←back to thread

Insider trade on Splunk acquisition?

(twitter.com)
417 points mkmk | 1 comments | 21 Sep 23 15:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
lacoolj ◴[21 Sep 23 17:23 UTC] No.37600881[source]▶
Let's assume this turns out to be insider trading. Can someone shed a little insight on why this is worthy of a prison sentence?

To me, even if they used information they had and we didn't, I don't see who the "victim" of this crime would be. It truly sounds like a "but it's unfair" argument and I'd really like to know why I'm wrong here.

Thanks in advance

replies(12): >>37600905 #>>37600910 #>>37600921 #>>37600927 #>>37600966 #>>37601021 #>>37601049 #>>37601190 #>>37601265 #>>37601287 #>>37601388 #>>37602632 #
1. thathndude ◴[21 Sep 23 17:28 UTC] No.37600966[source]▶
Someone had to sell the that call option . . .

Whoever sold it wouldn't have sold it if they knew a merger would be announced the very next day (or wouldn't have sold it at that price, to be more accurate).