RE: Why is Lou selling some shares (from Midrange-L)

Chris,
I agree that assessment of guilt is preceding actual charges and
investigations.  This is why I can't stomach those pundit panel programs on
Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, et. al.

>Yes, the execs sold off stock, but then all execs in all
>companies do that as a way of collecting their pay.

This is an interesting way of looking at stock options.  Options are a form
of compensation, like salary and bonus.  Usually senior executives have what
we might consider to be a healthy six-figure salary, but it can pale in
comparison to the bonus, which can again pale in comparison to the potential
gains from options.  I like to think of options as a creative benefit, like
a company car or expense account, only much, much more powerful.  Options
are supposed to be a long term investment.  If you can hold onto them
through many years of company growth they're worth far more than if they're
sold off regularly.  But then again, it's unwise to maintain the bulk of
your investments in one single company -- so it's smart to siphon some
options off regularly to diversify in other investments.  I'm splitting
semantic hairs here, I know, but to me options are a investment benefit, not
pay.  Strictly speaking I don't think you're incorrect, but I think of
salary as pay, and bonus and options as alternative potential compensation
because they're not guaranteed.

When and how executives choose to exercise their stock options is rightly
the subject of much scrutiny because the timing of their decisions can be
telling.  As you've suggested, these actions are best scrutinized within the
legal system, not the entertainment industry.


>Yes, employees
>couldn't move their own stock options, but wasn't that because their
>retirement plan guidelines forbid it?

I believe you're right again.  Usually 401K investments in company stock are
frozen according to plan guidelines because the company hits certain
financial or audit conditions, not because of executive edict.  The popular
criticism is directed at evil senior management at Enron for locking down
employees 401K's.  Many feel that this criticism is misdirected.  Most rank
and file employees invest 401K allocations in a company stock plan as if it
were just another high risk fund in the plan.  It's their own fault for not
reading the terms, but usually they don't know that they can be frozen out
of changing contributions to this fund if certain conditions occur.  Holders
of stock options know that their ability to trade is subject to blackout
periods and restrictions.  Most folks don't understand that the company
stock opportunity in their 401K program can be subject to different rules
than the rest of the program.  For this situation the real solutions are
better education on the details of a 401k plan and possibly restrictions on
the amount of investment an employee can tie up in a company stock fund.


I think.

-Jim