zlacker
[parent]
[thread]
5 comments
1. hef198+(OP)
[view]
[source]
2023-11-20 12:38:47
The only financial statements I believe are those signed of by external auditors. And even there my trust only goes that far.
replies(1):
>>insani+z1
◧
2. insani+z1
[view]
[source]
2023-11-20 12:49:12
>>hef198+(OP)
Pretty sure that it would be illegal for them to tweet insider information like that if it were false, since it's effectively a statement to shareholders.
replies(1):
>>hef198+P1
◧◩
3. hef198+P1
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2023-11-20 12:50:23
>>insani+z1
I'll take securities fraud for 420, please, but private.
replies(1):
>>insani+h2
◧◩◪
4. insani+h2
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2023-11-20 12:52:50
>>hef198+P1
That's exactly the point - by tweeting insider information you are making a public statement. We've learned this very recently...
replies(1):
>>hashha+Kx
◧◩◪◨
5. hashha+Kx
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2023-11-20 15:00:44
>>insani+h2
Parent meant probably meant that there's no securities fraud since no securities are involved as it's not a traded company.
replies(1):
>>insani+Nn1
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. insani+Nn1
[view]
[source]
[discussion]
2023-11-20 18:44:32
>>hashha+Kx
The shareholders are still invested, they still have a 401A Evaluation, and these statements are definitely going to have legal weight.
[go to top]