Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Honest George
At the end of 1989 Harken president Mikel Faulkner told a reporter at the
Petroleum Review that Harken would book more then $6M in end-of-the-year profits. On Augus 22, 1990, Harken's second- quarter report predicted $23.2M in losses. Once the news hit the street, the stock sank immediately from $4 to $2.37; it later bottomed out at $0.22/share. Eight and a half months later The Wall Street Journal reported that GWB was under investigation for failure to report he stock sales made around June 1990. The chairman of the SEC was Richard Breeden, who had worked for Sr. Bush as an economic advisor. The general councel at the SEC was James Doty, the same James Doty of the Baker Botts law firm, who represented GWB when he bought his 2% interest in the Texas Rangers with the money he got from dumping his Harken stock. The Houston law firm was founded by the great-grandfather of James Baker III, secretary of state under Bush Sr. and the point man for GWB in Florida after the disputed 2000 election. Breeden and Doty never asked for and interview with the subject of their investigation. Since 1993, Breeden, Doty, and other partners of Baker Botts have contributed over $200K to GWB's political campaigns, making the firm the pres's number fourteen career patrol. They were just beaten out for number 13 by the now defunct Arthur Anderson. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ganz, knock off the political bull ****.
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:34:23 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: [snip] Jon, you need to refrain from regurgitating the claims of others in areas of the law where you know nothing. The late filing was a Form 4. That form is filed under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Form 4 is designed to alert a company's shareholders to claims the company may have under Section 16(b). Section 16(b) requires an officer, director or 10% shareholder to repay any profit he makes on a purchase and sale, or a sale and purchase, of a company's stock within 6 months, regardless of whether the purchase and/or sale was made on the basis of inside information. Whether or not the filing is late, the officer, director or insider has to give back any profit made on a purchase and sale within 6 months. If there wasn't a purchase and sale within 6 months there is no liability, whether or not the filing was timely made. There is a group of lawyers who make a living by checking SEC filings for purchases and sales within 6 months, and a late filing does the officer or director no good whatever in that regard. If there was a purchase and sale within 6 months, shortly after the filing the company will get a letter from one of these lawyers pointing out that the company is required to get the profit back from the insider. If the company hasn't already gotten the profit back, it can expect to receive a bill from one of these lawyers for the "service" performed in calling the company's attention to its right to recover. Been there. Done that. On the one occasion when one of my clients got such a letter, we were able to politely reply that the matter had been taken care of before the company got the letter, so the service was not required. It's not at all uncommon for Form 4s to be late. In fact it's so common that the Annual Report on Form 10K has a box to check if the filing discloses a late filing of Form 3, 4 or 5. Over the course of more than 30 years I've seen many many late filings of Forms 3, 4 and 5. None of the filers even got a letter from the SEC about the late filing, let alone an investigation. So it sounds like Bush's late filing got precisely the same treatment as virtually every other late Form 4. Dave |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Bush lied Mr. Poodle. You can talk about forms all you want, but the only
one that counts is the one that Bush seems bent on shoving up the country's ass. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:34:23 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: snippin |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Scotty, knock off the stupid fool bit. You're good at it, but it gets old
fast. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Ganz, knock off the political bull ****. "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:34:23 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: [snip] Jon, you need to refrain from regurgitating the claims of others in areas of the law where you know nothing. The late filing was a Form 4. That form is filed under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Form 4 is designed to alert a company's shareholders to claims the company may have under Section 16(b). Section 16(b) requires an officer, director or 10% shareholder to repay any profit he makes on a purchase and sale, or a sale and purchase, of a company's stock within 6 months, regardless of whether the purchase and/or sale was made on the basis of inside information. Whether or not the filing is late, the officer, director or insider has to give back any profit made on a purchase and sale within 6 months. If there wasn't a purchase and sale within 6 months there is no liability, whether or not the filing was timely made. There is a group of lawyers who make a living by checking SEC filings for purchases and sales within 6 months, and a late filing does the officer or director no good whatever in that regard. If there was a purchase and sale within 6 months, shortly after the filing the company will get a letter from one of these lawyers pointing out that the company is required to get the profit back from the insider. If the company hasn't already gotten the profit back, it can expect to receive a bill from one of these lawyers for the "service" performed in calling the company's attention to its right to recover. Been there. Done that. On the one occasion when one of my clients got such a letter, we were able to politely reply that the matter had been taken care of before the company got the letter, so the service was not required. It's not at all uncommon for Form 4s to be late. In fact it's so common that the Annual Report on Form 10K has a box to check if the filing discloses a late filing of Form 3, 4 or 5. Over the course of more than 30 years I've seen many many late filings of Forms 3, 4 and 5. None of the filers even got a letter from the SEC about the late filing, let alone an investigation. So it sounds like Bush's late filing got precisely the same treatment as virtually every other late Form 4. Dave |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
PLONK
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... Scotty, knock off the stupid fool bit. You're good at it, but it gets old fast. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Ganz, knock off the political bull ****. "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:34:23 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: [snip] Jon, you need to refrain from regurgitating the claims of others in areas of the law where you know nothing. The late filing was a Form 4. That form is filed under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Form 4 is designed to alert a company's shareholders to claims the company may have under Section 16(b). Section 16(b) requires an officer, director or 10% shareholder to repay any profit he makes on a purchase and sale, or a sale and purchase, of a company's stock within 6 months, regardless of whether the purchase and/or sale was made on the basis of inside information. Whether or not the filing is late, the officer, director or insider has to give back any profit made on a purchase and sale within 6 months. If there wasn't a purchase and sale within 6 months there is no liability, whether or not the filing was timely made. There is a group of lawyers who make a living by checking SEC filings for purchases and sales within 6 months, and a late filing does the officer or director no good whatever in that regard. If there was a purchase and sale within 6 months, shortly after the filing the company will get a letter from one of these lawyers pointing out that the company is required to get the profit back from the insider. If the company hasn't already gotten the profit back, it can expect to receive a bill from one of these lawyers for the "service" performed in calling the company's attention to its right to recover. Been there. Done that. On the one occasion when one of my clients got such a letter, we were able to politely reply that the matter had been taken care of before the company got the letter, so the service was not required. It's not at all uncommon for Form 4s to be late. In fact it's so common that the Annual Report on Form 10K has a box to check if the filing discloses a late filing of Form 3, 4 or 5. Over the course of more than 30 years I've seen many many late filings of Forms 3, 4 and 5. None of the filers even got a letter from the SEC about the late filing, let alone an investigation. So it sounds like Bush's late filing got precisely the same treatment as virtually every other late Form 4. Dave |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Yipeee!!!!!
