Wall street journal options backdating

By contrast, Professor Ribstein contends (here) that the same options grant involved no culpable activity and that the grant date was reasonably fixed at a date certain so that the exercise price could be fixed while Jobs continued his negotiations with the company over the size of the grant.

Without having the benefit of complete information, it is hard to tell what the government ultimately may do in connection with the options backdating at Apple, or for that matter at any of the other companies that are under investigation.

Sorin is also alleged to have facilitated a similar backdating scheme at Ulticom, a Comverse subsidiary, by creating false company records.

Each of these kinds of activities is different, each involves different actions, and each arguably involves varying levels of culpability, both potential, and in some cases, actual.

This view is most persuasively presented on Professor Larry Ribstein’s (most recently, here).

There is absolutely no doubt that what has happened with the options backdating story is what usually happens when there is a contagion event across many companies.

Sorin himself was alleged to have realized more than million from the sale of stock underlying the exercises of backdated option that were granted during the 1991 to 2001 period.

Sorin was specifically alleged to have played a critical role in the scheme by drafting grand documents with false grant dates.

Leave a Reply