Biotech Values

[biomaven0]

I don't see how a "soft" plan could be legal. Even if the insider is leaving the actual decision of how many shares to sell to a third party, the insider cannot influence that party in any way. Here's a quote from the SEC guidance from last year:

for a Rule 10b5-1(c)(1)(i)(B)(3) defense to be available, the person is not permitted to exercise any subsequent influence over how, when, or whether a transaction occurs. The third party who has been granted discretion must not be aware of material nonpublic information when exercising that discretion.

The other interesting issue is the legality of canceling a 10b5 plan while in the possession of inside information. This currently seems to be a gray area. Here's an academic paper on this issue:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=330520

Personally I believe the full terms of 10b5 plans should be publicly disclosed.

Peter