3 ms·

Yes. If they sell them in three months they're using insider information for financial gain. If they live there they could have just been making an early start

by nsgi 8y ago

Yes. If they sell them in three months they're using insider information for financial gain. If they live there they could have just been making an early start on finding somewhere convenient to live. Whatever the rules are there's definitely a moral difference.

mbrumlow 8y ago
I am no lawyer. But I think insider information is only with respects to stocks. Also. I find no moral issue with this at all. Nor do I think it is somehow unfair. Even so Jeff him self could and I think did pick a place located near some of his houses. We really need to stop getting outraged when somebody else gets ahead. This is just pure jealousy and is very toxic. Pissing I somebody else's limonaid is not going to make yours taste any sweeter.
- otterley 8y ago
  > But I think insider information is only with respects to stocks. Technically it's "securities," which is a broader array of financial instruments than stocks. But I'm not sure that real estate, particularly real estate that one might use as a primary residence, is considered a qualifying security with respect to SEC insider trading laws.
  - kenneth 8y ago
    Real estate is not a security, unless you buy a derivative of it (like equity in a REIT)
  - fierro 8y ago
    lol real estate itself is not a security
conanbatt 8y ago
I have multiple objections to this statement.. 1) Trading on "inside knowledge" is not really a crime, or even a problem. Everyone knows something the other doesn't: thats why you trade on it. You sell your knowledge and knowhow. 2) Why do you think the employees of amazon are less entitled to that gain that the landlords or queens that have almost no relationship whatsoever to the company and have somehow a windfall 3) The ultimate loser of not being able to capture the externality value produced is the company, i.e. the shareholders. This is the other side of the coin of when amazon bargains for tax breaks: some people will be made wealthier for a tangential participation.
- countryqt30 8y ago
  1) "Trading on inside knowledge is not really a crime" - you should go work at the SEC :D
jtd514 8y ago
why do you care? Its not a security. They are not robbing anyone. Who cares? Are you jealous?

by nsgi 8y ago

mbrumlow 8y ago

I am no lawyer. But I think insider information is only with respects to stocks. Also. I find no moral issue with this at all. Nor do I think it is somehow unfair. Even so Jeff him self could and I think did pick a place located near some of his houses. We really need to stop getting outraged when somebody else gets ahead. This is just pure jealousy and is very toxic. Pissing I somebody else's limonaid is not going to make yours taste any sweeter.

otterley 8y ago
> But I think insider information is only with respects to stocks. Technically it's "securities," which is a broader array of financial instruments than stocks. But I'm not sure that real estate, particularly real estate that one might use as a primary residence, is considered a qualifying security with respect to SEC insider trading laws.
- kenneth 8y ago
  Real estate is not a security, unless you buy a derivative of it (like equity in a REIT)
- fierro 8y ago
  lol real estate itself is not a security

conanbatt 8y ago

I have multiple objections to this statement.. 1) Trading on "inside knowledge" is not really a crime, or even a problem. Everyone knows something the other doesn't: thats why you trade on it. You sell your knowledge and knowhow. 2) Why do you think the employees of amazon are less entitled to that gain that the landlords or queens that have almost no relationship whatsoever to the company and have somehow a windfall 3) The ultimate loser of not being able to capture the externality value produced is the company, i.e. the shareholders. This is the other side of the coin of when amazon bargains for tax breaks: some people will be made wealthier for a tangential participation.

countryqt30 8y ago
1) "Trading on inside knowledge is not really a crime" - you should go work at the SEC :D

jtd514 8y ago

why do you care? Its not a security. They are not robbing anyone. Who cares? Are you jealous?