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... PLONK "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... Scotty, knock off the stupid fool bit. You're good at it, but it gets old fast. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Ganz, knock off the political bull ****. "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:34:23 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: [snip] Jon, you need to refrain from regurgitating the claims of others in areas of the law where you know nothing. The late filing was a Form 4. That form is filed under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Form 4 is designed to alert a company's shareholders to claims the company may have under Section 16(b). Section 16(b) requires an officer, director or 10% shareholder to repay any profit he makes on a purchase and sale, or a sale and purchase, of a company's stock within 6 months, regardless of whether the purchase and/or sale was made on the basis of inside information. Whether or not the filing is late, the officer, director or insider has to give back any profit made on a purchase and sale within 6 months. If there wasn't a purchase and sale within 6 months there is no liability, whether or not the filing was timely made. There is a group of lawyers who make a living by checking SEC filings for purchases and sales within 6 months, and a late filing does the officer or director no good whatever in that regard. If there was a purchase and sale within 6 months, shortly after the filing the company will get a letter from one of these lawyers pointing out that the company is required to get the profit back from the insider. If the company hasn't already gotten the profit back, it can expect to receive a bill from one of these lawyers for the "service" performed in calling the company's attention to its right to recover. Been there. Done that. On the one occasion when one of my clients got such a letter, we were able to politely reply that the matter had been taken care of before the company got the letter, so the service was not required. It's not at all uncommon for Form 4s to be late. In fact it's so common that the Annual Report on Form 10K has a box to check if the filing discloses a late filing of Form 3, 4 or 5. Over the course of more than 30 years I've seen many many late filings of Forms 3, 4 and 5. None of the filers even got a letter from the SEC about the late filing, let alone an investigation. So it sounds like Bush's late filing got precisely the same treatment as virtually every other late Form 4. Dave |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
There you have it folks, Scotty finally poped something inside his think
head. It's ok for him to insult, but it isn't for anyone else. Sounds like he's picked the candidate most like himself. George W. Bush, the wimp and liar. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... PLONK "Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message ... Scotty, knock off the stupid fool bit. You're good at it, but it gets old fast. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Scott Vernon" wrote in message ... Ganz, knock off the political bull ****. "Dave" wrote in message ... On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:34:23 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz" said: [snip] Jon, you need to refrain from regurgitating the claims of others in areas of the law where you know nothing. The late filing was a Form 4. That form is filed under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Form 4 is designed to alert a company's shareholders to claims the company may have under Section 16(b). Section 16(b) requires an officer, director or 10% shareholder to repay any profit he makes on a purchase and sale, or a sale and purchase, of a company's stock within 6 months, regardless of whether the purchase and/or sale was made on the basis of inside information. Whether or not the filing is late, the officer, director or insider has to give back any profit made on a purchase and sale within 6 months. If there wasn't a purchase and sale within 6 months there is no liability, whether or not the filing was timely made. There is a group of lawyers who make a living by checking SEC filings for purchases and sales within 6 months, and a late filing does the officer or director no good whatever in that regard. If there was a purchase and sale within 6 months, shortly after the filing the company will get a letter from one of these lawyers pointing out that the company is required to get the profit back from the insider. If the company hasn't already gotten the profit back, it can expect to receive a bill from one of these lawyers for the "service" performed in calling the company's attention to its right to recover. Been there. Done that. On the one occasion when one of my clients got such a letter, we were able to politely reply that the matter had been taken care of before the company got the letter, so the service was not required. It's not at all uncommon for Form 4s to be late. In fact it's so common that the Annual Report on Form 10K has a box to check if the filing discloses a late filing of Form 3, 4 or 5. Over the course of more than 30 years I've seen many many late filings of Forms 3, 4 and 5. None of the filers even got a letter from the SEC about the late filing, let alone an investigation. So it sounds like Bush's late filing got precisely the same treatment as virtually every other late Form 4. Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Jonathan Ganz wrote:
, Scotty finally poped something inside his think head. "Poped"? When did Scotty convert, Katy will be thrilled! Cheers Marty |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Martin Baxter wrote: Jonathan Ganz wrote: , Scotty finally poped something inside his think head. "Poped"? When did Scotty convert, Katy will be thrilled! Pooped... sorry. No thinking involved. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Martin Baxter wrote: Jonathan Ganz wrote: , Scotty finally poped something inside his think head. "Poped"? When did Scotty convert, Katy will be thrilled! ok, ok, popped, popped, as in Poopy Bush. I mean Poppy Bush. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Gephardt -- Another liar? (OT) | General | |||
A truly great man! | ASA | |||
Democrats are more truthful and honest | ASA | |||
Bush Resume | ASA |