Is Martha Stewart the worst investor of all time? (1 Viewer)

[Don Black]

I mean seriously... She sells close to 4,000 shares of ImClone in order to make a $228,000 profit and the ensuing PR hit has cost her hundreds of millions of dollars in lost net worth due to her company's stock plunge.
My favorite quote from it all:
"Take away the name and its just a towel," said Mike Paul, a PR executive who also teaches courses on reputation management."

 

[Colin Dunn]

She didn't think she'd be caught, so she didn't perceive a "risk" to her reputation by dumping the ImClone shares...

 

[Malcolm R]

Wasn't she actually a stockbroker before the whole "Martha Stewart Living" phenomenon? I'm with Colin, she just didn't think she'd get caught.

 

[Jerry St.Marie]

I think the problem should be with the person that gave her the inside info. If someone in the know told me that a stock I had was going to drop I think I would find it a little difficult to just sit there and watch it happen. She herself was not an insider and she just acted on info that she should never have been given.

 

[Mark Romero]

I'd still like to have her money.

 

[Patrick_S]

She might be the worst investor of all time but she probably still has more money then anyone one here at HTF. In fact she may have more money then all of us combined.

 

[Scott L]

Yea but she's a devil. I'd rather be poor than a devil wouldn't you?

 

[Patrick_S]

I'd rather be poor than a devil wouldn't you?

I'd rather be rich any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

 

[Don Black]

It's funny because it's true...

 

[Ron-P]

Her latest magazine...

Peace Out~

 

[Jay Heyl]

Wasn't she actually a stockbroker before the whole "Martha Stewart Living" phenomenon?

Yes, she was a stockbroker. She also sat on the board of the New York Stock Exchange when everything hit the fan. She quickly resigned that position.

 

[Carl Johnson]

I think the government will have a hard time proving that Martha Stewart broke the law. I see three possibilities here: either her stockbroker got an inside tip that the stock was about to tank, she got the inside tip or they lucked out and chose to sell at the right time. The only way they could convict her is if Martha's friend the Imclone exec admitted to giving her inside information but considering the lengthy prison sentence he just got it doesn't sound like that happened.

 

[Brian Perry]

She herself was not an insider and she just acted on info that she should never have been given.

Yes, but it wasn't like she didn't know the guy very well and the idea to sell came out of the blue. If you know that one of your close friends is the president of a public company, you are bound by law not to act on certain types of advice from that person. I'm not saying it's easy, but that's the way it is.

Incidentally, she hasn't actually been charged with insider trading. The cover up and subsequent refusal to cooperate with officials (which was kind of a catch-22, as she tried to keep her reputation--i.e., company--intact) was what did her in.

I think it would be relatively easy to see if Martha is lying or not--make her broker produce the stop order she claims existed. Believe me, these stop orders are not held verbally for months or even days. They are logged into the brokerage firm's computer system. If the broker failed to execute one at the right time, he's on the hook for the loss.

 

[Christ Reynolds]

i doubt that she would be that stupid. trying to save a few bucks, that money was pocket change to her. plus, i heard it was 40,000 and not 228,000. not sure which is correct. i am GUESSING that 40k is what she saved by selling, and 228k is the total amount of stock she had, if both of those numbers are correct in some aspect. anyway, if there was anyone who wanted to blame martha stewart for anything, i'd be first in line. but i dont believe this story...

CJ

 

[Carl Johnson]

This is the conversation I'm picturing..........

broker calls Martha
"Rumor has it that Imclone is on it's way down, do you want to sell?"
Martha
"Sure."

I mean how could it be proven she broke the law without a co conspirator snitching on her? It looks like she just might have broken the law but it takes a hell of a lot more than that to get a conviction.

 

[Michael Reuben]

It looks like she just might have broken the law but it takes a hell of a lot more than that to get a conviction.

Brian Perry already pointed this out, but obviously it needs repeating:
Martha Stewart was not indicted for selling her ImClone stock.
If you want to know what the government needs to prove to get a conviction, here's the indictment.
M.

 

[Ted Lee]

bah. she'll roll with it, probably pay a fine, then move on with her life.

months after it's all over it will be forgotten. heck, who talks about what's her name shoplifting anymore? see..i can't even remember her name.

people who buy her stuff aren't going to think, "gee, since she's being indicted, i probably shouldn't buy this towel."

 

[Steve Kuester]

She's polishing the brass on the Titantic. It's all going down.


Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[Michael Reuben]

heck, who talks about what's her name shoplifting anymore?

The offenses are not comparable. Winona Ryder was indicated for what amounts to a single act that occurred on one day. Stewart has been indicted for an extended course of conduct involving multiple acts and spanning a period of several months. The amounts at issue are much greater in Stewart's case, and the alleged victims (basically, the investing public) are more numerous. And perhaps most importantly, the alleged criminal conduct includes lying to the prosecutor's office and the SEC. If you have any experience with these arms of government, then you know that they come down with a vengeance on people who they think lied to them.

M.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Ok, you lost me, Michael. This is for multiple counts of what? And doesn't all of this go back to her having/not having an order to sell if a stock dropped a certain amount?

What would really suck is that if she is truly innocent, then she has lost millions. Innocent until proven guilty? Who can she sue?

Glenn