|
Another Take Two Scandal, or
Just Another Wall Street Scandal?
An unusual event occurred at 4:01 PM on September 1st, 2009 as
video game investors were staring intently at their Dow Jones
Newswire streamers. Take Two Interactive was to announce
earnings on that day and news hit the streamer, “Take-Two
Swings To 3Q Loss; Co Cautious On FY Outlook.”
Opening up the report revealed an extensive analysis by Jay Miller
of Dow Jones.
Jay Miller of Dow Jones? Where was the actual company press
release?
Oh there it is: “Take-Two
Interactive Software, Inc. Reports Third Quarter Fiscal 2009
Financial Results.” But wait, which came first,
they both say 4:01 PM and some of us clearly got the analysis ahead
of the actual press release? I asked a Dow Jones
representative who insisted that the extensive ten paragraph story
came 48 seconds after the press release.
Hold on. 48 seconds? Dow Jones:
“We, like other newswire organizations, are often able to
issue analysis articles very quickly because companies provide
releases under embargo slightly before the releases are broadly
distributed. The embargo prohibits us from distributing a
release or related article before an agreed upon time. In the
case of Take-Two’s earnings, the embargo was until the
company issued the release over Business
Wire.”
In other words, certain news organizations are receiving sensitive
information in advance just so they can write out their stories in
advance. Is this really necessary? Wall Street does not
have enough scandals to go around? Take Two, specifically,
has a long history and maybe even a culture of scandal considering,
for example, having a founder who pled guilty to
first degree felony criminal charges for falsifying business
records.
Just a couple months ago, a jury found an ex fund manager
liable for insider trading on news embargoed information.
Just last week, bizarre trading in Dell, Inc. before the official
press release
caused some to wonder whether or not everybody was getting the
same news at the same time.
As Jacob Goldstein recently observed in his Wall Street Journal
blog, “Information wants to be free — all the
more so when there’s money to be made.”
There are a large number of cases by the SEC involving leaked news
information. You just have to wonder how many people
don’t get caught.
Investors would be much better served by companies that prevent
leaking sensitive information from members of the media by not
giving them any more information than they need in advance.
It is shocking that after so many Wall Street scandals, this kind
of unnecessary news distribution occurs at all.
|
|