Should have put in the link.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usdrug063697862mar06,0,3863322.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-headlines and said the stock has gone -back- up (i.e. recovered nicely) and will probably continue upwards.
Allowing for the state of the current market, it would not have been a bad share to buy and hold onto at 58$.
It will probably hold it's value fairly well if the recently approved therapy fulfills its promise, and go on to make a profit for those who bought at $58.
Which brings me to another point I neglected to make. Selling stock and making a profit isn't a crime. Selling the stock wasn't Martha's crime, acting on her broker's advice wasn't a crime - it was always overreaching to allege that this was insider trading, even if the "worst" was assumed to be true about Martha.
You want her creamed for something she wasn't convicted of doing. She had a perfect right to sell the stock. Just not to lie about her broker calling her.
Ask me about the Apple I bought at a hundred and I'll tell you someone ought to go to jail (Dh for making me buy it) but of course I would be joking. Ask me if I should hold onto my shares and expect to make a profit, I'll say of course I should. I bought those shares for the long term and held onto them because I expect the companys products to take over the market. My prediciton about the i-pods and the penetration of high-end apples in the scientific sector was right on.
Retirees who risked money on imclone did it because of a promising new treatment for cancer it developed. It's been approved now. If they thought the 58$ buy was a good one because of that, they can hang onto the stock for exactly the same reason they did before.
If they are just trying to gamble and get a quick profit on the vagaries of market cycles, including human emotions of confidence or panic, then they get what they deserve, and should be glad the stock has held most of its value instead of tanking.
"She had a perfect right to sell the stock. Just not to lie about her broker calling her."Stewart was a stock broker for 20 years. She also held a seat on the NYSE at the time she sold her ImClone.
If there was nothing illegal about that trade, why did she try to alter Bacanovic's email to her? Why did she repeatedly lie to investigators? Why did she hire a defense team before she was even accused of anything or even identified as more than just a witness?
Before you say that she believed she was going to be the object of an unwarranted SEC witch hunt, go to court tv and read the specifications for each count she was charged and convicted on. The jury did. And they took very little time to convict her on all counts, including conspiracy.
BTW, do you there is no specific criminal charge called "insider trading"? Those who illegally trade inside are formally charged with things like securities fraud, conspiracy and the like.
and said the stock has gone -back- up (i.e. recovered nicely) and will probably continue upwards. Allowing for the state of the current market, it would not have been a bad share to buy and hold onto at 58$.
I want to be your broker; your standards are easy to meet. In the same time (Dec 27, 2001 to today's close):
-Dow Jones Industrials have risen 3.9%
-NASDAQ has risen 1.6%
-S&P 500 has risen 0.9%
-Imclone has fallen -19%
If you think 20% below average is a good return on stock, would you be interested in letting me manage your portfolio?