, making untrue statements of material facts and

omitting to state material facts, was found.

4. Is subject to any federal or state administrative enforcement

order or judgement which prohibits, denies, or revokes the use of

any exemption from registration connection with the offer, purchase

or sale of securities.

5. Is currently subject of any order, judgment, or decree of any

court of competent jurisdiction temporarily or preliminarily

restraining or enjoining, or is subject to any order, judgment or

decree of any court of competent jurisdiction permanently

restraining or enjoining, such party from engaging in or continuing

any conduct or practice in connection with the purchase or sale of

any security or involving the making of any false filing with the

state entered within five years prior to the filing of the

Solicitation of Interest Form

ining, or is subject to any order, judgment or

decree of any court of competent jurisdiction permanently

restraining or enjoining, such party from engaging in or continuing

any conduct or practice in connection with the purchase or sale of

any security or involving the making of any false filing with the

state entered within five years prior to the filing of the

Solicitation of Interest Form.

The prohibitions listed above shall not apply if the person

subject to the disqualification is duly licensed or registered to

conduct securities related business in the state in which the

administrative order or judgment was entered against such person or

if the broker/dealer employing such party is licensed or registered

in this state and the Form B-D filed with this state discloses the

order, conviction, judgment or decree relating to such person. No

person disqualified under this subsection may act in a capacity

other than that for which the person is licensed or registered. Any

disqualification caused by this section is automatically waived if

the agency which created the basis for disqualification determines

upon a showing of good cause that it is not necessary under the

circumstances that the exemption be denied.

(2) A failure to comply with any condition of section (1) of

this rule will not result in the loss of the exemption from the

requirements of section [301] of this Act for any offer to a

particular individual or entity if the offerer shows:

(a) The failure to comply did not pertain to a condition

directly intended to protect that particular individual or entity;

and

(b) The failure to comply was insignificant with respect to the

offering as a whole; and

is rule will not result in the loss of the exemption from the

requirements of section [301] of this Act for any offer to a

particular individual or entity if the offerer shows:

(a) The failure to comply did not pertain to a condition

directly intended to protect that particular individual or entity;

and

(b) The failure to comply was insignificant with respect to the

offering as a whole; and

(c) A good faith and reasonable attempt was made to comply with

all applicable conditions of section (1).

Where an exemption is established only through reliance upon

this section (2), the failure to comply shall nonetheless be

actionable as a violation of the Act by the [Administrator] under

section [408] of the Act and constitute grounds for denying or

revoking the exemption as to a specific security or transaction.

(3) The offerer shall comply with the requirements set forth

below. Failure to comply will not result in the loss of the

exemption from the requirements of section [301] of this Act, but

shall be a violation of the Act, be actionable by the

[Administrator] under section [408] of the Act, and constitute

grounds for denying or revoking the exemption as to a specific

security or transaction.

(a) Any published notice or script for broadcast must contain at

least the identity of the chief executive officer of the issuer, a

brief and general description of its business and products and the

following legends:

1. No money or other consideration is being solicited and none

will be accepted;

2. No sales of the securities will be made or commitment to

purchase accepted until delivery of an offering circular that

includes complete information about the issuer and the offering;

3. An indication of interest made by a prospective investor

involves no obligation or commitment of any kind; and

4. This offer is being made pursuant to an exemption from

registration under the federal and state securities laws

curities will be made or commitment to

purchase accepted until delivery of an offering circular that

includes complete information about the issuer and the offering;

3. An indication of interest made by a prospective investor

involves no obligation or commitment of any kind; and

4. This offer is being made pursuant to an exemption from

registration under the federal and state securities laws. No sale

may be made until the offering statement is qualified by the SEC and

is registered in this state.

(b) All communications with prospective investors made in

reliance on this rule must cease after a registration statement is

filed in this state, and no sale may be made until at least twenty

(20) calendar days after the last communication made in reliance on

this rule.

[(c) A preliminary prospectus (or its equivalent) may only be

used in connection with an offering for which indications of

interest have been solicited under this rule if the offering is

conducted by a registered broker-dealer.] \2\

\2\ See footnote 1.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) The [Administrator] may waive any condition of this

exemption in writing, upon application by the offerer and cause

having been shown. Neither compliance nor attempted compliance with

this rule, nor the absence of any objection or order by the

[Administrator] with respect to any offer of securities undertaken

pursuant to this rule, shall be deemed to be a waiver of any

condition of the rule or deemed to be a confirmation by the

[Administrator] of the availability of this rule.

