1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Wonder if the Pens knew he was a fraud?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by markvid, Mar 5, 2007.

  1. markvid

    markvid Guest

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07064/767001-100.stm

    Sounds like John Rigas all over again. Tried to step in to be the savior, but probably didn't have the funds to do it.
     
  2. JR

    JR Active Member

    Nothing fraudulent here. They were merely restating their financials from the last couple of years.

    The issue isn't about illegal behaviour but about correcting a rather informal procedure for granting stock options.

    Here'as an update:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070305.wrim0305/BNStory/Business/home

    “The grant process was characterized by informality and a lack of definitive documentation, and lacked safeguards to ensure compliance with applicable accounting, regulatory and disclosure rules,” the company said in the release."
     
  3. three_bags_full

    three_bags_full Well-Known Member

    Mispricing options is a serious misstep. Restating the financials is SOP, but if they've not been dealt with for the pricing game, trouble may be around the bend.
     
  4. markvid

    markvid Guest

    JR, I'm confused, then.
    Why was he effectively stripped of his job?
     
  5. JR

    JR Active Member

    He was both Chairman & CEO which is generally considered a no-no in today's corporate governance universe.

    He will continue to be co-chief executive officer with Michael Lazaridis.
     
  6. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    Nowhere do I see the term "backdating," but that clearly is what is going on here -- and hundreds of other companies. Backdating is when you award options based on the date of the lowest price over the previous 52 weeks, not on the actual date the options are awarded. It is legal if companies disclose to shareholders that this is how they award options to executive. But I believe zero companies have actually done this. Soon enough, some company or CEO is going to get indicted over backdating. It's an illegal perversion of the point of awarding options, which is to give CEOs a further incentive to perform so they and the company both benefit. Of course, you can argue that options themselves have been a legal perversion, because that is where CEOs make the bulk of their income.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page