Cuban reportedly charged with Insider Trading

[Mavdog]

actually, no, I've never heard a good argument for allowing people to manipulate stock markets with priviledged knowledge not available to other investors.

perhaps you have one?

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

actually, no, I've never heard a good argument for allowing people to manipulate stock markets with priviledged knowledge not available to other investors.

Why don't you recount some of the bad arguments you've heard or considered.

[Mavdog]

well, at this point in the discussion you haven't put forth any bad arguments to recount....

[MavsX]

dammit sike!

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

well, at this point in the discussion you haven't put forth any bad arguments to recount....

My guess is that you are completely ignorant of arguments for legalization of insider trading, and accordingly I find it quite typically banal that you say that anyone not as ignorant as you must be kidding when they say the question is worthy of consideration.

So...recognizing that you reject arguments for the legalization of insider trading without having heard or considered them, why on earth should I expect a reasoned critique of the arguments rather than a knee-jerk rejection from you?

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

As I understand matters, Cuban owned less than 10% of the company's equity and he wasn't a director, hence he is not an "insider" by definition. As I read this, the only way he is an "insider" is if he has violated some duty of trust. I see a CEO of a company trying to sell more stock to a big investor, but I don't see any duty of trust on the matter.

It looks like the SEC's case boils down to the CEO of a failed company swearing that 4 years ago in an 8 minute cellphone call Mark Cuban made some solemn oath to that CEO. That looks pretty flimsy to me.

According to the front page of the DMN, Cuban doesn't deny that he traded the stock after learning of the PIPE, but instead that he wasn't an insider and owed no duty of trust to the Company or its shareholders. Hat tip to Alexamenos for ferreting this out.

The SEC's case boils down to CEO Faure's testimony that Faure told Cubes he was going to give him some hot inside info, and according to Faure, Cubes replied, 'give it to me baby.'

All Cubes has to say is, "I made no promise to keep the info secret, I never accepted any such duty," and now it's Cubes word versus the bitter CEO of a failed company.

Not that the SEC won't manage to get Cubes on something...I mean Martha Stewart went to prison for and she was never found to have engaged insider trading.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

Hat tip to Alexamenos for ferreting this out.

That guy is sooooo overrated!

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Underdog

That guy is sooooo overrated!

but I'm his biggest fan.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

but I'm his biggest fan.

Nah-uh - I'm his biggest fan!

(I'm watching him on his computer right now - such pretty feet...)

[alexamenos]

lol...scary.

[alexamenos]

Another hat-tip to Alexamenos for asking why the SEC is on a Cuban vendetta.

Originally Posted by alexamenos

That mamma.com stock is worthless today, and the SEC is going to go after Cuban 4 years after the fact because the CEO of the Company tried to pitch Cuban on buying more stock at a discounted price? This looks like a vendetta, and the question is, 'why'?

maybe this is the answer:

A person close to Mr. Cuban provided what he said was one of a series of e-mail messages from Jeffrey B. Norris, an S.E.C. lawyer in Fort Worth, who accused the billionaire of being unpatriotic for helping to finance a movie named “Loose Change.” In the e-mail message, Mr. Norris described the movie as a “vicious and absurd documentary” that “posits that President Bush planned the demolition of the World Trade Center as a pretext for going to war against Iraq.”

In the e-mail message, sent from his S.E.C. e-mail address, Mr. Norris said he was informing Christopher Cox, the chairman of the S.E.C., of Mr. Cuban’s actions.

“If this upsets you, I wonder how George Bush feels,” Mr. Norris wrote. “I assume that Mr. Cox would view your involvement with ‘Loose Change’ much as I do. After all, he served his country as a Republican congressman from Orange County for nearly 20 years and was appointed by President Bush.”

Here's a question: Exactly what FORMAL role does the SEC have in regard to the production and distribution of Lame Conspiracy theorys and why would the chairman of the SEC need to be kept informed of Cuban's involvement with the film?

a. none
b. none whatsoever or
c. all of the above

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

Here's a question: Exactly what FORMAL role does the SEC have in regard to the production and distribution of Lame Conspiracy theorys and why would the chairman of the SEC need to be kept informed of Cuban's involvement with the film?

Government bodies going after rogue billionaires for being "unpatriotic"?

Doesn't that lend weight to the conspiracy theories?


(I'm putting my aluminum foil hat back on!)

[Murphy3]

Cuban should go to jail for his involvement in "Loose Change".. at the least, he deserves to lose every penny that he has ever earned in the US of A.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by alexamenos

My guess is that you are completely ignorant of arguments for legalization of insider trading, and accordingly I find it quite typically banal that you say that anyone not as ignorant as you must be kidding when they say the question is worthy of consideration.

So...recognizing that you reject arguments for the legalization of insider trading without having heard or considered them, why on earth should I expect a reasoned critique of the arguments rather than a knee-jerk rejection from you?

let's see, you make the claim that there are no reasons to make insider trading illegal, and when questioned on that position you fail to offer a single reason in support of your claim?

yeah, it's pretty clear who wears the label of "ignorant", and apparently you like to wear it with pride.

good job.

[chumdawg]

Alexa also believes that there should be no income tax at all, or somesuch. She's quite the little anarchist...if I were you, I wouldn't even worry about it.

[Re-Dirk-ulous]

Cubes will only face jail time if he denies ever speaking with that CEO and/or denies participating the trading. Martha stewart went to jail because she denied, denied, denied. In Cubes case, it's just a civil suit.

So Cubes had a convo with this guy, the guy informed Cubes they will be doing that 'pipe' thing that Cubes hates because it lowers the stock value or something like that, so he decided to get rid of it.

Why isn't any of that blame put on the CEO?

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Alexa also believes that there should be no income tax at all, or somesuch. She's quite the little anarchist...if I were you, I wouldn't even worry about it.

Or more specifically she believes that there's something wrong with holding a gun to someone's head and saying, 'your money or your life.' Granted, it's a pretty radical position but it's worth noting that prior to the ascendancy of socialism it wasn't an unheard of position.

[alexamenos]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

let's see, you make the claim that there are no reasons to make insider trading illegal, and when questioned on that position you fail to offer a single reason in support of your claim?

I didn't make this claim at all. This is what I said:

A more interesting discussion is whether there's any real need to regulate insider trading and whether anything is actually accomplished by regulating insider trading...

I stand by this statement, I've actually read positions pro and con, and it's actually an interesting discussion. I don't have a fixed position one way or the other, but I believe both sides have some merits.

[DirkFTW]

You have got to be kidding.

[LonghornDub]

I thought for a moment I had wandered into the politics sub-forum. Had to double check.

[jthig32]

Dismissed

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by Cuban tweet

Its been a great day so far, and its only going to get better!

Awesome. So this means that Lebron will be a Maverick by days end?