Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
One would think the SEC might have other, more important things to be looking into now given the fact that a lot of non-"murky" laws are being broken every day on Wall Street.
Honestly, I think it's a fair thing to investigate. Yet, it would seem that there must be some privacy issues at stake. How much does the shareholding set really need to know. What isn't necessary to disclose? I have a feeling that because Jobs is such a pivotal figure from a product development standpoint, that these disclosures are more meaningful for Apple, but perhaps not for Acme Tool & Die, for example.
@ninjagin: They don't have to disclose anything. They just cannot mislead investors. For instance, they said that Steve Jobs was having a "hormone imbalance" when he was getting a liver transplant. If the SEC believes that Jobs' health is material to stockholders, then this might be considered fraudulent.
@NurseDave: You don't have to. Its like any law, you apply it to the case at hand. If your CEO is so ingrained in not only the day to day of the company but the very image of the company of course its going to be different then the CEO of a company who does little more then sit back and pull a paycheck.
@Hello Mister Walrus: Well I think thats part of the question. In a case like this is not disclosing something like this misleading by its very nature? There is defiantly a balance of opposing ideals but thats true of nearly any legal question.
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
@Hello Mister Walrus: Well I think thats part of the question. In a case like this is not disclosing something like this misleading by its very nature? There is defiantly a balance of opposing ideals but thats true of nearly any legal question.
07/08/09
07/08/09