Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (5422)	1/15/2002 4:08:26 PM
From: RCMac	Respond to of 52153

[IGEN - Roche "manipulation" of IGEN price] Peter, I think your response to Doc's question -- whether there's a possible class action or other legal recourse against Roche for intentionally driving down IGEN's stock -- is entirely correct: they [Roche] were manipulating here with the intention of either buying or pressuring the company. What Roche did, as you say, doesn't meet the "in connection with a purchase or sale" requirement of SEC Rule 10b-5. Although the SEC in an enforcement action under section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 wouldn't have to meet the purchase or sale requirement, Roche's conduct does seem a matter of business cheating, not something aimed at the integrity of the securities markets; nor, almost the same thing, an offense against the principles of full disclosure underlying the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act. Section 9 of the Securities Exchange Act, directly proscribing "manipulation", also doesn't have an explicit purchase or sale requirement, but this sectin has been interpreted narrowly. As I recall, nearly all of the very few actions under Section 9 have to do with "painting the tape" and other securities purchases/sales fiddling with the price, not with things like cheating a company out of royalties or other business items with the incidental effect of driving down the stock price. --RCM