|
|
Post by gamblerjag on Feb 9, 2015 17:52:14 GMT -5
I think that pop was about 4,000 shares... 67,000 shares were already traded and up about .06 cents.. then it was 8.09.. on a few thousand.. someone probably did an erroneous trade.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on Feb 9, 2015 18:36:56 GMT -5
At the moment that 8.09 printed, the bid/ ask were still where they'd been, so it was definitely a fat finger event.
|
|
|
|
Post by hankscorpio7 on Feb 9, 2015 22:37:41 GMT -5
Black Rock vs Palombo... Am guessing the market has figured it out...  And knows which side to take... Insiders won that battle easy last year. They had uncanny ability of selling at most of the highs last year. Is any insider buying? |
|
|
|
Post by nemzter on Feb 12, 2015 18:37:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Feb 12, 2015 18:47:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mrhaigs on Feb 12, 2015 18:55:41 GMT -5
I'm thankful for this. Now you know why she liquidated her stock position.
|
|
|
|
Post by bighaus89 on Feb 12, 2015 19:12:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by pmikeks on Feb 12, 2015 19:30:21 GMT -5
This position is in Danbury CT. Does this position replace Diane in California or is it another Senior VP located in CT. I see the posting but if this is her replacement I didn't see where she stepped down. I would be happy if she is out to pasture but not unique for a company to have more then one SVP of HR if company is on both east/west coasts. I'm ready to celebrate if she's gone.
|
|
|
|
Post by rak5555 on Feb 12, 2015 19:36:18 GMT -5
I WONDER IF THIS WILL CAUSE RALLY IN SHARE PRICE TOMORROW.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Feb 12, 2015 20:02:49 GMT -5
How mean! She's being promoted, and so they need someone to take her place!!
|
|
|
|
Post by xoxoxoxo on Feb 12, 2015 22:30:31 GMT -5
"Experience in a manufacturing environment with experience in union avoidance"
As a shareholder, I like that. As a human, I find it sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by 4allthemarbles on Feb 13, 2015 10:23:17 GMT -5
Guess we should be careful where this one goes... For the record, I read this as a positive on many, if not all fronts. The most positive being that There is a very very slim chance Diane might go away.
Amazing, she has a couple hundred employees and needs assistance. I have a couple thousand spread out all over the place and I do just fine. Poor Diane must have it so very rough. Keep in mind there are different levels of VP or any title. You can very easily handle both coasts with a competent subordinate as its done everyday in every business.
However, this is just my opinion. The other piece about the compensation with the stock plan- there are other companies that are more generous with their packages. I just have an issues with her selling all of the time, BUT if she is doing it for a charity foundation, more power to her.
At the end of the day, if the board has no issue with her selling or her performance (of a small workforce), than its just noise. Doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by savzak on Feb 13, 2015 10:47:22 GMT -5
I just have an issues with her selling all of the time, BUT if she is doing it for a charity foundation, more power to her.
I don't understand why whether you have issues with her selling depends on what she does with the proceeds. I don't see why motives we may perceive to be selfless or altruistic make her sales any more acceptable to long investors than any other purpose for which she might wish to cash out. She either owes it to us not to sell, or she doesn't.
For me, the bottom line is, either way, it's her asset and I have no right to impose my preference on her because I perceive that her disposition of that asset may indirectly affect me because of any negative market sentiment that may result.
I prefer that she and others hold all their shares but that's substantially different than saying she owes it to me to hold them.
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Feb 13, 2015 11:07:07 GMT -5
Who knows what's going on? Perhaps some of her bosses are tired of her selling, and they see the emergence of the Danbury plant in terms of the work force employed there as compared to Valencia to be an opportunity to ease her out, figuring she doesn't want to move to Danbury. Or perhaps she just plain ready to retire, and they figured they might as well take that opportunity to relocate the HR chief to Danbury. I think it's the latter, and her selling stock has never bothered me much (a little, you understand, but not much). Essentially agree with Savzak.
|
|
|
|
Post by 4allthemarbles on Feb 13, 2015 11:23:18 GMT -5
I just have an issues with her selling all of the time, BUT if she is doing it for a charity foundation, more power to her.
I don't understand why whether you have issues with her selling depends on what she does with the proceeds. I don't see why motives we may perceive to be selfless or altruistic make her sales any more acceptable to long investors than any other purpose for which she might wish to cash out. She either owes it to us not to sell, or she doesn't.
For me, the bottom line is, either way, it's her asset and I have no right to impose my preference on her because I perceive that her disposition of that asset may indirectly affect me because of any negative market sentiment that may result.
I prefer that she and others hold all their shares but that's substantially different than saying she owes it to me to hold them.
Savzak, Im not making a point about philosophy. I personally don't like that she always seems to sell. Any while her compensation is her business, like it or not, she's in a high profile position that would reflect or can be perceived as a confidence issue during key times. As a stockholder, I will state my preferences on almost anything decision the they make- I am a stockholder, it's in my purview. The motives I do question- for instance, selling off and running for the exits is different than selling and using those proceeds for charity. So, in essence, to me, it does matter- IE she sells and uses the proceeds to by stock in Novo (or something of that nature). My preference is that they hold most of their position. |
|
And knows which side to take...
