Pet food insider sold shares before recall (omg!)

CFO calls sale a 'horrible coincidence'

The chief financial officer of Menu Foods Income Fund says it's a "horrible coincidence" that he sold nearly half his units in the troubled pet food maker less than three weeks before a massive recall of tainted pet food.

Insider trading reports show that Mark Wiens sold 14,000 units for $102,900 on Feb. 26 and Feb. 27. Those shares would be worth $62,440 today, based on yesterday's close of $4.46 a unit.

That represented 45 per cent of Mr. Wiens's units. After the sale, he still owned 17,193 units and options to purchase 101,812 units, according to insider trading reports.

"It's a horrible coincidence, yes . . ." Mr. Wiens said yesterday.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070410.wxrmenu10/BNStory/Business/home

Is this a new story?

what they should do....after what happened to her.

I mean he sold his shares, and was on his own board---was warned by the SEC about selling the shares, but did it anyway.

she would probably advise you to not lie to investigators.

yeah, she really killed your pets what a pointless comparison. Just had to take a swipe even though the two things arent remotely comparable.

Oh yeah, that was about 4 years ago.... Weve been in a long fucked up war ever since then too...

If you believe this, I have a bridge I want to sell you.

Either this guy thinks we're all REALLY stupid, or he's paid the appropriate vigs to Rove's campaign fund and knows he's a made man.

From the IAMS website - "On April 5, 2007, Menu Foods amended its cuts-and-gravy pet food recall to include food manufactured beginning November 8, 2006."

I'm sure someone must have suspected something before last winter. I wonder if Canada has whistleblower protections. Someone in that corp. has to know.

Serious jail time, however, not usually. I'm guessing two years less a day suspended and a fine, on the negligence aspect of it, and another fine if insider trading is ever proved.

"Who couldn't known?. . . "

Which means that something substantive will be done about this. Like a real investigation.

The SEC would invite him to tea and cucumber sandwiches(minus the crusts...), where they would all titter about him being such a naughty, naughty boy.

these people do serious jail time.

It's the logical reason to wait.

according to some reports.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=496360

I see prison bars in this guys future. I knew there
was a coverup!

Don't we have a right to know which products to avoid
or to throw out? The FDA is the equivalent to the mob.

I hope someone leaks the info before the any other creature becomes ill from this crap. I am so mad I actually signed peta's petition calling for the head of the FDA to resign - http://getactive.peta.org/campaign/iams_fda

there is no such thing as coincidence.....

as if he/she was right on! Unbelievable. Prison time for this b-tard.

No, not really. It's all about greed and profits. And one wonders why I hate the megacorporations.

It seems there's a difference between "trading on insider information" like M. Stewart, and "trading as an insider" like M. Wiens.

I am not a lawyer nor an insider, so not sure. Anyone know if using your own knowledge to buy or sell is a crime?

"It's a horrible coincidence" - well, it's no crime to lie to a reporter.

if you know, or should know, that the knowledge was proprietary, then you are screwed. (in fact, even a planned trade becomes problematic at this stage. say I am a shareholder of company x. buy 20 shares a month, every month for two years. before I made my march purchase this year, I learned that the company was going to be taken over because my friend Bob, the CEO, told me. I cannot them continue to make my March purchase, since I have insider information. another example: I (this one is true) worked as a business consultant. I own shares of a company, and have both a sell and a buy order in place with my broker for when the shares hit certain levels. My firm was then retained by this company to do strategic planning. At this point, I became privy to confidential, non-public information, in this case that the firm was seeking to have itself acquired by another firm. on the advice of counsel, I had to cancel both orders, and am stuck with the shares, because I know something that the public doesn't (that the firm is for sale and has hired my firm to find a buyer. so I lost money, even though I had planned to sell and buy shares before I knew anything else, and even had that instruction in writing, dating from 6 months before I ever had contact with this firm.

of course, if you get information inadvertently (like hearing the CEO talking on the train or something) it is fair game.

I trust that this chap can affirmatively prove that he sold these shares before being informed of anything, otherwise he is fucked, even if he didn't know. insider trading, in the US at least, basically requires an affirmative defense. you need to prove that you didn't know anything, because as a corporate insider, the assumption is that you did. And if he sold these shares to make a quick $40,000, he's a fucking idiot (since it would be reported) so I tend to believe him.

on edit: the rule in question is 10b5-2, which clarifies who, as an outsider, has reason to believe that information was told in confidence. that's the trigger. if someone tells you something with the reasonable expectation that it is in confidence, you are in trouble.

not a chance. Even before this incident, his holdings totalled about $220,000. it's unclear how much his options were worth, but since the stock was only worth about 6 bucks (Canadian, natch) and he held roughly 100,000 options, even if the purchase price was a penny, they weren't worth a million.

frankly, the company was tanking already, it had lost most of its market value since 2005. in last 2005, the stock was worth about $15, in February it was worth $6. the company couldn't pay its creditors, and therefore couldn't pay a dividend (and since it wasa dividend producing stock by definition, it wasn't worth owning) I mean the company lost $55 million (CAD) in 2005, and was only worth $150m (CAD) not a good investment.

As of December 31, 2006, the company was worth only $107,000,000 (CAD) and change. if the CFO was making more than $150,000 CAD plus options (which are worthless now, no option currently viable is for below the current stock price) then there was real trouble going on.

He can spend the rest of his life knowing the sublime joy that is kidney dialysis...

doesn't believe in "coincidence"

and I'm SURE this will interest him!

like Martha. :grr:

These monsters are worse than imagined!

that said 39,000 pets may have been affected. Unfortunately, I don't have the paper (girlfriend's house) or I would offer more information.

People get pretty irritated when greedy Republicons murder their family members.
I feel the best response to this would be to let their death chow rot on the shelves.
I know it isn't possible for everyone, but preparing your own dog/cat food would strike a blow these Republicons will understand - right in the wallet.

One of the companies was accused of testing the food, having test animals die, and then selling it anyway. If that's true the CEO should be in prison.