They aren't very good at football, but they are my alma mater, so I'd say nothing at all. :)
Posted on 03/02/2021 6:45:26 AM PST by C19fan
Teenage son??? Try grown man.
What’s wrong with Zips?
When I was a kid the local grocery store had a big tub of tennis shoes out front. You’d dig through and find your size. Times have changed.
So he used her name and credit card, fraud as he is 19, and the company fires her. Now unless she was complicit in the scheme, why fire her?
Sounds like that is working.
So is the problem credit card fraud? Insider information? Employee discount misuse? From the article it looks like he only marked up the $132k purchase by $20k on resale, so he isn't making a gouging profit.
Must still be living in her basement.
Lives in her basement, plays X-Box all day, drives a Porsche.
Must be something the article isn’t saying since they dumped an actual female executive..
So the kid was a capitalist. So what?
Must be nice to have a spending limit of $132,000 on a credit card.
Yeah, the kid bought “low” and sold higher. Umm, what the heck is wrong with that?
Otherwise, Nike is woke, employed slaves for years, etc. I wish them the worst in all regards. If they feel this hurt them, good. I hope it did.
Trying to figure out exactly what she did wrong.
She reported the business he was doing, and he claims she gave him no inside information. He is also a legal adult. Did she approve use of her credit card?
One would think that ridiculous financial speculation in sneakers would actually be the sort of societal bubble that Nike would love to promote. Hell, Wall Street does it every day.
There are several scenarios under which she would be held complicit.
My guess would be that he either used her employee discount or a priority access to limited editions. Or more likely they canned her because he used her secure access to internal resources.
I don’t have any credit cards with a $132,000 credit limit.
I read the story at the link. According to it, she wasn’t fired:
“Nike in a statement said Hebert had made the decision to resign.”
Of course, under corporate speak, it could mean that they gave her an option to resign, or some much worse alternative.
Probably AmEx, no preset limit
It is unlikely she did not know what he was doing since it was her credit card financing the transaction which thereby conveyed her tacit approval and involvement which would then have at least the appearance of being based on insider knowledge. Nike cannot afford to play favorites in its distribution channels.
The credit card left no room for plausible denaibility. I am sympathetic though, who doesn’t want to help out their kid if they can? But who wants an exec who is so clumsy at concealment?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.