SanDisk man tipped off his family to Fusion-io fusion, bagged $220k in share snatch – says SEC

An ex-SanDisk manager and his family have been accused in the US of insider trading after profiting from the biz's acquisition of Fusion-io. America's financial watchdog the SEC alleged [PDF] that, while working for SanDisk, Anand Jayapalan tipped off three members of his family to the deal to make a quick profit on Fusion-io …

[Anonymous Coward]

io dear

[Anonymous Coward]

illegal cache transaction

[BebopWeBop]

What amazes me is how people, "notionaly" so smart do not understand how this is unlikely to be noticed!

[John Brown (no body)]

The real question is, how many of those "notionally smart" people get away with it.

[CrazyOldCatMan]

The real question is, how many of those "notionally smart" people get away with it.

Lots. Especially with those of net worth > 100 million.

[Winkypop]

Greed.

Numbs the brain like no other.

[Tom 7]

If they were a bit smarter

the would do what the big boys do and spread the load across many accounts.

[Bandikoto]

Re: If they were a bit smarter

He no doubt got noticed precisely because they're not big boys. The big boys being the only ones meant to make a mint off of that sale. Can't be profiting from the actions of the oligarchy.

[Prst. V.Jeltz]

What amazes me is how people, "notionaly" so smart do not understand how this is unlikely to be noticed!

um , like not unlikely?

I'd have phrased it:

What amazes me is how people, "notionaly" so smart do not understand how likely this is to be noticed!

[Archaon]

@Prst. V.Jeltz "not unlikely" is a double negative so effectively means the same as saying "likely".

Reading it and trying to understand why you'd want to use a double negative like that both hurt my brain though.

[Prst. V.Jeltz]

"Reading it and trying to understand why you'd want to use a double negative like that both hurt my brain though."

Yes , It was the post I was responding to that used a clunkily constructed double negative that required a little unpacking to realise , that whilst technically right , it gave the opposite impression to the one the author was trying to convey.

[John Stirling]

desperation

It is astounding what people do when they are desperate.

Manager tells his wife, for no other reason than because she is his wife. She tells her family, they pressure back to buy stock which he either knows about or doesn't. Everyone goes to prison.

It's a timeless classic.

Or he's a complete idiot.

[a_yank_lurker]

Re: desperation

Or flat stupid. Insider trading laws are on the books for these transactions. The problem some will face is they knew about the deal before it was announced. The question will really become who told whom what and when.

[whoseyourdaddy]

Re: desperation

We are repeatedly told not to tell spouses or family members or friends or, are you stupid?: the press.

Still leaks out and discussed endlessly on stock chat boards.

Daytraders suck.

[Ken Moorhouse]

Re: Daytraders suck.

Daytraders - correct me if I am wrong - are buying and selling stocks/shares in a *legitimate* way, with the implied aim of closing their position by the end of a trading period. There is nothing wrong with this.

[Prst. V.Jeltz]

Re: Daytraders suck.

yeah but how does it help?

[Ken Moorhouse]

Anand and Ananda and Ananda...

It was allegedly a grammatically coordinated fraud.

[Roopee]

Clearly the one with the $100k credit card debt was extremely well off and stupid to start with. Were the comments about his "drastic" reduction in income supposed to make us feel sorry for him? Poor lamb. Now he's going to be slaughtered :)

[Martin]

He made two mistakes...

He didn't do it in the UK, and he wasn't a Lord.

[Anonymous Coward]

Admittedly I don't know much about trading in general, but would it still be illegal if, for example, the wife "overheard" the husband without his knowledge, and she then proceeds to purchase the shares without his involvement?

[Martin]

Oh, yes. She is still trading using non-public information, so yes, it is still insider trading and still illegal.

[Anonymous Coward]

If this is such a heinous crime

Why is no verification done *before* the stock is purchased?

I.e. people made to prove their employment etc.

Can't help thinking that the system is rigged to profit from the stupidity rather than protect the markets.

[Jason Bloomberg]

Re: If this is such a heinous crime

Why is no verification done *before* the stock is purchased?

What exactly would they be verifying before the stock is purchased?

Being able to say, "no, you can't do that", rests on having the inside knowledge which isn't in the public domain. It also requires being able to determine that it amounts to insider trading which will usually be impossible, and easy to get round, before any insider trading is actioned.

There is obviously enough information recorded to identify and prosecute insider trading post fact.

[GoGlen]

I/O Error

Idiot Operator between keyboard and chair.

[GrapeBunch]

Perp was insider at San. Perp's family bought and sold shares of Fusion-io, of which perp was not an insider. Maybe he can argue that a possible deal was public knowledge, open to anybody watching the parking lots of the two companies. Or maybe he has a better defence than these admittedly flimsy attempts. I'd like to see this again when it is over. "Innocent until proven ... " and all that.

[kelleyos]

And just think, if he had been a member of Congress or the Senate, it would have been totally legal!