I tell you, I'm shocked
On Tuesday this week, five days after Intel acknowledged that its plan to produce 7nm processors had gone off the rails, a shareholder lawsuit was filed against the chip maker. The complaint [PDF], filed in a US federal district court in San Francisco against Intel, CEO Bob Swan, and CFO George Davis, alleges that Silicon …
Probably expected the share price to go up. Buy low, sell high, etc.
Someone purchasing nearly $300k worth of shares the day before the investor meeting would raise red flags of insider trading to me.
Sounds like she got a 'hot tip' from someone claiming to be in the know (an insider), which turned out to be garbage. And now she has sour grapes for following an illegal tip that turned out to be wrong.
"Sucks to be intel now."
Just re-watched "Chernobyl" and it reminded me:
"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid."
Intel has told a few porkies around 10nm and the current state is approaching the truth - 10nm is a bust flush, they can make some things on the process but it will never be "full production" and they will now use TSMC to fill that hole.
Given the extent of that truth (TL;DR: sorry guys, we blew US$200bn and have a huge hole in our portfolio for another 3-5 years which a competitor will fill for us), I suspect the state of 7nm may have been overly pessimistic as they want to ensure all debts are paid....
If I was the opposing attorney, I'd subpeona her investment records and look for any time she made a big purchase of a stock before an earnings announcement that turned out well and caused the stock to soar. For each instance I'd ask if she mailed a check for that gain to the company in question.
Exactly. You pays yer money & takes yer chances.
I've bet wrong on individual stocks more than once, and I've lost my shirt over it a couple times. I never whined about it, though ... instead I learned something. Now I invest in index funds (and a few other odds and ends) and am in it for the long-term. The very long term.
This should get tossed as a nuisance. Should. It probably won't, alas.
This is just yet more of the culture we are in where far too many people have no concept of taking responsibility for their actions. I always thought that the risk of shares is "the value of your investment may go up or down and you may not get back what you invested".
If, as she claims, that Intel were not being open about the 7nm production issues then she may have a tenuous case but I would have thought the risks of being landed with a large legal bill far outweigh any compensation.
Lunatic bet on a surprise result (this is not a surprise to anyone who watches the stock). Now looks like a twat. Tries to deflect blame anyway possible (when put in charge of other people's money, trust is important).
Fuck me, I barely follow Intel and haven't got any shares, but even I knew AMD, Apple and Arm are killing intel. A cursory search would show this.
No, because stock analysts aren't just any old fools, they are M&S fools.
Short term, the stock market is incredibly volatile. Almost any major news tends to make the anal-ysts twitch one way or the other (and no one know which way they will twitch), but within hours or days, things settle to a more realistic position of a slight loss or gain rather than the wild loses or gains the anal-ysts caused. Stock anal-ysts are like sheep, following some intangible "leader", ie the one that jumps first, which tends to indicate that so-called anal-ysts are not what they claim, they are herd followers.
Who knows, maybe it's not so stupid/ bad looser, but is the lady the front person in a rather cunning plan: let's see if we can trip up Intel even more. Not only do they loose market share because their 7nm efforts fail (continuously), but also let them haemorrhage cash by winning a class action. Either way, you're right: winners, whatever the result, are the lawyers chasing the ambulance. One can see vultures circling already...
So she's basically saying she was stupid and wants her money back (as the lawyers lick their chops).
Had she read any of Intel's filings she would have seen the following risk:
"We are subject to risks associated with the development and implementation of new manufacturing process technology. We may not be successful or efficient in developing or implementing new production processes. Production of integrated circuits is a complex process. We are continually engaged in the transition from our existing process to the next-generation process technology. This consistent innovation involves significant expense and carries inherent risks, including difficulties in designing and developing next-generation process technologies, development and production timing delays, lower than anticipated manufacturing yields, and product defects and errata."
This is from their 2015 annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission and in subsequent years.
In May Intel said 7nm wouldn't happen until at least 2021.
They had problems going to 10nm as well.
Her only possible argument is that in January Intel said everything was on schedule with 7nm and it would come out in 2021. They possibly also said this in April, but I haven't checked. Then in July they said they are 12 months behind with expected yield, and (somehow) 6 months behind for release, but that release was late 2022 or even 2023 (which is certainly later than six months after 2021). That means in January they were six months behind expected yield, yet they claimed everything was on schedule and the process was fine.
However I'm sure that Intel have more than covered their asses in all of these statements. And any tech investor would not be buying Intel for short term gains, but long term dividend and general price stability. She should have stuck that money into AMD and rode that 25% gain in a week.
I remember back in my youth, an old guy had driven his car into a neighbour's garden wall, and refused to accept responsibility for it, despite his car being embedded in the wall. He claimed the car must have been faulty and tried to blame another neighbour, who sold it him the day before. Well the police soon got involved and established the old man had neither insurance nor licence to drive the vehicle. It was also pointed out by one of the neighbours that the old man had never been taught how to drive, and just thought he'd pick it up as he went along.
Needless to say, he was banned from driving for some time, and wouldn't it be sweet justice if Cheryl Huang lost her case and then subsequently got banned from trading in shares for a couple of aeons.
Unless she sold the shares immediately afterwards, which makes her an imbecile, she hasnt actually lost any money, yet.
Probably find it isnt her money, and its either invested for a group of "friends" or she "borrowed" it from somewhere she shouldnt have in the hope of making a quick profit.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020