Slashdot Mirror


Former Dell Execs Involved In Massive Insider Trading Probe

DMandPenfold writes "Two former Dell employees, including a former investor relations manager, were part of a $62 million record-breaking insider trading scam, involving the company's shares as well as Nvidia stock, according to the FBI. The news comes as the U.S. authorities step up their pursuit of inside traders. Two months ago, Galleon hedge fund founder Raj Rajaratnam was sentenced to 11 years in jail for his role in a scam involving AMD, IBM and 3Com stock. Yesterday, Sandeep Goyal, an employee at Dell's U.S. headquarters between 2006 and 2007 before becoming a financial analyst, was arrested. An unnamed co-conspirator in Dell's investor relations department from 2007 to 2009 is also alleged to have been part of the scam. ... Goyal allegedly made $175,000 by providing inside information about Dell to a hedge fund. He has pleaded guilty to charges of securities fraud."

34 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. And yet... by Cornwallis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and yet... John Corzine is still walking the streets.

    1. Re:And yet... by NikeHerc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and yet... John Corzine is still walking the streets.

      So is Nancy Pelosi and a lot of other senators and congressmen. Does anyone think they should be immune from arrest due to insider trading?

      --
      Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
    2. Re:And yet... by HerculesMO · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You fail to get the point.. read about MF Global and what Corzine did there.

      --
      The price is always right if someone else is paying.
    3. Re:And yet... by scottbomb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oddly enough, insider trading is LEGAL for members of Congress. Ain't that just awesome?

    4. Re:And yet... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 2

      No, they should all be locked up in Federal "Pound Me In The Ass" Prison, but as the people that make the laws are the people that benefit from that little loophole, I suppose that will never happen...

      Hell, even if by some miracle these assholes did get locked up, you know there would be pardons handed down somewhere. They take care of their own...

    5. Re:And yet... by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod this up. Congress doesn't even try to hide their corruption these days.

      And this is how SOPA/PIPA will play out: A new version will be introduced just after the elections that includes exemptions/protection for the big players like Google and Facebook. This version will be passed no matter how much "the people" scream, as long as congressional donations aren't in jeopardy.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    6. Re:And yet... by alexander_686 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The short answer is no.

      The trick here is that a representative’s knowledge of pending legislation, regulatory actions, etc. (i.e. knowledge from his day job) is technically not insider information – which of course if big enough to drive a very large truck though.

      So congressmen can still be charged with insider trading if they got their knowledge outside of their day job Congressmen have been prosecuted when outsiders have bribed them with inside information (less paper trail then giving them money) but it’s been rare.

    7. Re:And yet... by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 2

      The "new version" has been in play since last year. Good luck trying to rally anyone to fight on the side of child pornographers.

      --
      Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
    8. Re:And yet... by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2

      Corzine didn't trade on inside information. He simply traded using his customers funds.

      And just in case you thought that was illegal...well, it turns out using clients money to trade in "secure" assets like treasuries was always legal. Unfortunately, the financial industry successfully lobbied for the definition of "secure" to be broadened considerably in the last decade.

      Personally, after 4 years of this, I have no sympathy for anyone in the financial industry, broker or client. It's a den of iniquity and disrepute.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
  2. at this rate ... by peter303 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They might be able to start softball team of convicted inside traders at Fed Med by the end of the decade. its something everyone knows is happening, but almost no one gets caught.

    1. Re:at this rate ... by Kenja · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For much the same reason they get free health care from the government and yet fight against the rest of us getting it.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  3. Libertarianism and insider trading by timeOday · · Score: 2

    I would be curious to hear the libertarian viewpoint on whether insider trading should be a crime?

    1. Re:Libertarianism and insider trading by Scareduck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It doesn't strike me as being an easy thing, either way; on the one hand, it's a kind of fraud, which is one of the legitimate reasons for having a government (institutionalized and monopolized force). On the other, information is always diffused and imperfect in any market, so arresting and incarcerating people for not providing it is not likely to work well if only for political reasons (Google Harry Markopolos for an example of why). In that sense, the SEC gives people a false sense of security that the government is doing some aspect of due diligence for them that is not in reality happening.

      --

      Dog is my co-pilot.

