Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Hewlett-Packard (HPQ)

HPQ 26.28

+0.4%

Nov 7 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Kirk © who wrote (3986)	9/28/2006 11:07:50 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	of 4345

Wrong. The filing of the disclosure statement requirement of disclosure is at the time the disclosure statement is due and filed. Just like a tax return. You duty to file an honest return CEASES at the time of filing. Subsequent disclosure? To the filing? A company does not need to disclose what is already in the National Enquirer. Subsequent information is mildly amusing and if EGREGIOUS goes only to whether you really disclosed EVERY THING AT THE TIME OF FILING. As to the reasons Perkins gave AFTER HE WAS ONE OF TWO DIRECTORS THAT VOTED AGAINST ANY INVESTIGATION OF LEAKS (THE OTHER BEING OF COURSE KEYWORTH), is what? What about disclosing that Perkins is personally raising all this as a smoke screen to cover up his part in the stealing of HP corporate secrets? Should that be disclosed? No? Why not? MAYBE BECAUSE IT IS NOT TRUE? And maybe it isn't true that he resigned over pretexting, maybe he resigned because HE was trading on leaked information that Keyworth was stealing? Why not disclose all of this? Because it is conjecture bullshit, which is not material to an investment decision in HP. Faith based investments? Not on mine dime.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next