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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Quarter to Quarter Aggressive Growth Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jack Hartmann who wrote (3887)	7/6/2002 12:04:39 AM
From: puget206	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6932

He he, Jack. The thing to watch out for apparently, is when the company loans money to the insiders to do stock buy-backs (so as to present a nice picture for the masses), meanwhile due to accounting issues and reality checks, the stocks goes in the crapper as events reveal themselves, margin calls are made by the brokerage which added additional leverage to the "loan beneficiary", and the loan is never paid back and executive exists with a lovely parachute package that was pre-existing. I'd really like to see some SEC rule that says: immediate disclosure of loans to insiders (indeed before it happens) and full documentation regarding them, as well as a requirement that option plays be revealed in realtime. Otherwise you get Adelphia type crap-0-matic garbage disposal flushing of shareholder funds, when the "unseen" hand is finally seen. Seriously, what is any "real" company doing loaning money to executives? Those executives should be able to go to a bank if they want a loan, and the company should be using its cash in more efficient ways, including avoiding "stink." Wasn't that an issue for PILL, as well in the past? I remember when that exec got his margin call and the stock went in the crapper, although I don't remember if he had an initial loan from the company or just went to the broker and "wagered" his shares w/o notice to stockholders. Forgive me, but I also think some of those guys that buy, do corresponding options trades to "hedge" their risk which are never recorded on 144's or Form 3 or 4s. I'd like to see a little more transparancy for insiders' doings. I also didn't like the AMGN thing I read recently where IMNX exec's were supposed to get a special reward if the merger was accomplished by "X" date. Why shouldn't they work for the shareholder's benefit rather than getting personal millions for accomplishing something the shareholders authorized? This self-dealing business just irks me to no end. It kind of reminds me of the ACVC thing, where there was the buy out (after I sold), and the insiders, but not the shareholders got "extra". I think FORG (formerly VTEL) is another one in that catagory, but I'm not sure. (They spun off to insiders a part.) If I'm wrong, let me know. Anyway, I guess, relief rally w/o anyone reading financials or even knowing what's really in them. I think this comes to a bad end, but it might take a while. As the foxes have announced they love the chickens and are adamant about protecting them.