    2. Re:Libertarianism and insider trading by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Truly free market, you say? Last I looked, one of the conditions for a "truly free market" was perfect knowledge for all the parties. Quite the opposite to "inside knowledge".

    3. Re:Libertarianism and insider trading by chrb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My understanding is that the majority of libertarians would say: no, insider trading should not be a crime, as it does not involve the use of force. Government should exist to protect citizens from being deprived of life and property by force, and therefore the criminal statutes should reflect that. At worst insider trading would be a contractual violation, and hence subject to a civil court case. And if you have not signed a contract prohibiting insider trading, then an insider would have freedom to act as they wish. Some would go further and argue that insider trading is actually a good thing, as it lets outsiders gain some insight as to what is actually going on inside a company, ie. in itself, insider trading it is a form of information sharing that communicates useful information to people outwith the company.

    4. Re:Libertarianism and insider trading by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A better question would be, if corporations are people, wouldn't buying stocks violate the 13th amendment abolishing slavery?

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    5. Re:Libertarianism and insider trading by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      Or some kind of Borg mind-link system.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    6. Re:Libertarianism and insider trading by SydShamino · · Score: 2

      3. If insider trading were legal, long-term outcome would be that every trader would seek (and receive) insider knowledge.

      I sense a gaping hole in your logic. What incentive would there be for those with insider information to provide it to those who lack it, other than monetary incentive. Making insider trading non-profitable by making the selling of insider secrets more profitable seems like a hollow victory.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  4. Free market! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would be curious to hear the libertarian viewpoint on whether insider trading should be a crime?

    A truly free market would solve it!

    How?

    I SAID A TRULY FREE MARKET WOULD SOLVE IT!

    1. Re:Free market! by Tsingi · · Score: 3, Informative

      I would be curious to hear the libertarian viewpoint on whether insider trading should be a crime?

      A truly free market would solve it!

      How?

      I SAID A TRULY FREE MARKET WOULD SOLVE IT!

      Yes, you did say that. In fact, you can sell parts of your company to anyone you want, barring monopolistic actions. Until you make a public offering. That would be the stock market. Ownership is now public, so you are responsible to the public and private trading most certainly should be fraud.

    2. Re:Free market! by istartedi · · Score: 2

      For those who don't understand the free market concept, let me clue you in. It solves problems because it's an ideal. How do you obtain an ideal economic order, you say? Just send me $588,987 and I'll tell you. You must agreee not to share the plans with others. Those are my terms. I can set them, because it's a free market.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  5. Did pay off the right people? by Manip · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Insider trading is hugely common in the corporate world to the point that there is an entire industry surrounding it (Wall Street). Any prosecutions for "insider trading" are totally political. They either upset someone in power, upset a competitor with powerful friends, or didn't do something they were asked to do.

    See Quest's CEO as an example. He refused to allow the NSA to spy on Quest's customers and suddenly he is in jail for "insider trading." Opps.

  6. Re:More Internet related crime by Tsingi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Folks...

    You can't refer to the regular posters as "folks", post AC, whip out a scare tactic, and support censorship all in the same breath.

    (Actually you CAN, but expect it to be pointed out.)

  7. It's nice to see some action... by msobkow · · Score: 2

    It's nice to see some action on insider trading scams and valuation fraud, but how about nailing the big fish instead of tossing us minnows and thinking we'll be satisfied. I want to see the sharks hanging on a hook: the Wall Street traders and bankers who've cost the US and global economy literal BILLIONS.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  8. Insider.. it's all insider.. by iONiUM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yesterday Google announced earnings. At 4:01pm EST, exactly. I was able to get the page at 4:01:05pm EST, and just as a joke at the exact same time I checked out after hours trading on GOOG. It was already down 8%, though 5 minutes earlier it was holding around even on close. Tell me, how anyone was able to parse that document in 4 seconds, place the trade, and have it go through after hours.

    The system is already so corrupt and broken that anybody who isn't on the "in" shouldn't ever try to invest except for extreme long term. I don't know why a case like this would surprise anyone.

