3 ms·

> The SEC said: "We allege that Mr Loudon took advantage of his remote working conditions That's the meat of it; an anti-remote article in disguise

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Right. He took advantage of his partner, not remote work. Bad human.
- 15457345234 3y ago
  No, taking advantage of his partner would be sitting her down and getting her drunk before interrogating her to obtain inside information. Advantage was taken of the remote working situation which created the possibility to overhear a confidential phonecall. I'm not against remote work but don't misinterpret reality to push a narrative.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    She could've mentioned the deal when they were both at home together (in passing, taking an M&A call outside of business hours), even if they weren't working remote. Unsophisticated person who took advantage, and was too simple to know the SEC looks for this in the trade data stream and too callous to care what would happen to their partner when (not if) caught. https://www.velaw.com/insights/utilizing-data-analytics-sec-harnesses-the-power-to-unveil-insider-trading-patterns-and-prioritizes-egregious-cases/ https://www.velaw.com/insights/utilizing-data-analytics-sec-... https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-129 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-129 > I'm not against remote work but don't misinterpret reality to push a narrative. Reality is this happens all the time without remote work. https://www.google.com/search?q=sec+charges+insider+trading https://www.google.com/search?q=sec+charges+insider+trading https://github.com/0xNF/lawsofinsidertrading.com https://github.com/0xNF/lawsofinsidertrading.com ("Matt Levine's Laws of Insider Trading, webified")
    - 15457345234 3y ago
      In this instance, advantage was taken of the remote work scenario. I'm confining my comments to this instance because that's the topic of the thread.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-02-26/honey-i-insider-traded-your-merger https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-02-26/honey-... > Loudon and his wife generally worked in home offices within 20 feet of each other. As a result, they frequently overheard and witnessed each other’s work-related conversations and video conferences. In late December 2022, Loudon and his wife traveled to Rome, staying in a small Airbnb where Loudon’s wife regularly worked on the TA acquisition and discussed the deal while Loudon was seated nearby. > But also: “Loudon’s wife acknowledged discussing aspects of the acquisition with Loudon during the normal course of marital communications.” This is not a case where she rigorously kept the deal secret from him, and he broke into her laptop: It’s a case where a husband and wife talked about their days, and she trusted that he would not go and insider trade on the deal. Because why would he do that? That would be crazy!

toomuchtodo 3y ago

Right. He took advantage of his partner, not remote work. Bad human.

15457345234 3y ago
No, taking advantage of his partner would be sitting her down and getting her drunk before interrogating her to obtain inside information. Advantage was taken of the remote working situation which created the possibility to overhear a confidential phonecall. I'm not against remote work but don't misinterpret reality to push a narrative.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  She could've mentioned the deal when they were both at home together (in passing, taking an M&A call outside of business hours), even if they weren't working remote. Unsophisticated person who took advantage, and was too simple to know the SEC looks for this in the trade data stream and too callous to care what would happen to their partner when (not if) caught. https://www.velaw.com/insights/utilizing-data-analytics-sec-harnesses-the-power-to-unveil-insider-trading-patterns-and-prioritizes-egregious-cases/ https://www.velaw.com/insights/utilizing-data-analytics-sec-... https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-129 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-129 > I'm not against remote work but don't misinterpret reality to push a narrative. Reality is this happens all the time without remote work. https://www.google.com/search?q=sec+charges+insider+trading https://www.google.com/search?q=sec+charges+insider+trading https://github.com/0xNF/lawsofinsidertrading.com https://github.com/0xNF/lawsofinsidertrading.com ("Matt Levine's Laws of Insider Trading, webified")
  - 15457345234 3y ago
    In this instance, advantage was taken of the remote work scenario. I'm confining my comments to this instance because that's the topic of the thread.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-02-26/honey-i-insider-traded-your-merger https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-02-26/honey-... > Loudon and his wife generally worked in home offices within 20 feet of each other. As a result, they frequently overheard and witnessed each other’s work-related conversations and video conferences. In late December 2022, Loudon and his wife traveled to Rome, staying in a small Airbnb where Loudon’s wife regularly worked on the TA acquisition and discussed the deal while Loudon was seated nearby. > But also: “Loudon’s wife acknowledged discussing aspects of the acquisition with Loudon during the normal course of marital communications.” This is not a case where she rigorously kept the deal secret from him, and he broke into her laptop: It’s a case where a husband and wife talked about their days, and she trusted that he would not go and insider trade on the deal. Because why would he do that? That would be crazy!