|
Gday
Has
anyone actually thought if Mr Hoggard actually intended to do comitt insider
trading. Hoggard is a multi-millionare and it would seem totally bizarre
that such a person would take trade under his own name for the possibility of
100k profit. I would imagine his punishment will be on the slight side due
to the very little harm caused. A thought anyway.
James
Lee
Direct
Broking.
From: Oliver Shapleski
[mailto:oliver.shapleski@vuw.ac.nz]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000
11:02 AM
To: sharechat@sharechat.co.nz
Subject: [sharechat]
Fletchers and Insider Trading
Was delighted to see an article in the Post last
night that said Stephen Franks and Roger Kerr are pursuing punitive penalties
for Kerry Hoggard. About time someone did! I was disgusted last
week when Fletchers said they did not consider taking further action as
necessary. How important is integrity to them? How did you
Fletcher shareholders feel about the company not going any
further?
The company has a DUTY to shareholders under the
SecAmendment Act to take actions on behalf of shareholders. If I was a
shareholder of Fletchers I would already have served a notice on the company
myself requiring that Fletchers take further action. Lost his chair and
paid back the profits? What sort of deterrent is that? The whole
point of 300% penalties is to act as a deterrent - who are the company to say
that the loss of job was a sufficient one?
I can't wait to hear how the High Court deals
with this one - if there is ANY integrity in the process at all there is no
way Kerry Hoggard will get out of there paying less than another $100k.
My question then is: who gets the $100k? My understanding was that only
the company can take the action, and that the moeny goes to the company to act
as compensation for damage to reputation. If Stephen Franks is leading
the action to restore FLC's reputation (and I assume with his expertise he
knows that he can), where does the money go?
Oliver
| 
See IRG research reports
