News Focus
News Focus
icon url

yoyomama

07/31/10 3:05 PM

#89769 RE: JohnSamuel #89768

I don't see him going for that...but that's pretty negative thinking I suppose. He doesn't even let the ambassadors in on who the GO800 service has been sold to, does he?

For whatever reason he likes to hype the dates & numbers in the PRs and announcements...it's done on purpose. YMMV.
icon url

blackhawks

07/31/10 4:10 PM

#89773 RE: JohnSamuel #89768

"am not a lawyer, but if it is done in a way that none of the info is at risk of being traded on by any of the parties, it would seem doable to me, in my opinion."

Well that's the tricky part now isn't it? Let's say Ambassadors are now wearing three 'hats': Ambassador, investor and PR reviewer/'insider'.

It seems to me that all it would take is one significant purchase by any of us reviewing a PR that had material info that was likely to trigger a 'run'...signed contract and advertsiing committment by Fortune 500 company, for instance, and before you can say 'Bud Fox' one of us is in front of an SEC investigator stating "I din' know nuthin'.

Paid employee status, with all of the trading constraints inherent in such a relationship, would keep me from making such a trade and save me from a 'perp walk'!
icon url

Upticky

07/31/10 5:35 PM

#89779 RE: JohnSamuel #89768

Post Unavailable

Additional Information