==========================================START OF PAGE 1======

         UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 14803 / January 30, 1996

SEC v. Ronald M. Zook, et al., Case No. 95-798-CIV-ORL-22 (M.D.
Fla.)

     The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on
January 24, 1996, Honorable Anne C. Conway, United States
District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, entered a
final judgment of permanent injunction upon default against
Ronald M. Zook ("Zook") and Financial Concepts Group
International, Inc. ("FCGI") (collectively "Defendants"),
enjoining them from future violations of the registration and
antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws.

     Previously, on August 7, 1995, the Commission filed a
Complaint against the Defendants, alleging violations of Sections
5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5,
thereunder.
     The Complaint alleged that from at least late 1992 through
March 1995, Defendants defrauded at least 195 investors residing
in at least 21 states of a total of approximately $6 million, by
soliciting them to invest in investment contracts involving
"prime bank" instruments, a/k/a "overseas" or "European bank
debentures" and a program involving trading on overseas markets.
The Complaint further alleged that Defendants defrauded investors
by making material misrepresentations and omissions of material
facts regarding the nature, safety and returns of investors'
purported investments.

     Specifically, the Complaint alleged that Defendants
misrepresented to investors that their money was being used to
invest in risk-free, prime bank instruments and bank debentures
paying 60% to 216% interest per year.  In at least four
instances, defendants misrepresented to investors that their
funds were being placed in "secured investments" to trade on
various stock exchanges, including the European, Japanese and
Hong Kong stock markets, paying 120% interest per year.

     According to the Complaint, Defendants neither invested in
prime bank instruments or bank debentures, nor engaged in trading
on any overseas or other exchange.  Instead, they allegedly used
investor funds to: (a) pay business and personal expenses; (b)
make "interest" payments to other investors; and (c) provide