Slashdot Mirror
A 'Witch Hunt' in Silicon Valley
garzpacho writes "BusinessWeek Online has an interview with Daniel Warmenhoven (CEO of Network Appliances), who joins a growing list of technology executives in saying that the government's search for backdated options among tech companies is going too far: 'It's become a witch hunt. I think the government is looking to find some egregious examples [of wrongdoing] and to publicly hang people for them. That's fine. But where does it stop? I'm not saying the past practices were all good. But I thought the SEC's role was to build investor confidence. What they're doing right now is destroying it, and I don't see the purpose. They're penalizing today's shareholders for events that occurred five years ago. But who is this protecting, exactly? With Enron, every shareholder in the company lost money. The same with Qwest, and with MCI-Worldcom. But I don't know who the injured party is here.'"
If these people commited crimes - they need to pay. Fuck em.
I hope high gas prices are depriving your children, you fucking dumbass.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
'It's become a witch hunt. I think the government is looking to find some egregious examples [of wrongdoing] and to publicly hang people for them.
If they've done wrong, even in the past, shouldn't they have to answer for it?
Seems reasonable to me, should seem very reasonable to those who place their trust in and money at risk with the stock for these enterprises.
As always, those who have done nothing wrong and keep good records have nothing to fear.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
This is about making trades fair. Why should the privaleged few be the ones to make bank while everyone else takes a huge loss? Look at Martha Stewart. She is really great at her appeals to emotion. "Oh wo is me because I'm under house arrest and I had to serve jail time"(paraphrased of course). The point is that nobody should be let off the hook for doing things that the SEC specifically prohibits. Once people understand that they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, invester confidence will rise. We will be confident that finally those privaleged few might be too afraid of the reprocussions to go around screwing us small guys.
When will you get your due? Why does the world stack itself against you and scorn your creative ways of taking money from investors and lining your pockets?
I cry for your predicament! Worry not, hell hath no wrath like an MBA wronged!
Yeah, wake me up when we go a solid week without gross examples of cronyism, boards not doing their jobs, and investor fraud. Then do it again for a whole year, then we can complain about the "witch hunts". Instead I'm guessing there's a lot more stuff to uncover. In fact, the louder they complain, then the more there is. If they didn't have anything to worry about, well, there'd be nothing to complain about.
Hey, I'm just your average shit and piss factory.
This guy is an executive?!
Backdating means that the strike price on your option is less than it should be. The 'strike price' of stock options is generally the price on the date the option was granted. If the option is backdated to a date when the stock price was lower, then that extra money comes out of the company's profit, and, thus, out of the shareholders' pockets. Instead of rewarding execs for increasing the stock price in the future, backdating rewards them for increasing it in the past. You can argue that they may deserve the extra. However, hiding the compensation in a stock option intentionally misleads investors.
The injured party is the mope (or market) that the executives sold their stock to. The injured party is the rest of the shareholders. I mean, this is stupidly simple math.
It was illegal when it was done. It was clear that it was illegal. It was (for the most part) hidden very much on purpose. It is very clear what was going on and why they thought they could get away with it.
If the SEC prosecutes all of these instances, than my faith in the market goes up, not down.
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
Ever notice that, any more, any time any investigation into anything is started, someone comes out declaring it is a "Witch Hunt"? It seems to be the easy-out everyone tries to use when things start to get too hot. I swear I've heard it like 4 or 5 times in the past year or so, in public statements to the press by lawyers for defendents, and by other potentially biased parties such as this guy.
Also, the guy says that the purpose of the SEC is to build confidence, and he wonders how the investigation builds confidence? What a moronic question. That's like saying that the police "hurt the publics confidence" in the safety of their community by investigating crimes? I mean, wtf? We all know crimes are committed all the time. Having the police actually investigate, and then arrest people builds my confidence far more than a police department that tries to *pretend* no crime is actually happening.
But I thought the SEC's role was to build investor confidence. What they're doing right now is destroying it, and I don't see the purpose.
Wait, let me get this straight-- by making sure everyone is playing fair, the SEC is destroying investor confidence? Where's this guy from? Bizarro world?
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
But I don't know who the injured party is here.
Come on, that's really disingenuous. To be clear, these investigations are not into backdating stock options for high-ranking execs, which is almost always a legal practice. The investigations deal with backdating stock options, and then not doing the required public reporting that the backdating occurred.
In many cases, this is like sliding a six or seven figure check under the door to these employees, and then refusing to account for it in your statements on executive compensation.
The injured parties are clearly shareholders, who are being lied to about the actual compensation levels for senior management. Shareholders have the right to know if execs are being compensated fairly for their performance, or if money that could be paid out in dividends is in fact sneaking its way back into the CEO's hookers-and-coke fund.
Since when do they need a purpose, exactly?
If a cop knocks on your door tonight and asks if he can look around without a warrant and no apparent reason.
Wouldn't you ask him "for what purpose?"
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Sadly, when the board is found to have defrauded and misled investors by doing things like this, the penalty for it, most often, is to fine the company, i.e. its investors.
We don't have a mechanism to make the executives responsible for the deception pay for it. Instead we force the shareholders, who've already been duped, to pay the penalty.
Mmmm.. Donuts
The same could be said for all the Sarbanes-Oxley (aka "SOX") crap. It's supposed to protect shareholders, but instead, it's costing companies millions of dollars. Where does all that money come from? Out of the bottom line. Who gets hurt? The shareholders.
... instead of just guessing what they're supposed to do, paying a 3rd-party auditor to come in and guess what they're supposed to do, and then finding out in the end that they spent millions and still did the wrong thing. :(
I'm not saying they should just cover their eyes and say "Second set of books? I don't see any second set of books.", but SOX sucks and needs to be reformed. Maybe next time around, they could actually spell out what they want, so companies might be able to comply
Saying the SEC is investigating any company, makes investors believe there's a problem, even if the SEC clears the company the small relief from that is nothing compared to the huge drop in stock prices and confidence lose. Who wants to buy a part of a company that might be hit with an SEC lawsuit?
The fact is the SEC has no proof of any wrong doing at any of these companies, yet at the same time they publicly will talk about investigating them, a step that is known as the first step before a serious legal action is taken. The company loses, the investors who didn't hear about this ahead of time loses, and the SEC either find something or walks away, creating a world of paranoia in the companies.
This would be fine except any company that is investigated and is doing everything completely on the level gets hammered in the market when the investigation is brought to light. Now instead of buying into a company you believe is a good company, you're going to look for a company that the SEC isn't going to investigate.
Over time it's hopeful that an SEC investigation isn't an immediate tail dive for a company but for the forseeable future most investors see it as a major problem.
What's even worse is that while the companies do get screwed when the SEC does find something even when the companies, who wins? The investors lose, the company itself loses, the SEC wins, the only other winner is other companies competing with the first company. Now should they have cheated? No. But at the same time should the only winner be a third party entity that had nothing to do with the original problem and wasn't harmed by the original problem, while the victim who is mostly ignorant of it in the first place still gets nothing?
I personally say the SEC should continue to investigate large scale crime, stop attacking every business with out an idea of any wrong doing or at the very least make sure not to damage every company they want to investigate just for the sake of being impartial.
That seems like an odd POV. The more that you uncover and eliminate bad practices, the more confidence we'll have in the system.
It seems to me the same as saying that you can bolster peoples faith in government by ignoring corruption...
Someone should dig in, reveal and eliminate any trace of wrong-doing in business. Who are you suggesting should do this if not the SEC, and how do you suggest we enable (whoever you pick) to do this job?