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.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: inaflash who wrote (63601)	4/25/2007 7:29:23 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 213177

good synopsis inaflash, also I would like to point anyone interested in this options backdating scandal to this BW article (which paraphrases a WSJ article). What this says is that the SEC charged 3 individual (executives) at Brocade Communication systems, it has failed to bring charges against the company- because shareholders were not harmed! Brocade has set aside $$ to settle this case and by all accounts it has been sitting there for years now. OK- so this is a criminal case against executives but no case against the company- that then means the INDIVIDUALS being charged need to have benefitted materially by this practice, and by all accounts most of the executives charged did not really benefit (with the exception of that guy that ran away to Israel). I don't think these cases are going anywhere and as soon as this Brocade case is finally dismissed sometime this year we can put this behind us, everybody knows not to do it now. Turns out this backdating stuff ain't so black and white to the SEC. First, there was a story in the Wall Street Journal today, about a debate that's been raging within the SEC for the past year as to whether to fine Brocade Communications for backdating-related problems. While the SEC did charge three former executives last July, including former CEO Greg Reyes, it has failed to take the $7 million set aside by the storage gear maker last March to settle any civil charges. The reason, says the Journal, is that commissioners are debating “whether and how harshly to penalize companies where backdating occurred.” According to the Journal, that’s because of the difficulty of proving how, and to what extent, shareholders were actually harmed by alleged backdating at the company. businessweek.com