this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
755 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

59440 readers
3610 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Unity bosses sold stock days before development fees announcement::Unity executives sold thousands of shares in the weeks leading up to last night's hugely controversial announcement it …

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 229 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Sounds like insider trading to me

[–] Szymon@lemmy.ca 78 points 1 year ago (7 children)

The stock is down 5.5% today. It's down 6% from a week ago.

The stock is up 0.5% from a month ago, and up a whopping 32% from 6 months ago.

It's down 50% from five years ago.

What I'm getting at is that this announcement has very little movement on the stock price overall. Unless these bosses were clearing out their inventory thinking this news would kill the company, its possible these sales were normal transactions.

[–] gila@lemm.ee 56 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The financial impact of this decision is entirely speculative at this stage. Unity's next quarterly earnings report won't be impacted by it. The market is attempting to price in losses that haven't yet occurred. We won't know how it affects stock price for awhile

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 17 points 1 year ago

Yeah, an announcement like this is the shit wall street lives for. Short term gain but a long term harm is what they're all about. That's why they love layoffs as well. Doesn't matter that it screws with company morale, short term the company makes more profit!

[–] Szymon@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

The small nosedive the stock price took agrees with your assessment. It'll get an emotional reaction from some, but decisions like this are made in the interest of the shareholder, not the consumer - this is a calculated move to generate profit. They decided that the losses of people abandoning the product will be outweighed by the profits of this new revenue steam.

[–] Goodie@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (7 children)

So it's only kind of insider trader because it's only 5%?

[–] ColonelSanders@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

He may have committed some...light insider trading

Edit: inb4 people don't get the joke

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] livingcoder@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

"Normal transaction" after a fundamental change in how all games that use your product are financially responsible by novel, unmeasurable, and unrealistic metrics. No transaction prior to this kind of announcement is "normal" imo.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 49 points 1 year ago (3 children)

All trading by corporate officers is, by definition, "insider trading".

But as long as they did it at the appropriate times (usually windows after earnings calls iirc) and file with the SEC it's fine.

[–] tory@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

We're gonna tank the company for money, everyone in this room sell all your stock over the next x months.

X months pass and the last sale of stock happens legally

Time for that announcement, send it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Nope, just a scheduled sale of a minute portion of his held shares which he receives as part of his compensation and a minuscule amount of shares outstanding. He's sold over 50k shares this year, this is just a normal thing.

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Has any executive uh ever been prosecuted for insider trading after stock buybacks?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] misterundercoat@lemmy.world 76 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you're ever worried that these corporate assholes are never punished for their blatant shady behavior, don't worry. They have to deal with raised eyebrows which we all know can be super embarrassing.

[–] MisterMcBolt@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I dunno, if a government cares enough to look into this then the corpos might get some VERY sharp slaps on their wrists.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 69 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] waitmarks@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago (1 children)

unfortunately there is a massive loophole that allows them to do this. what they do is set up sell orders at regular intervals (once a month or whatever) for months or years in advance. then when they decide they dont want to sell, they just cancel the order which is totally fine for them to do for some reason. if they do want to sell they just let the order execute and if anyone asks, they set it up a year ago and there is no possibility that the current decision could have influenced them into making that sell order a year ago.

[–] sonnenzeit@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I guess it would be best to change the rules so that they cannot trade their company stocks at all while working there and a reasonable period beyond. I think some legislations already restrict floating stock like that but I'm no expert on the matter.

[–] severien@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That would make stocks a form of retirement, not a work compensation.

How about that you can sell the stocks, with an uncancellable order a year in advance?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mrsgreenpotato@discuss.tchncs.de 64 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Installed Godot yesterday and it's starting to grow on me, I like it. Looking forward to a huge movement of studios over to Godot, which will hopefully speed up the development of Godot through further support. Is there any reliable source of data about which game engines are popular at the moment? I want to see that sweet sweet decline in Unity user base over to Godot.

[–] cryball@sopuli.xyz 18 points 1 year ago

I found steamdb.info. According to them Godot seems to be growing steadily.

[–] Fisch@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really love Godot, it's great. I actually switched to it before I even knew what open source was simply because it's way nicer to use.

[–] mrsgreenpotato@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

What types of games do you develop? I just started gamedev as a hobbyist earlier this year, so I'm by no means an expert in the field. I'm not into 2D games, I very much prefer 3D. What scares me is that I don't see that many well made 3D games in Godot out there. It's mostly 2D. Nonetheless, the engine seems to be capable of doing about the same of what Unity offers. I hope I'll be able to soon reach the same level of proficiency in Godot and support the growth of 3D community.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Usually people at a company are not allowed to sell stock except during special windows. For people at the very top it's restricted even further where they need to essentially plan to buy/sell stock well in advance. Essentially there is a huge delay to any stock decisions. So these sell offs were likely decided far in advance and once locked in cannot be changed.

For more details read https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rule-10b5-1.asp

[–] vivadanang@lemm.ee 45 points 1 year ago

the sale might not have been shady if scheduled, but the timing of the announcement which they have complete control over IS shady as fuck.

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

So basically it can be "legit" if they schedule the sale for a year out and the announcement for a year and a day...

[–] Damage@feddit.it 14 points 1 year ago

You can regulate the stock market as much as you want but it's a flawed concept.

[–] Vendul@feddit.de 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Rubanski@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 3 points 1 year ago

He's literally the micro transactions guy. He's cancer.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It'll be my ignorance, but how are you allowed to own stock in the company you're on the C-level of? Wouldn't your direct control of the company, and the ability to buy and sell stock, be seen as insider trading?

[–] Album@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Many company boards (of which CEOs sit at) have requirements where they must vest a minimum dollar amount into acquiring company shares. The purpose of this is to ensure they have an interest in the success of the stock and thereby the success of the company.

These same companies will then additionally have blackout periods typically 30 days before the announcement of quarterly earnings where employees are restricted from selling shares.

Not sure what unity's board rules are but if they are a public company it should be in their investors materials, annual reports, etc

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Hard to see selling stock, as an executive, as confidence inspiring.

[–] Album@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

All execs sell their own stock all the time. You're just aware of it today for one company so it seems like an issue.

Riccitiello has 3 million shares. He sold 2k (.06%) recently and 50k (1.5%) YTD.

You should also be made aware that when you are identified as a director of a company, trades like this are generally automatically scheduled due to MNPI regulations.

https://www.gurufocus.com/stock/U/insider

Tim Apple sells about a million shares of AAPL every year, while holding roughly 3M continuously. Likely all pre-planned on a schedule.

https://www.gurufocus.com/stock/AAPL/insider

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] StarkillerX42@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

If they own shares, then they want the company to succeed. A better question is "why are they allowed to sell those shares until they quit?" And the answer to that question is that everyone with enough power to change this also enjoys the current system.

[–] cloud@lazysoci.al 5 points 1 year ago

Get fucked, use Godot

load more comments
view more: next ›