Comment by jamiequint
14 hours ago
In what way would that be securities fraud? I guess you could get nailed under Section 17(a), but really hard to make a case they're defrauding investors by representing they were going to make ads worse performing than they ended up making them.
In order for it to be securities fraud it has to be tied to a securities transaction and the misstatement has to be material to a reasonable investor's decision.
Because everything is securities fraud: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/everyt...
it's not securities fraud if investors make a lot of money
For every investor who has made money, there is another who has lost an equal amount. Money cannot be created, it can only change hands!
1 reply →
A plan to gamble the brand’s reputation on whether people will remember their promises seems risky enough to be considered material.
> representing they were going to make ads worse performing than they ended up making them.
This is disingenuous. It’s a tradeoff between lower performing ads or losing market share by degrading trust in your product.