Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 07/14/2002 3:51:42 AM PDT by Lecie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Lecie
The critical paragraphs of this article:  (hopefully staying within FR posting guidelines for LAT articles) ...

It was Meulbroek's report on what happened to Harken's stock when the company announced its big second-quarter losses on Aug. 20 [1990] that tipped the scale.

If investors didn't view that report as "materially" affecting the company, and show it by selling off shares and driving down the price, there would be no case, the SEC lawyers concluded. And Meulbroek found that, in the end, it didn't.

Harken's stock on the American Stock Exchange opened at $3 a share on Aug. 20, her report stated. The earnings report came out at 9:34 a.m. that day. For three hours, nothing happened. Then, as the SEC's initial investigative documents indicated, the stock nose-dived by 21% in the afternoon, closing at $2.37.

But Muelbroek, reasoning that Harken was a thinly traded stock, decided to analyze the stock's movement on the following day as well, which was standard practice at the time. She discovered that the stock rebounded to recover all its losses of the previous day, closing at $3 on Aug. 21.

"Unless another reason exists for the price rebound on Aug. 21, the most likely explanation for the increase is that investors overreacted to the earnings announcement, recognized their error, and corrected it," her report said. "Such price reversals are rare but not unheard of."

The bottom line: The announcement had no "material effect" on the stock. So, even if Bush knew it was coming two months before, that knowledge was worthless, Meulbroek's findings concluded, although she said Friday, "We still don't know what caused the stock to rebound that day."

2 posted on 07/14/2002 4:15:12 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lecie
BTTT
3 posted on 07/14/2002 4:17:53 AM PDT by BlueAngel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lecie
I understand that Bush's stock was sold as a block to another person. That person has been the subject of conjecture, and since the SEC refused then and now to identify that person, there is an important piece of info missing.

Before this will be considered a clean deal that mysterious buyer must be identified.

6 posted on 07/14/2002 4:34:29 AM PDT by rdavis84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lecie
What I'm baffled about is why this comes up 12 years later? Was there any new information? I guess we should wait a few years and then go after Clinton for being a rapist...
45 posted on 07/14/2002 2:01:40 PM PDT by EaglesUpForever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson