←back to thread

Insider trade on Splunk acquisition?

(twitter.com)
417 points mkmk | 1 comments | 21 Sep 23 15:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | 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 #
sleepychu ◴[21 Sep 23 17:31 UTC] No.37601021[source]▶
I can't tell you why any non-violent crime warrants a custodial sentence. It seems like civil penalties really ought to be enough deterrent and a much better recompense to society.

Who is the victim?

The person who bought the stock you knew was worthless or sold you the stock you knew was gold.

Why is insider trading a crime?

It's an unmanageable market advantage, if we didn't disallow it then people wouldn't play. The people who make the rules benefit from people playing.

replies(2): >>37601175 #>>37602381 #
1. spaceman_2020 ◴[21 Sep 23 19:00 UTC] No.37602381[source]▶
It pretty much undermines the fairness of the entire market. If insider trading wasn’t a crime, the single goal of every investor would not be to find investable companies but to find insider information.

The stock market would cease to be an effective tool for raising capital.

It would be more akin to the crypto market where there are no such rules about insider trading and everything is pumped and dumped via influencers and degens acting on insider tips.