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.'"

10 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. Well... by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    '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
  2. Leveling the playing field by Bryansix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Leveling the playing field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Look at Martha Stewart.

      Good example. Martha Stewart was not arrested for insider trading. There is no evidence to convict her (or even charge her) with insider trading.

      She was convicted of lying to investigators while being investigated for insider trading, which is normally a trivial matter that is almost never prosecuted.

      I suspect they chose a famous person to make an example of, to appear tough on white-collar crime. Or the spouse of the prosecutor really loves Martha Stewart and the prosecutor doesn't want to redecorate again.

      You have the right to remain silent. Use it.

  3. Oh poor MBA! by irritating+environme · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  4. Uh, the shareholders? by cfulmer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  5. Give me a break... by moehoward · · Score: 5, Insightful


    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
  6. Every investigation is a "Witch Hunt" apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  7. Bizarro Silicon Valley by User+956 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  8. Re:Purpose by vertinox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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)
  9. Yes, but who will pay for it? by donutello · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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