• @PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    569 months ago

    Good luck. If the SEC hasn’t already started building a case against him for insider trading, then nothing is going to happen to him. He’ll get a golden parachute and scurry off to ruin some other company.

    • conciselyverbose
      link
      fedilink
      689 months ago

      “Selling shares before the announcement” was a pretty egregious misrepresentation. He has scheduled pre-registered sales on a regular basis because he gets paid partly in stock.

      It was always going to be relatively soon after a sale of stock.

      • William
        link
        fedilink
        English
        229 months ago

        As if you can’t schedule your announcements to fall just after the scheduled stock sales… Or just before them, if you want.

      • sino
        link
        fedilink
        English
        109 months ago

        Just want to add you’re right but what pisses me off is that they still can influence decisions based on this. Let’s say his shares are sold at x day, just do some decisions before that and boom your auto sell share price is now either higher or lower. Only because it’s predetermined they still influence it and SEC now can’t do shit.

        • conciselyverbose
          link
          fedilink
          89 months ago

          This has nothing in common with insider trading and doesn’t resemble it in any way. The shares he sold weren’t a relevant proportion of his ownership. He didn’t sell then deliberately tank them. He sold then announced something he thought would improve the value of his big stake in the company. The decision almost definitely cost him a lot of money by substantially lowering the trajectory of his company’s ability to maintain market share.

            • @Revan343@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              49 months ago

              If he didn’t think the announcement would improve the value of the company, why did they do it?

              • conciselyverbose
                link
                fedilink
                39 months ago

                Exactly. It was plopping his dick on the table, then realizing “oh shit, no one actually is impressed by this”.

                Insider trading would be more “I know we’re about to get sued for this egregious fuckup and have no defense, so I’m going to sell before the news leaks”. Strategy knowledge can be part of insider trading, but it would tend to be more buying shares because you have advanced knowledge that a highly lucrative contract has been signed before the announcement. It would be harder to have selling because of a strategy decision be insider trading unless you were opposed to it internally, because decisions you make are intended to make the shareholders (you) money.

      • @Aqarius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        79 months ago

        You know, that might just make it worse. As in, this wasn’t some 5d plot, he genuinely thought this would work.

      • @JonEFive@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        59 months ago

        Don’t you bring facts into this! We want to be outraged!

        Being serious though, they ought to be investigating whether there were any changes in those sale orders. If they’ve been the same and unchanged for the last two years or some long period of time, I don’t think there’s a case. But if they’re was an adjustment a month or two ago, that would be very problematic.

      • P03 Locke
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 months ago

        Ha, yeah, that defense worked so well for Martha Stewart.