2 ms·

This is a pretty good overview of the case for Cuban: http://www.professorbainbridge.com/professorbainbridgecom/2013/10/mark-cuban-acquitted-of-insider-trading

• lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  This is a good overview, but a few things to note: - Cuban was the largest shareholder - Cuban was told that the company planned to offer a deal that allowed for more purchases at a 10% discount, diluting his stock. He was told this before the public announcement, and sold his stock the day before the public announcement. None of this was really disputed. What was disputed was whether or not Cuban had a conversation that acknowledged he was an insider and that he couldn't sell, and whether or not there was an implied confidentiality agreement. This would suggest admission of guilt as well as satisfy the "misappropriation" definition of insider in the article you linked, since they couldn't satisfy the fiduciary definition. So, he traded based on non-public, adverse information, and saved himself from a substantial loss. Despite this, the SEC failed to convince the jury that he fit any formal definition of "insider". I think we can all agree that whoever bought all of his stock prior to the public announcement of the dilution did not have his advantage, and his advantage came solely from a position of privilege within the company.
  • Dylan16807 13y ago
    - Cuban was the largest shareholder That really doesn't matter, since it was a puny 6%.