5 ms·
Guys, nacchio was a more run-of-the-mill-crook, tho. Not a spy , etc. so was the guy that ran worldcom. they were (in bed) with the NSA because of their role a
by 001sky 13y ago
Guys, nacchio was a more run-of-the-mill-crook, tho.
Not a spy , etc. so was the guy that ran worldcom. they were (in bed) with the NSA because of their role as backbone providers (ie, only incidentally). they both went to jail because they took on too much debt in the telecom boom laying fiber, not because the NSA framed them. the stupid stuff they did predates (in nacchio's case) the involvement with the uswest. the poor economics of qwest--which was trying to hide--was the reason he bought uswest. us west was a cash cow and able to service his debts.
The NSA dispute post-dates the stock market/telco imposion, and also both his acquisition of uswest and the start his insider selling, and cirucmstantially seems like a desperate bid to gain leverage in his criminal case (ie, his credibility is lacking, as the allegations are self-serving).
In 1996, reports appearing in The Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News revealed that CLECs had lodged complaints with the FCC against US West, including multiple complaints from Qwest Communications International, Inc. The complaints alleged US West neglected or seriously delayed release of "bundled loops" as required by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, making it difficult for competitors to provide local telephone service to their customers. Other competitors began following suit, and charged US West with monopoly-like or anti-trust type behavior.[citation needed]
During the winter of 1999–2000, US West announced that it had received an unsolicited purchase offer from Qwest Communications International, Inc. At the time, US West had been attempting to merge with Global Crossing, but for months this deal had been stalled through the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). US West management publicly refused Qwest's offer. Qwest eventually purchased enough US West stock to enable Qwest to take control of the Board of Directors in March 2000.
On June 30, 2000, US West, Inc. and Qwest Communications International, Inc. combined via merger. US West, Inc. was merged into Qwest Communications International, Inc. with all of US West's direct subsidiaries becoming direct subsidiaries of Qwest.
[edits for clarity]
- eliasmacpherson 13y agoWhere are you getting that? Nacchio was convicted for insider trading in 2007. Unless I am mistaken, your italicised text has nothing to do with that.
- anigbrowl 13y agoHe was convicted in 2007, but insider trading was alleged to have taken place much earlier (1999-2002), long before his relationship with the NSA supposedly went south. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio
- eliasmacpherson 13y ago"Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio, convicted of insider trading in April 2007, alleged in appeal documents that the NSA requested that Qwest participate in its wiretapping program more than six months before September 11, 2001. Nacchio recalls the meeting as occurring on February 27, 2001. Nacchio further claims that the NSA cancelled a lucrative contract with Qwest as a result of Qwest's refusal to participate in the wiretapping program." [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwest#Refusal_of_NSA_surveillance_requests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwest#Refusal_of_NSA_surveilla...
- 001sky 13y agoNacchio started selling stock earlier (see op cit) than that meeting. But its sort of beside the point. The information <he was hiding from the public> was information that long predated all of this. He was convicted of basically lying in the earlier SEC reports which is why he had <insider> information. It was harder to convict him on witholding material information, so they went after him (and won) for insider trading. Unfortunately, his allegations about NSA are sort of irrelevant to wether or not he was guilty or not. His credibilty as a witness is shot not only by his conflict of interest (ie, he's trying to get out of jail) but also because he was convicted of a crime of fundamental dishonesty. I don;t think there is much doubt that his general business tenure as CEO was sketchy at best in terms of integrity. That doesn;t make the NSA innocent, but it makes the Nacchio link much less interesting as a discussion piece. Nacchio is not any kind of hero figure or champion of integrity.
- eliasmacpherson 13y agoThanks for your comment, it explains how your initial comment relates to his conviction. This article helped too. [1] The basis of his conviction is that he made a prediction that the court found to be false, and the court found that he should have known it would be false. If it's for say, predicting 2001/2002 revenue, he was convicted as lying to the SEC, it's possible that losing NSA/government contracts contributed. I don't know the dates and so don't know for which year(s) he was convicted for making a false prediction. If it was earlier than 2002 it is probably as you say, run of the mill lying to the SEC. His allegations are of retaliation, that he was given cruel and unusual attention because he refused to comply. As regards whether it was retaliation, his credibility is shot. I don't doubt that the meetings occurred, that qwest refused and that contracts were cancelled. In that regard even though he may be a liar, he did better than the CEO's of the other companies. I am sure if you subject any CEO to enough scrutiny you can convict them of something. Put it this way, I'd take a CEO who makes unrealistic predictions about revenue over one that silently allows warrantless wiretapping. [1] http://www.deseretnews.com/article/635163326/Ex-Qwest-CEO-plans-novel-defense-in-trading-probe.html?pg=all http://www.deseretnews.com/article/635163326/Ex-Qwest-CEO-pl...