5 ms·

At least company bosses now have money to hire bodyguards for themselves. https://www.eurogamer.net/unity-bosses-sold-stock-days-before-development-fees-announc

At least company bosses now have money to hire bodyguards for themselves. https://www.eurogamer.net/unity-bosses-sold-stock-days-before-development-fees-announcement-raising-eyebrows https://www.eurogamer.net/unity-bosses-sold-stock-days-befor...

awfml 3y ago
Aren't public company executives always required to sell on a predefined schedule?
- jdiff 3y ago
  Genuine question, what stops executives from scheduling stock-tanking announcements to align with their stock-selling schedule?
  - tomjakubowski 3y ago
    I don't know, but one guess: maybe sticking to a stock-selling schedule isn't enough to steer clear of insider trading.
  - bmitc 3y ago
    That's still considered inside trading, but as far as I can tell, nothing prevents it. Inside trading seems rampant and completely unenforced unless you're a regular Joe or Martha Stewart.
    - FateOfNations 3y ago
      And really with Martha Stewart, it wasn't the insider trading, it was lying about insider trading.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - blululu 3y ago
      Perhaps you run in more criminally inflected circles, but I have never seen anyone committing insider trading, and if I did, I would be more than happy to report it to the SEC. Insider trading is a crime that is definitely enforced and comes with serious consequences. The SEC regularly publishes a list of people who have been convicted and it made a record number of convictions last year (nothing surprising since the population keeps growing). Martha Stewart was not exceptional. She was convicted because she committed crimes.
      - bmitc 3y ago
        > Perhaps you run in more criminally inflected circles, but I have never seen anyone committing insider trading, and if I did, I would be more than happy to report it to the SEC. I don't appreciate the linking you've done there. I do not condone or participate in insider trading nor do I personally know anyone who does. I actually want it regulated and prosecuted much more strictly. > The SEC regularly publishes a list of people who have been convicted and it made a record number of convictions last year How many of those are CEOs, executives, or board members at large corporations or politicans? The point being that powerful and wealthy people can often get away with it. See Musk's market manipulation. The entire point of my comment and the one I replied to was to point put the several loopholes that very probably allow rampant insider trading. I would even go so far as to question whether CEOs, executives, and board members should even be allowed to own stock in their company and related industries given the level of conflict of interest. Certified accountants can't even hold the broadest of broad market ETFs in an IRA if the ETF is even tacitly related to a client. In other words, any trading done by top-level management at major corporations is likely technically insider trading.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - AlotOfReading 3y ago
    There's an explicit rule about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1
  - brucethemoose2 3y ago
    > stock-tanking announcements Plausible deniability. Can the FTC show company leadership knew the announcement would be a "stock tanking" one? After all, why would they intentionally do that? Price increases are positive announcements for many companies.
- deusum 3y ago
  Nah, that sort of regulation hurts innovation. /ˢ
- heliophobicdude 3y ago
  Will that stop abuse when you determine to release stock-damaging news after you had planned a scheduled sell?
  - raincole 3y ago
    It's more about to allow other investors to dump the stocks before you.
- mannewalis 3y ago
  Honestly, 2000 shares is nothing for JR. I expect he probably probably participates in the employee stock purchase program and offloads those shares each quarter.
brucethemoose2 3y ago
> Last year, he apologised after labelling developers that don't prioritise monetisation in the creative process as "some of the biggest fucking idiots". > "My word choice was crude. I am sorry. I am listening and I will do better," he later said. I see he's taking his own advice, and doing better!
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
stuckinhell 3y ago
https://www.pionline.com/money-management/blackrock-now-paying-guards-home-security-ceo-larry-fink https://www.pionline.com/money-management/blackrock-now-payi... Seems like many many american ceo's are hiring bodyguards for themselves... At least nobility had the concept of noblesse oblige. Millionaire CEO Tim Gurner wants unemployment to jump to 50% because workers have become ‘arrogant’ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tim-gurner-property-developer-australia-b2411161.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tim-gurner...
- hotnfresh 3y ago
  50%?! That’s well over the “there’s going to be a violent revolution and/or populist strongman coup now, period, end of story” mark. He’s either a blowhard or an idiot. Or maybe both, I guess.
  - ReptileMan 3y ago
    Not if you have robot police force.
  - somedude895 3y ago
    He's also the guy responsible for the whole "Millennials should just stop eating avocados if they think they're poor" meme
    - voisin 3y ago
      All the times I heard this I assumed it was a caricature of boomer advice. I had no idea it originated with someone honestly stating it. Crazy.
  - stuckinhell 3y ago
    I think a huge percentage of the executive class are extremely narcissistic and completely out of touch with the common person. Populism (Trumpism) will NEVER go away as long as we have an executive class without a ounce of empathy.
r053bud 3y ago
I'll definitely get downvoted, but I feel like constantly fearing for your life is a fair price to pay for being rich
- Lolaccount 3y ago
  [flagged]
- robswc 3y ago
  I won't down vote you but I would love to know how you came to that conclusion. And what is "rich" ?
  - r053bud 3y ago
    It’s an arbitrary amount, but let’s call it double digit millions. You’re set for life at that point.
    - robswc 3y ago
      In net worth or cash? In any case, I think its ridiculous. That would apply to a non-insignificant % of the population of HN. There are tons of authors, programmers and founders with that much money. You really think that if someone writes a book that goes on to sell enough that they make more than $9,999,999 they should fear for their safety if they dare reap the real value of their work?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- Aeolun 3y ago
  Isn’t it poor people that constantly have to fear for their lives? Certainly the life expectancy of millionaire CEO’s seems to be a lot higher.
  - r053bud 3y ago
    Exactly why I think it’s fair. Poor people shouldn’t be the only group of people who have to constantly live in fear. The people who are creating the conditions of poverty should have to share that mental burden. They can keep their money though!
kentonv 3y ago
> Behind the scenes, CEO John Riccitiello shifted 2000 shares last week on 6th September, as noted by Yahoo Finance, which noted this move was part of a trend over the past year where the exec has sold more than 50,000 shares in total and bought none. This is normal. Many CEOs are paid primarily in stock. No matter how much you believe in your company, diversification is financially wise, so of course they are always selling stock. Typically they sell every month on a schedule pre-determined months or years in advance. No CEO is ever going to buy their own stock because it would make no financial sense. Reporters looking for clicks love this situation because it means that whenever a company does something that makes people angry, you can always look up the CEO's stock sales and discover that, oh wow, they just sold a bunch of stock in the last month! And they never buy any! The reporter conveniently omits the fact that the CEO has been selling that exact same quantity of stock every single month going back years. Sometimes the reporter gets extra-lucky and the CEO's stock is primarily in class B shares, which must first be converted to class A before sale. So every month, the CEO converts some number of shares to class A, and then immediately sells them. This shows up in financial records as the CEO sold 100% of their class A shares. So the reporter reports: "The CEO just sold ALL their stock last week!" CEOs and other top execs are _not allowed_ to just sell stock on a whim, they have to set up a schedule far in advance. The SEC is quite serious about this. (Now, if you do find that a CEO has sold an _unusually large_ amount of stock compared to their historical schedule, then maybe you have something, but somehow that's never what the reporters are saying...) (BTW 2000 shares of Unity is like ~$80,000. 50,000 shares is ~$2M. The guy apparently receives over $10M of stock per year so these numbers are surprisingly small, he seems to be holding onto most of it: https://www1.salary.com/John-Riccitiello-Salary-Bonus-Stock-Options-for-Unity-Software-Inc.html https://www1.salary.com/John-Riccitiello-Salary-Bonus-Stock-... )

