What is wrong with backdating stock options Mexican live webcams sex
In the US, however, there seems to be have been much more consideration of the issue (at least according to my Google search results).Despite recent controversies surrounding the backdating of executive stock options, the general attitude in the US is that backdating is not wrong (or right), per se.They have also sought shelter under the banner that Jobs was no accountant, and thus didn't realize the effects that backdating would render. Critics of prosecuting options backdaters, and basically most of the Apple shareholders who've contacted me, believe that as long as the executive has otherwise performed admirably for shareholders, and as long as shareholders have personally been able to profit from a company's share price growth, it's OK to overlook a few failings.But you don't need an accounting to degree to know that backdating is wrong. Few tears were shed when William Mc Guire, CEO of United Health , was deposed for his role in backdating that company's stock options. Jobs' only sin, his defenders will say, was that he was an ignorant shmoe who didn't "appreciate the accounting implications" and didn't personally benefit from the scheme.In the legal profession, information is the key to success.You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries.It would not be uncommon for there to be a lapse of days or even weeks between the time commercial terms are agreed and the date of final contract execution.
Then why have more than 170 companies been investigated since 2007 by the U. Securities and Exchange Commission and other federal authorities for potential fraud in connection with stock option...
Apple shareholders have been particularly unfazed by the revelation that Jobs was not only aware that backdating was occurring, but also intimately involved in picking the dates to which the stock options were backdated.
Many shareholders have rallied to defend Jobs' actions on the basis of his overall performance with the company.
1990) held that: “Illinois courts have, in the past, permitted the “relation back” theory of contract effectiveness: that is, contractual terms may be effective for a period before the contract is executed, so long as such coverage is clear from the face of the contract: In the law of contracts, it is elementary that ordinarily a contract speaks from the day of its date, regardless of when it was executed and delivered.
It is of common occurrence in connection with deeds, leases and other contracts that, while they are not in effect at all and have no legal existence until delivered, yet, in respect to the date of delivery, they, in point of commencement, relate back or commence in the future.