4 ms·
Per this idea, shorts on the insurance companies dealing with the WTC were trading at 30x their usual volume in the days leading up to 9-11. So the WTC was des
by uuilly 19y ago
Per this idea, shorts on the insurance companies dealing with the WTC were trading at 30x their usual volume in the days leading up to 9-11. So the WTC was destroyed, insurance companies took a bath and whoever shorted their stock became quite rich. Most of these funds have since been traced back to Al Qaeda associates.
I call this "outsider trading." His example of Greenpeace shorting Exxon before suing them is quite similar to the example I just gave. I have no idea if this sort of behavior is regulated by the SEC the way insider trading is. I think it's generally un-ethical though.
- utnick 19y ago"Most of these funds have since been traced back to Al Qaeda associates" Do you have a link to back that up? Haven't heard that before.
- Zak 19y agoI'm pretty sure it's illegal to place bets against an insurance company knowing that your associates are going to destroy property that company insures. I'd put it under conspiracy to commit arson though, not insider trading.