awfml 3y ago

Aren't public company executives always required to sell on a predefined schedule?

jdiff 3y ago
Genuine question, what stops executives from scheduling stock-tanking announcements to align with their stock-selling schedule?
- tomjakubowski 3y ago
  I don't know, but one guess: maybe sticking to a stock-selling schedule isn't enough to steer clear of insider trading.
- bmitc 3y ago
  That's still considered inside trading, but as far as I can tell, nothing prevents it. Inside trading seems rampant and completely unenforced unless you're a regular Joe or Martha Stewart.
  - FateOfNations 3y ago
    And really with Martha Stewart, it wasn't the insider trading, it was lying about insider trading.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - blululu 3y ago
    Perhaps you run in more criminally inflected circles, but I have never seen anyone committing insider trading, and if I did, I would be more than happy to report it to the SEC. Insider trading is a crime that is definitely enforced and comes with serious consequences. The SEC regularly publishes a list of people who have been convicted and it made a record number of convictions last year (nothing surprising since the population keeps growing). Martha Stewart was not exceptional. She was convicted because she committed crimes.
    - bmitc 3y ago
      > Perhaps you run in more criminally inflected circles, but I have never seen anyone committing insider trading, and if I did, I would be more than happy to report it to the SEC. I don't appreciate the linking you've done there. I do not condone or participate in insider trading nor do I personally know anyone who does. I actually want it regulated and prosecuted much more strictly. > The SEC regularly publishes a list of people who have been convicted and it made a record number of convictions last year How many of those are CEOs, executives, or board members at large corporations or politicans? The point being that powerful and wealthy people can often get away with it. See Musk's market manipulation. The entire point of my comment and the one I replied to was to point put the several loopholes that very probably allow rampant insider trading. I would even go so far as to question whether CEOs, executives, and board members should even be allowed to own stock in their company and related industries given the level of conflict of interest. Certified accountants can't even hold the broadest of broad market ETFs in an IRA if the ETF is even tacitly related to a client. In other words, any trading done by top-level management at major corporations is likely technically insider trading.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- AlotOfReading 3y ago
  There's an explicit rule about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1
- brucethemoose2 3y ago
  > stock-tanking announcements Plausible deniability. Can the FTC show company leadership knew the announcement would be a "stock tanking" one? After all, why would they intentionally do that? Price increases are positive announcements for many companies.
deusum 3y ago
Nah, that sort of regulation hurts innovation. /ˢ
heliophobicdude 3y ago
Will that stop abuse when you determine to release stock-damaging news after you had planned a scheduled sell?
- raincole 3y ago
  It's more about to allow other investors to dump the stocks before you.
mannewalis 3y ago
Honestly, 2000 shares is nothing for JR. I expect he probably probably participates in the employee stock purchase program and offloads those shares each quarter.

