Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm pretty sure a bunch of the folks you can read about at http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/insidertrading.shtml thought that their winks and nods would go unnoticed.



The vast majority of insider trading goes unprosecuted.

Pointing out that some winks and nods get caught does not mean that most of them get caught.


I'm not sure what your point is. I never made a statement about the percentage of insider trading that was identified, nor did I suggest that most people engaged in insider trading were caught. I merely pointed out the logically obvious: a lot of the people caught engaging in insider trading probably didn't believe they'd be caught.


The point of confluence's recent comments it to highlight the obvious (or I thought it already was) fact that if it can happen, it will happen. Laws of men are not laws of physics, they don't apply unconditionally and immediately.


Also looking through that list I see some really poorly executed insider trading. Going massively long options on shared brokerage accounts:

> the two equally split the illicit profits in their shared brokerage accounts.

-- http://www.sec.gov/News/PressRelease/Detail/PressRelease/137...

I mean come on! If you're going to do something illegal do it with some god damn panache; multiple separate accounts, multiple people, smaller orders, stock only, no paper trails, cash transfers, etc.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: