http://www.zerohedge.com/article/insider-selling-buying-update-2019-1 Interesting, how much of that activity is based on knowledge and confidence in a companies future, and how much is simply selling at what may be the best price possible before the 1/1/11 tax bomb drops?
No argument from me, as long as such sales are reported in a timely fashion. If an investor is not interested in whether or not company employees are selling or buying company stock that is their choice.
Well what it comes down to, is exposing fraud. If insider trading were permitted, everyone that owned Enron wouldn't have been as screwed.
I don't know if that would have changed much, to be honest. Of course if we're going to go to the Enron example, we must remember that all executives of any publicly traded company have to file with the SEC for share sales. If the executive board of Enron didn't hold any shares of stock, one could say that in and of itself was a pretty good signal not to own the stock. If they did own stock but were moving out of it, they'd still have to file. To be fair, in the grand scheme few people actually knew that Enron was cooking it's books so bad at the time. I don't think insider trading would have changed that entire fiasco as even if you had the executives winding out of what they had left, that stock had high enough volume of trading on a daily basis nothing would have tipped off investors. The problem is all the signals were there, it's just that no one wanted to believe that could happen.
