She chose poorly and that is the breaks of stock trading. The reality is that she blew 80% of her settlement on dragging him back into court and the ensuing defamation lawsuit brought against her by Tom Stemberg and his new wife.
Yeah, if they had overrvalued the stock, he could have made out better theoretically. If he had 2 million in “undervalued” stock and a million in other assets, he could’ve given her 75% of the stock to give her half of his wealth.
If they instead said his stock was worth 10 million, then he’d only have to give her 55% of the stock to account for half of his total wealth.
So he probably lost more shares in the early settlement than he would have if the settlement had happened after the IPO.
She made the choice to sell her shares. The Globe somehow is trying to connect Romney to her bad choice. Wonder if she is gaining financially for being part of this current media charade.
That was my thinking. If Mitt had quoted a higher value for the stock, she would have gotten LESS stock because the targeted value payout value would have been reached at that “presumed” share price.
In other words, he did her a favor by quoting a lower price and thus making sure she got more shares.
Nobody told her to sell off those shares early. She could have very easily held on to them and made ten times as much. She didn’t. Tough cookies, that’s the way the market works.
If anyone has a cause to bitch it’s her husband, who was “screwed” by Mitt because he ended up giving her far more shares than she would have otherwise gotten if he had quoted a higher price.
So tell me, what exactly, is she bitching about?
Bingo! If Romney had said $10 a share she would only have gotten 100,000 shares. I guess she’s never been told to “buy low and sell high”. On top of that, stock is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it. Just ask the dummies who bought into the FB hype.