brucethemoose2 3y ago

> Last year, he apologised after labelling developers that don't prioritise monetisation in the creative process as "some of the biggest fucking idiots". > "My word choice was crude. I am sorry. I am listening and I will do better," he later said. I see he's taking his own advice, and doing better!

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

stuckinhell 3y ago

https://www.pionline.com/money-management/blackrock-now-paying-guards-home-security-ceo-larry-fink https://www.pionline.com/money-management/blackrock-now-payi... Seems like many many american ceo's are hiring bodyguards for themselves... At least nobility had the concept of noblesse oblige. Millionaire CEO Tim Gurner wants unemployment to jump to 50% because workers have become ‘arrogant’ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tim-gurner-property-developer-australia-b2411161.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tim-gurner...

hotnfresh 3y ago
50%?! That’s well over the “there’s going to be a violent revolution and/or populist strongman coup now, period, end of story” mark. He’s either a blowhard or an idiot. Or maybe both, I guess.
- ReptileMan 3y ago
  Not if you have robot police force.
- somedude895 3y ago
  He's also the guy responsible for the whole "Millennials should just stop eating avocados if they think they're poor" meme
  - voisin 3y ago
    All the times I heard this I assumed it was a caricature of boomer advice. I had no idea it originated with someone honestly stating it. Crazy.
- stuckinhell 3y ago
  I think a huge percentage of the executive class are extremely narcissistic and completely out of touch with the common person. Populism (Trumpism) will NEVER go away as long as we have an executive class without a ounce of empathy.

r053bud 3y ago

I'll definitely get downvoted, but I feel like constantly fearing for your life is a fair price to pay for being rich

Lolaccount 3y ago
[flagged]
robswc 3y ago
I won't down vote you but I would love to know how you came to that conclusion. And what is "rich" ?
- r053bud 3y ago
  It’s an arbitrary amount, but let’s call it double digit millions. You’re set for life at that point.
  - robswc 3y ago
    In net worth or cash? In any case, I think its ridiculous. That would apply to a non-insignificant % of the population of HN. There are tons of authors, programmers and founders with that much money. You really think that if someone writes a book that goes on to sell enough that they make more than $9,999,999 they should fear for their safety if they dare reap the real value of their work?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Aeolun 3y ago
Isn’t it poor people that constantly have to fear for their lives? Certainly the life expectancy of millionaire CEO’s seems to be a lot higher.
- r053bud 3y ago
  Exactly why I think it’s fair. Poor people shouldn’t be the only group of people who have to constantly live in fear. The people who are creating the conditions of poverty should have to share that mental burden. They can keep their money though!

kentonv 3y ago

> Behind the scenes, CEO John Riccitiello shifted 2000 shares last week on 6th September, as noted by Yahoo Finance, which noted this move was part of a trend over the past year where the exec has sold more than 50,000 shares in total and bought none. This is normal. Many CEOs are paid primarily in stock. No matter how much you believe in your company, diversification is financially wise, so of course they are always selling stock. Typically they sell every month on a schedule pre-determined months or years in advance. No CEO is ever going to buy their own stock because it would make no financial sense. Reporters looking for clicks love this situation because it means that whenever a company does something that makes people angry, you can always look up the CEO's stock sales and discover that, oh wow, they just sold a bunch of stock in the last month! And they never buy any! The reporter conveniently omits the fact that the CEO has been selling that exact same quantity of stock every single month going back years. Sometimes the reporter gets extra-lucky and the CEO's stock is primarily in class B shares, which must first be converted to class A before sale. So every month, the CEO converts some number of shares to class A, and then immediately sells them. This shows up in financial records as the CEO sold 100% of their class A shares. So the reporter reports: "The CEO just sold ALL their stock last week!" CEOs and other top execs are _not allowed_ to just sell stock on a whim, they have to set up a schedule far in advance. The SEC is quite serious about this. (Now, if you do find that a CEO has sold an _unusually large_ amount of stock compared to their historical schedule, then maybe you have something, but somehow that's never what the reporters are saying...) (BTW 2000 shares of Unity is like ~$80,000. 50,000 shares is ~$2M. The guy apparently receives over $10M of stock per year so these numbers are surprisingly small, he seems to be holding onto most of it: https://www1.salary.com/John-Riccitiello-Salary-Bonus-Stock-Options-for-Unity-Software-Inc.html https://www1.salary.com/John-Riccitiello-Salary-Bonus-Stock-... )