GameStop Director Shedding Shares

October 13, 2009 -

On the surface, GameStop appears to be doing well, even gathering positive assessments from financial analysts on its prospects for the holidays in a weakened economic market.

But, according to an article on Gamasutra, GameStop Director Leonard Riggio has sold 2.3 million shares of company stock, netting him more than $60 million, and dropping his stake in the company from 6.9 percent to 5.5 percent. Riggio is also founder and board chairman of Barnes & Noble.

From Gamasutra:

"Unless he desperately needs $60 million," it appears that he doesn't think the stock is going to be performing very well, insider trading firm Form4Oracle co-founder Alex Romayev told financial magazine Barron's. "He's got a lot bigger stake in Barnes & Noble. Clearly he thinks selling GameStop is better than selling Barnes & Noble."

Even more interesting was a note at the end of the Gamasutra story:

But Romayev told Barron's that the last time Riggio made a GameStop shares sale not related to options, he divested just in time to avoid a 62 percent loss.

Posted in

Comments

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

Maybe he wants to buy Borders?

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

Its only 1.2 or so percent hes selling, I don;t see much of a problem here unelss the stock drops in price in the enxt 6 months.


Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

If the Director of a company sells off $60 million of their own shares, what do you think will happen to the company share price? It won't drop in the next 6 months. It'll drop in the next 6 hours. Which is in fact precisely what's been happening. Riggio sold on Oct. 8 when the price was at a historic high for the past 30 days. It's been dropping ever since.

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

yep. A major share holder selling stock is a very bad sign for most traders and tehy will attempt to ditch it thus lowering the value.

Lets just see if he buys it all back + some for $30 million.

E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

But Romayev told Barron's that the last time Riggio made a GameStop shares sale not related to options, he divested just in time to avoid a 62 percent loss.

Isn't that the very definition of 'Insider Trading'?

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

It sounds like it. 

Back in the 80's Ray Kassar sold a bunch of his stock right before announcing Atari wasn't on track with Q4 projections right before the videogame crash.  He was investigated but determined to be innocent of insider trading, and he even gave the $$ back.  By that time, however, the damage had been done. 

In either case, if it isn't insider trading, then it's just plain stupid timing.

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

I'm kinda wondering myself why the SEC didn't jump all over that one.  

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

The SEC has never had a very good track record of going after insider trading unless someone famous is involved.  For the most part the 'sexy' factor is just too low.

Re: GameStop Director Shedding Shares

I think the cases of outsiders trading on information from insiders are more frequently prosecuted. It's not that easy to make a insider trading case against an insider. Who can tell when they trade on publicly availabale information as opposed to information peculiarly within their knowledge? 

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew WilsonI hope after this genaration everything is backwards compatible becouse everything is now x86 architecture. with the exception of Nintendo of course .07/12/2014 - 10:54pm
Andrew EisenWhy do you hope we didn't buy any? They're still available on the Wii VC, which is accessible from the Wii U.07/12/2014 - 10:48pm
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/07/12/segas-plans-for-wii-u-virtual-console-are-non-existent/ Hope you didn't buy any Sega games off the original VC, since Sega has no plans on bringing them to the Wii U Virtual Console.07/12/2014 - 5:39pm
MechaTama31I think there are a significant number of jobs people will do for food that they will not do for an ipad.07/12/2014 - 8:39am
Infophilelabour (primarily among mothers and teens) and some show increased labour. Maybe it's a cultural thing in play that results in different outcomes in different societies.07/12/2014 - 6:53am
InfophileYou also need to take into account just how crappy it would be to only have the basics to live. But with competing forces at play like this, it's impossible to argue to an answer. We have to look to tests of it, and results are mixed. Some show decreased07/12/2014 - 6:51am
MechaTama31to be done, and some people really need jobs.07/11/2014 - 5:41pm
MechaTama31Info, I think you don't really understand just how crappy a lot of the jobs are that provide the "basics" that you assume will just continue to be produced under such a system. There's very little pride or prestige to be had from such jobs, but they need07/11/2014 - 5:40pm
Andrew EisenMaskedPixelante - That's probably because it's now available on the Wii U eShop for $8.07/11/2014 - 5:18pm
InfophileThat's not how human psychology works. It's all about "Keeping up with the Joneses." When everyone around you has a new fancy smartphone and is talking about that cool HBO series, do you want to be the one left out?07/11/2014 - 4:05pm
Matthew WilsonThe issue is most people would settle for the basics and not work. That is why we would need very heavy automation to make a system like that work. Almost all labor intensive tasks would have to be done by robot.07/11/2014 - 2:32pm
InfophileOf course, that's a gross oversimplification. The idea, have a basic safety net that pays for what's needed to live. If people can find a job and are willing to work, they get more money which can be spent on comfort and perks.07/11/2014 - 11:33am
InfophileIt's quite possible to get an economy to work with a basic minimum standard of living. You just need perks for the people who do work. Everyone gets food and a home. Everyone who works also gets an iPhone.07/11/2014 - 11:32am
MaskedPixelanteIn the continuing adventures of "Stuff I figured would be overpriced on eBay but isn't", 15 bucks for a copy of Mario and Luigi: Superstar Saga.07/11/2014 - 10:04am
SleakerI didn't gather the same conclusion.. Seems like they are focusing on devices & services still, just not calling it 'devices and services'07/11/2014 - 8:57am
PHX CorpMicrosoft CEO readies big shakeup, drops devices and services focus http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/10/5887143/satya-nadella-microsoft-ceo-employee-email07/11/2014 - 8:45am
MechaTama31declared that everybody should have them. Somebody still has to produce them.07/11/2014 - 7:44am
MechaTama31I do mean the developers/governmet. And money is not the only thing of value. I am including the food, housing, etc that everybody is supposed to get for free under this system. In the real world, those things don't exist merely because an authority has07/11/2014 - 7:43am
InfophileAs automation gets better and better, the number of jobs absolutely required keeps diminishing. How many people these days do you think are actually needed to keep everyone alive? Most people just make our lives more convenient and entertaining.07/11/2014 - 4:43am
Matthew Wilsonthat kind of system only works when most people (around 70 to 80 percent ) do not need to work.07/11/2014 - 1:21am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician