3 ms·

They Sold Their Stock. They could've made a difference, but they made a profit

11 points by patrickdevivo 7y ago

afrcnc 7y ago
They're business people and CEOs elected in public functions. They did what they were trained to do. Watch their own backs. This is why business people should not be eligible for public functions unless 10-20 years removed from any executive job. Would love to see a government led by academics for once.
- necovek 7y ago
  That means you do not have intimate knowledge of how academic institutions operate. They are similarly led by internal preferences, money, position/rank grabbing, and disregard for rules and fairness. People are people. And being smart and knowledgable is far removed from having any common sense.
hkmurakami 7y ago
Burr's actions look bad. Meanwhile Matt Levine rebuts It for Loeffler: """ Similarly Loeffler sold as much as $3.1 million worth of stock (the reports give only broad ranges for each asset), which sounds like a lot for a senator, until you remember that “the Atlanta businesswoman, whose husband is the chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, is worth an estimated $500 million.” So she learned devastating news about a global pandemic and rushed out to sell … stock worth 0.6% of her net worth? Really? At that level of wealth that’s just a minor portfolio tweak; if she was going to insider trade, surely she’d have gone bigger. Also frankly at that level of wealth—and having a stock exchange CEO in the family—it seems unlikely she’s making such tiny trading decisions at all. As, in fact, she said: Loeffler responded on Twitter by calling criticism of her stock sales “a ridiculous and baseless attack.” The tweet said “I do not make investment decisions for my portfolio. Investment decisions are made by multiple third-party advisors without my or my husband’s knowledge or involvement.” That is a much better response than “no I sold before the stocks went down”! https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-20/senators-picked-a-good-time-to-sell-stocks https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-20/senato...
tsycho 7y ago
Just to play devil's advocate: Selling stock takes 5 mins, even less than that if you just relayed the instruction to your spouse. A senator who comes out of a briefing convinced about the gravity of the situation, and then takes every possible action to do the right thing after, but also takes a few mins to sell their stock, is okay in my book. Basically I care much more about what other actions they took, and how they fared at their actual job.
- valar_m 7y ago
  When you sell a share of stock, someone else bought it. How is it okay to sell a security to an unsuspecting buyer when you have nonpublic information that you know affects its value?
  - icedchai 7y ago
    It's unlikely the seller has enough shares to move the market. The buyer would've bought it anyway.
    - valar_m 7y ago
      It's not about moving the market, it's about selling a security when you have nonpublic information that it's worth less than its price. That's a crime. And of course the buyer wouldn't have bought it if they had the same information.
      - icedchai 7y ago
        He could easily argue that he was being cautious, trading on news reports out of China. That was all public. The buyer could've done the same.
      - tsycho 7y ago
        Insider trading is _effectively_ legal for congresspersons after the STOCK act of 2012 was amended in 2013 to remove the online disclosure requirement. https://investmentu.com/why-congressional-insider-trading-legal-profitable/ https://investmentu.com/why-congressional-insider-trading-le...
bsg75 7y ago
I would applaud insider trading criminal charges to be leveled in these cases, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

11 points by patrickdevivo 7y ago

They're business people and CEOs elected in public functions. They did what they were trained to do. Watch their own backs. This is why business people should not be eligible for public functions unless 10-20 years removed from any executive job. Would love to see a government led by academics for once.

necovek 7y ago
That means you do not have intimate knowledge of how academic institutions operate. They are similarly led by internal preferences, money, position/rank grabbing, and disregard for rules and fairness. People are people. And being smart and knowledgable is far removed from having any common sense.

hkmurakami 7y ago

Burr's actions look bad. Meanwhile Matt Levine rebuts It for Loeffler: """ Similarly Loeffler sold as much as $3.1 million worth of stock (the reports give only broad ranges for each asset), which sounds like a lot for a senator, until you remember that “the Atlanta businesswoman, whose husband is the chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, is worth an estimated $500 million.” So she learned devastating news about a global pandemic and rushed out to sell … stock worth 0.6% of her net worth? Really? At that level of wealth that’s just a minor portfolio tweak; if she was going to insider trade, surely she’d have gone bigger. Also frankly at that level of wealth—and having a stock exchange CEO in the family—it seems unlikely she’s making such tiny trading decisions at all. As, in fact, she said: Loeffler responded on Twitter by calling criticism of her stock sales “a ridiculous and baseless attack.” The tweet said “I do not make investment decisions for my portfolio. Investment decisions are made by multiple third-party advisors without my or my husband’s knowledge or involvement.” That is a much better response than “no I sold before the stocks went down”! https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-20/senators-picked-a-good-time-to-sell-stocks https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-20/senato...

tsycho 7y ago

Just to play devil's advocate: Selling stock takes 5 mins, even less than that if you just relayed the instruction to your spouse. A senator who comes out of a briefing convinced about the gravity of the situation, and then takes every possible action to do the right thing after, but also takes a few mins to sell their stock, is okay in my book. Basically I care much more about what other actions they took, and how they fared at their actual job.

valar_m 7y ago
When you sell a share of stock, someone else bought it. How is it okay to sell a security to an unsuspecting buyer when you have nonpublic information that you know affects its value?
- icedchai 7y ago
  It's unlikely the seller has enough shares to move the market. The buyer would've bought it anyway.
  - valar_m 7y ago
    It's not about moving the market, it's about selling a security when you have nonpublic information that it's worth less than its price. That's a crime. And of course the buyer wouldn't have bought it if they had the same information.
    - icedchai 7y ago
      He could easily argue that he was being cautious, trading on news reports out of China. That was all public. The buyer could've done the same.
    - tsycho 7y ago
      Insider trading is _effectively_ legal for congresspersons after the STOCK act of 2012 was amended in 2013 to remove the online disclosure requirement. https://investmentu.com/why-congressional-insider-trading-legal-profitable/ https://investmentu.com/why-congressional-insider-trading-le...

bsg75 7y ago

I would applaud insider trading criminal charges to be leveled in these cases, but I'm not going to hold my breath.