    1. Re:Insider.. it's all insider.. by nanoflower · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's possible due to automated trading. If Google reported that their earnings were lower than expected even if only a small amount that could lead to some automated selling. That wouldn't require an analyst to read the report and decipher it before making a decision to sell/buy/hold.

    2. Re:Insider.. it's all insider.. by TheLink · · Score: 2

      What if you wrote reports/articles in such a way that the automated stuff would screw up when parsing it? :)

      Of course you'd need to have some plausible deniability.

      --
    3. Re:Insider.. it's all insider.. by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Tell me, how anyone was able to parse that document in 4 seconds, place the trade, and have it go through after hours.

      You do realize that automated trading platforms do lexical analysis, right? They get a copy of all press releases and electronically decide if it's good or bad and do trades based on it. Even basic lexical analysis can tell you a statement of "loss" or "failed to meet expectations" is generally bad news (SELL!), while "higher than expected revenue" and "largest profit" is good news (BUY!).

      In fact, it's possible all statements about earnings and such are couched in rather standard language to comply with regulations - trying to weasel word your way out of saying loss could be seen as trying to decieve the public.

    4. Re:Insider.. it's all insider.. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 2

      Yeah, If I were a Corperate executive important enough to merit a regular mention in press releases on earnings, I'd totally change my name to "Record Profits" .

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  9. Their commercials said it first by theArtificial · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dude, you're getting a cell?

    --
    Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  10. Re:Meh by pwizard2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've grown absolutely disgusted with big business AND the government. These executives are already rich from their salaries/company perks, so why even do something like this in the first place? They don't need the money... what can they buy with it that they already can't afford? I don't understand...is it just a penis-measuring game where executives are looking to make more money than the rest? Libertarianism once appealed to me, but I've seen more and more that people can't be trusted to do the right thing. The existence of a true free market depends on the major players not being a bunch of sociopaths. Giving more power to the government isn't the answer either because their agenda doesn't usually match up with mine. It's a problem with no solution.

    Meanwhile, lots of ordinary people can barely afford to get by these days. If I were in charge of a company and earning several million a year, I would sacrifice my personal income for the year and give it to the people working for me instead. They need it more. If you need millions rolling in each year to maintain your lifestyle, you're doing something wrong.

    --
    "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
  11. Re:How dare they make information public too soon! by stewbee · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Step away from the libertarian kool-aid for a minute and think about it rationally. Here is an excerpt from wikipedia about information asymmetry which is what occurs when there is insider trading.

    In economics and contract theory, information asymmetry deals with the study of decisions in transactions where one party has more or better information than the other. This creates an imbalance of power in transactions which can sometimes cause the transactions to go awry, a kind of market failure in the worst case. Examples of this problem are adverse selection,[1] moral hazard, and information monopoly.[2] Most commonly, information asymmetries are studied in the context of principalâ"agent problems.

    This affects things such as rational pricing of goods, as well as supply and demand. Insider trading is also a momentary arbitrage. While there is nothing inherently wrong with arbitrage, those privy to the information are those that get to take advantage of it while the non-informed parties will suffer. This is not conducive to a true free market.

  12. Gilded Age, not Modern China by alexander_686 · · Score: 2

    I think you go too far when you go into China territory.

    I think it would be more fair to compare it to the Gilded Age of Robber Barons. Insiders who tilted the rules of the market in their own favor. Jay Gould and Daniel Drew would be good examples. These people gained control of corporations and tilted it towards their own gain vs. the shareholders. Took control of banks and choked off competition. Etc.

  13. Real insider trading by roman_mir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Real insider trading is done in government, before it releases a law or decision upon a company's future (like knowing whether FDA will deny or allow a new drug to the market), and Senators / Congressmen being bribed in stock options where straight up cash would be considered an illegal bribe, because they voted themselves this little neat trick.

    Insider trading idea is a bunch of crap. The only problem is FRAUD, all other trading that is done privately is done based on some form of information.

    For a top manager to bet against his company and then tank the stock by doing something that would undermine the company's value is FRAUD.

    For a top manager to bet against his company because he THINKS that the company is going in the wrong direction - that's not fraud, that's common sense.

    For a government official to accept a bribe in form of a stock option or to short stock of a company before passing a LAW that would hurt that company financially - that is REAL insider trading fraud.