(5) Offers made in reliance on this rule will not result in a

violation of Section 301 of the Act by virtue of being integrated

with subsequent offers or sales of securities unless such subsequent

offers and sales would be integrated under federal securities laws.

be a waiver of any

condition of the rule or deemed to be a confirmation by the

[Administrator] of the availability of this rule.

(5) Offers made in reliance on this rule will not result in a

violation of Section 301 of the Act by virtue of being integrated

with subsequent offers or sales of securities unless such subsequent

offers and sales would be integrated under federal securities laws.

(6) Issuers on whose behalf indications of interest are

solicited under this rule may not make offers or sales in reliance

on section[s] [private placement exemption] \3\ until [six (6)] \4\

months after the last communication with a prospective investor made

pursuant to this rule.

\3\ Each jurisdiction should review its exemptions to determine

which ones should be denied if contaminated by public solicitation.

\4\ Some jurisdictions may choose a twelve month period because

the private placement exemptions already in their statutes use this

time frame.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments

1. All communications made in reliance on this rule are subject

to the anti-fraud provisions of this Act.

2. The [Administrator] may or may not review the materials filed

pursuant to this rule. Materials filed, if reviewed, will be judged

under anti-fraud principles. Any discussion in the offering

documents of the potential rewards of the investment must be

balanced by a discussion of possible risks.

3. Any offer effected in violation of this rule may constitute

an unlawful offer of an unregistered security for which civil

liability attaches under Section [410] of the Act. Likewise any

misrepresentation or omission may give rise to civil liability.

Under the Uniform Securities Act a subsequent registration of the

security for the sale of the security does not ``cure'' the previous

unlawful offer. Only a rescission offer made in accordance with the

provisions of the Act can accomplish such a ``cure.'' See commentary

under Section 410.

Section [410] of the Act. Likewise any

misrepresentation or omission may give rise to civil liability.

Under the Uniform Securities Act a subsequent registration of the

security for the sale of the security does not ``cure'' the previous

unlawful offer. Only a rescission offer made in accordance with the

provisions of the Act can accomplish such a ``cure.'' See commentary

under Section 410.

Note to Users: The following form sets forth the minimum

informational requirement for soliciting indications of interest

under federal and state securities laws. You may include additional

information if you think it necessary or desirable. Remember that

any discussion in this document is subject to the anti-fraud

provisions of the federal and state securities laws and must thereby

be complete. Also, any discussion of potential rewards of the

proposed investment must be balanced by a

discussion of possible risks. You may alter the graphic presentation of

the form in any way as long as the minimum information is clearly

presented.

Solicitation of Interest Form

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Name of Company

Street Address of Principal Office:

Company Telephone Number:

Date of Organization:

Amount of the Proposed Offering:---------------------------------------

Name of Chief Executive Officer:---------------------------------------

This is a solicitation of interest only. No money or other

consideration is being solicited and none will be accepted.

No sales of the securities will be made or commitment to

purchase accepted until the delivery of a final offering circular

that includes complete information about the issuer and the

offering.

An indication of interest made by a prospective investor

involves no obligation or commitment of any kind.

This offer is being made pursuant to an exemption from

registration under the federal and state securities laws

curities will be made or commitment to

purchase accepted until the delivery of a final offering circular

that includes complete information about the issuer and the

offering.

An indication of interest made by a prospective investor

involves no obligation or commitment of any kind.

This offer is being made pursuant to an exemption from

registration under the federal and state securities laws. No sale

may be made until the offering statement is qualified by the SEC and

is registered in this state.

This Company

( ) Has never conducted business operations.

( ) Is in the development stage.

( ) Is currently conducting operations.

( ) Has shown a profit for the last fiscal year.

( ) Other (specify) __________

Business

1. Describe in general what business the company does or

proposes to do, including what products or goods are or will be

produced or services that are or will be rendered.

2. Describe in general how these products or services are to be

produced or rendered and how and when the company intends to carry

out its activities.

Offering Proceeds

3. Describe in general how the company intends to use the

proceeds of the proposed offering.

Key Personnel of the Company

4. Provide the following information for all officers and

directors or persons occupying similar positions:

Name, Title, Office Street Address, Telephone Number, Employment

History (Employers, titles and dates of positions held during the

past five years), and Education (degrees, schools and dates).

(end of form)

[FR Doc. 95-16391 Filed 7-7-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.