Author:
cost her millions. The Veeckster
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 09:48:52 06/30/02 Sun
Author Host/IP: 67.25.98.138
In reply to:
Don't listen to NPR
's message, "El Wrongo. The 227K was her total profit." on 08:29:27 06/30/02 Sun
And my source was, uh, NEWSWEEK Ken.
Check out the circumstantial evidence. It warrants an investigation, which is exactly what's happening. Shewas very close with both the broker and the CEO. There's also a trail of phone calls logged and plus the broker's assistant now says there was no agreement with Martha to sell if the stock dropped below $60 a share and that he was pressured by the broker to say that there was. Hence the broker's suspension from Merrill Lynch. You don't find that warrants an investigation?
Also, your argument is that she wouldn't have done it because she would have known in advance it would come out? I doubt it. It is possible she didn't consciously think it through or realize it was privileged inf she got. If so, she should say so and come clean not deny.
As for your point that it was inconsequential sum, Anyone that rich manages every cent of her money.
I have always LIKED Martha. I admire her business savvy and hard work and spunk. So I'm sorry to see this but the fact is it smells fishy.
>It was 20K difference between when she sold it, and
>when everyone else found out about the FDA flunking
>them out.
>
>In other words, if she had waited until the general
>announcement was made, she would've gotten 20K less
>for her stock. Big deal.
>
>She's lost MILLIONS on HER stock as a result of the
>bad press. But that ain't enough. The politicians
>wanna grandstand.
>
>No, insider trading isn't good. However, if she
>wanted to really do some insider tradiing, she sure as
>hell could've made more than 20K.
>
>I mean, the damn woman's a millionaire a hundred times
>over. Do you really think she'd risk losing MILLIONS,
>which is what happened to her own stock, over a 20K
>savings?????????
>
>Grandstanding in front of a scapegoat. That's what
>it's all about.
>
>"Insider trading" didn't seem to be a problem when
>Hillary made 50K off of a single investment, and never
>invested again. Sheer luck?
>
>Senate libs need to worry more about getting their
>jobs done, than Martha's 20K.
>
>
>
>
>
>>So, just to make sure I understand your position-- you
>>think insider trading is ok?
>>
>>yes or no?
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 
Well yeah she didn't realize it would become public and so of course did not realize bad press would