4 ms·
> which by definition hurts whoever they sell to as they are left holding the bag Of course. The Intel CEO sells stock to investors without telling them that t
by rvern 9y ago
> which by definition hurts whoever they sell to as they are left holding the bag
Of course. The Intel CEO sells stock to investors without telling them that there is a vulnerability that makes the stock worth much less than they think, thus hurting these investors. Sounds intuitive, right?
The investors he sells to had already sent an order to buy to their broker. They were going to buy at the same or worse price anyway, so they aren't harmed by this. Someone else is harmed, but that's the market professionals who, months later, don't get an opportunity to profit off of the news before everyone else. I'm sure economics not being intuitive has something to do with why democracies end up with bad policies all the time.
- lovich 9y agoA: if you are going to just slip in an insult there with the line about economics being unintuitive, go fuck yourself. If you honestly didn't mean it as an insult, then I apologize. B: you've moved the goalposts. I said it hurt others when they sell based on information they know as an employee, of the company whose stock they are selling. You are arguing that its fine because those people would probably be hurt anyway. If it was really fine then why didn't the CEO tell everyone about the vulnerability before making the sale? Those investors would have just bought it anyway, right?