←back to thread

Insider trade on Splunk acquisition?

(twitter.com)
417 points mkmk | 5 comments | 21 Sep 23 15:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
scarmig ◴[21 Sep 23 16:51 UTC] No.37600401[source]▶
Go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $10M.
replies(3): >>37600415 #>>37600568 #>>37600880 #
swarnie[dead post] ◴[21 Sep 23 16:52 UTC] No.37600415[source]▶
[flagged]
yellowstuff ◴[21 Sep 23 16:53 UTC] No.37600432[source]▶
The SEC absolutely will be looking into this trade.
replies(1): >>37600665 #
1. booi ◴[21 Sep 23 17:12 UTC] No.37600710[source]▶
didn't they send martha stewart to jail?
replies(2): >>37600820 #>>37600851 #
2. yellowstuff ◴[21 Sep 23 17:17 UTC] No.37600790[source]▶
Search for "insider trading convictions". They're not rare, and often result in jail time.

Are most of the inside traders that get caught non-professional investors, because the pros know how to escape detection? Are the convictions a small fraction of the number of crimes? Is the SEC too focused on crimes that are easy to prosecute and ignoring more important systemic issues? I'd say yes to all, but the SEC is far from toothless in this type of case.

3. yellowstuff ◴[21 Sep 23 17:19 UTC] No.37600820[source]▶
Technically her jail sentence was for lying about her insider trading, not for the original crime.
4. SkipperCat ◴[21 Sep 23 17:21 UTC] No.37600851[source]▶
Martha went to jail for lying to the Feds. If she just told the truth, she would have probably gotten no more than a wrist slap.
5. vkou ◴[21 Sep 23 17:29 UTC] No.37600976[source]▶
Insider trading is one crime that the SEC prosecutes regularly, because most people doing it are incredibly stupid.