Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 164 posts

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#51

Post by jonas21 »

qqtt wrote: post #2

I'm not sure if this is standard for SEC press releases, but why do they include details such as, "he was a school teacher" and, "he owed gambling debts"? I've always suspected the SEC investigations regarding things like insider trading are typically the opposite of justice and designed to go after the smallest possible players while giving the illusion of enforcement. And these details in an allegedly serious inves…

The full context in the press release is:

> The SEC’s complaint alleges that Wylam, a high school teacher and bookmaker, traded on this information and also tipped Naveen Sood, who owed Wylam a six-figure gambling debt. Sood allegedly traded on this information and tipped his three friends Marcus Bannon, Matthew Rauch, and Naresh Ramaiya, each of whom also illegally traded on the information.

In order to make an insider trading case against people who are several degrees out, they have to show how non-public information flowed to them. Establishing that Wylam is a bookmaker and Sood is a client of his is an important part of this. Maybe the "high school teacher" part isn't particularly relevant, but if you cut it, it would sound like he was a full-time bookmaker, which isn't the case.

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#52

Post by whywhywhywhy »

endisneigh wrote: post #5

White collar crimes are barely punished - what a joke. Insider trading isn’t larceny, but for the sake of conversation let’s say it was - 1 million in insider trading would be like 4000 counts of grand larceny, each of which carry a max fine of 25K each. If people were actually fined 100 million for 1 million of insider trading I bet you it’d stop happening. For comparison $250 or more stolen is grand larceny and has…

>White collar crimes are barely punished - what a joke.

and not punished at all if you're a politician

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#54

Post by paulpauper »

>The SEC’s complaint further alleges that Bannon tipped Sood with material, nonpublic information concerning Bannon’s employer, Fortinet Inc. As alleged in the complaint, Bannon learned in early October 2016 that Fortinet was going to unexpectedly announce preliminary negative financial results. Bannon allegedly tipped this information to Sood, who used it to trade. After learning the information, Sood allegedly tipped Wylam and Ramaiya, who also traded.

It's like the stock market equivalent of the blockchain. No matter how long or convoluted the chain of communication is , they can always piece it together.

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#55

Post by sithlord »

endisneigh wrote: post #5

White collar crimes are barely punished - what a joke. Insider trading isn’t larceny, but for the sake of conversation let’s say it was - 1 million in insider trading would be like 4000 counts of grand larceny, each of which carry a max fine of 25K each. If people were actually fined 100 million for 1 million of insider trading I bet you it’d stop happening. For comparison $250 or more stolen is grand larceny and has…

Part of the challenge of fining someone is, to fine them in such a way that it is painful, and achievable. Fining someone 100million for 1 million in trading would be a punishment that no one would be able to pay back. Also, would just immediately invoke a chapter 13 bankruptcy, which I think, would discharge these. So basically you would just be issuing public bankruptcy with such extreme amounts.

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#56

Post by JumpCrisscross »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #20
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> designed to go after the smallest possible players SEC doesn't have infinite resources to go after every possible financial crime. They go after the ones that have the highest likelihood of successful prosecution. This is the case with most prosecutions like this.

That's called "revenue policing" and the only people who like it are the people high status enough to not be subject to it.

> the only people who like it are the people high status enough to not be subject to it

Everyone at the SEC is keenly aware that bagging a high-ranking financier is a ticket to higher office.

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#57

Post by paulpauper »

WalterBright wrote: post #24
endisneigh wrote: post #5

White collar crimes are barely punished - what a joke. Insider trading isn’t larceny, but for the sake of conversation let’s say it was - 1 million in insider trading would be like 4000 counts of grand larceny, each of which carry a max fine of 25K each. If people were actually fined 100 million for 1 million of insider trading I bet you it’d stop happening. For comparison $250 or more stolen is grand larceny and has…

> I bet you it’d stop happening You'd lose that bet. The death penalty didn't stop pickpocketing, or any other crimes, for that matter. People just don't work like that. Constantly ratcheting up the penalties starts moving into medieval territory rather quickly.

You have to consider the counterfactual in which there is no deterrent. Just because it doesn't deter all doesn't make it useless.

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#58

Post by slickrick216 »

qqtt wrote: post #2

I'm not sure if this is standard for SEC press releases, but why do they include details such as, "he was a school teacher" and, "he owed gambling debts"? I've always suspected the SEC investigations regarding things like insider trading are typically the opposite of justice and designed to go after the smallest possible players while giving the illusion of enforcement. And these details in an allegedly serious inves…

Yes

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#59

Post by stale2002 »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #20
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> designed to go after the smallest possible players SEC doesn't have infinite resources to go after every possible financial crime. They go after the ones that have the highest likelihood of successful prosecution. This is the case with most prosecutions like this.

That's called "revenue policing" and the only people who like it are the people high status enough to not be subject to it.

Do you have an alternative solution, to getting around the problem of the fact that they don't have infinite resources?

Do you think that they should just go after crimes, at random, even if that means that much less crimes are successfully caught, because of the inefficient use of resources?

Re: Six charged in Silicon Valley insider trading ring

#60

Post by tw04 »

omarhaneef wrote: post #48

Covered in Matt Levine today and highlights some details: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-16/don-t-... Such as: Shortly after seeing the screenshot of Wylam’s account on July 28, Brown called Wylam on the telephone. During the call, Wylam explained how he made such large profits purchasing Infinera put options before the July 27 announcement. Brown “flipped out” because, in his view, the massive si…

https://archive.is/Y6H89
Post reply on HN