Sadler.. insider trading?

This has Bern rumbling on for years, yet nothing ever comes of it.

If it's insider trading you're bothered about, look no further than our former Chancellor and current Prime Minister and the whole raft of contracts going to his family from Government.
 
Wizaard said:
This has Bern rumbling on for years, yet nothing ever comes of it.

If it's insider trading you're bothered about, look no further than our former Chancellor and current Prime Minister and the whole raft of contracts going to his family from Government.
Click to expand...
Dunno. There was a court appearance and a date set.

The truth is we don't know what's in it. Hopefully nothing, but the fact it's got to court...dunno.
 
There isn't much to see here. LaRocca is accused of insider trading when he was at Segantii. Simon Sadler will automatically be named as part of any investigation due to his role as CIO. LaRocca will probably walk the charges, and his new employer, JPMorgan seem to think so given they made him their new head of APAC a few months back.

It's very inside baseball, but there really isn't anything here.
 
cside said:
There isn't much to see here. LaRocca is accused of insider trading when he was at Segantii. Simon Sadler will automatically be named as part of any investigation due to his role as CIO. LaRocca will probably walk the charges, and his new employer, JPMorgan seem to think so given they made him their new head of APAC a few months back.

It's very inside baseball, but there really isn't anything here.
Click to expand...
Cheers for insight. Hopefully nothing to worry about then.
 
cside said:
There isn't much to see here. LaRocca is accused of insider trading when he was at Segantii. Simon Sadler will automatically be named as part of any investigation due to his role as CIO. LaRocca will probably walk the charges, and his new employer, JPMorgan seem to think so given they made him their new head of APAC a few months back.

It's very inside baseball, but there really isn't anything here.
Click to expand...
Possible. Feels like the SFC got caught with its pants down when Segantii’s name came up in connection with the US investigation (which seemed to conclude that the hedge funds did nothing wrong). Still not good reputationally, even if it goes nowhere.

For the record, max penalty is HK$10mn fine, ten years prison. (Repeat: maximum).
 
cside said:
There isn't much to see here. LaRocca is accused of insider trading when he was at Segantii. Simon Sadler will automatically be named as part of any investigation due to his role as CIO. LaRocca will probably walk the charges, and his new employer, JPMorgan seem to think so given they made him their new head of APAC a few months back.

It's very inside baseball, but there really isn't anything here.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear he is not Head of JP Morgan APAC, he is head of part of the trading team.

Although the point about why would JP Morgan appoint if they knew is valid.

Unless charges came out the blue and they didn’t know.
 
cside said:
There isn't much to see here. LaRocca is accused of insider trading when he was at Segantii. Simon Sadler will automatically be named as part of any investigation due to his role as CIO. LaRocca will probably walk the charges, and his new employer, JPMorgan seem to think so given they made him their new head of APAC a few months back.

It's very inside baseball, but there really isn't anything here.
Click to expand...
It looks to me as if Sadler is named as a defendant and his bail set at 1million HKD, much more than La Rocca’s. So it seems to me that his involvement is much more than just a regulatory necessity. If the document in the op is genuine, then this looks pretty serious.

That said, innocent until proven guilty and insider trading in the U.K. is very difficult to prove. If the law is the same in HK then the SFC will have an uphill task. If securities/investors in the USA are involved then that’s a whole new ball game.

I’m actually quite concerned.
 
seasideone said:
Just to be clear he is not Head of JP Morgan APAC, he is head of part of the trading team.

Although the point about why would JP Morgan appoint if they knew is valid.

Unless charges came out the blue and they didn’t know.
Click to expand...
Don’t the redemptions Segantii has been seeing suggest it didn’t come out of the blue?
 
Its not a massive shock to be honest, I heard this was going to be happening about 2 years ago, that actually coincided with the club trying to compete on the cheap

Its a very murky world that our owner operates in
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
Its not a massive shock to be honest, I heard this was going to be happening about 2 years ago, that actually coincided with the club trying to compete on the cheap

Its a very murky world that our owner operates in
Click to expand...
The one 2 years ago, was some organisations stopping trading with the fund wasn't it?. Although I think the reports suggested there was no wrong doing, just nerves around block trading investigations on wall street.

This one appears to be relating to a trade in 2017
 
SMB_BFC said:
The one 2 years ago, was some organisations stopping trading with the fund wasn't it?. Although I think the reports suggested there was no wrong doing, just nerves around block trading investigations on wall street.

This one appears to be relating to a trade in 2017
Click to expand...
I don't no specifics just that i was told by someone who moves in the same circles that he was in trouble hence him leaving Hong Kong
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
Its not a massive shock to be honest, I heard this was going to be happening about 2 years ago, that actually coincided with the club trying to compete on the cheap

Its a very murky world that our owner operates in
Click to expand...
Yes. There have been reports in the financial press about investigations before. I think Bank of America and Citigroup suspended trading with Segantii at one point.
 
I hope those saying 'there's nothing in this' are saying so with the benefit of knowledge. However, on different allegations altogether, didn't some say the same about Andrew James Pilley?
I don't know anything about the Hong Kong legal system to comment on it's integrity, fairness & burden of proof etc.
Whatever happens, this will be a distraction & concern for SS & the uncertainty is likely to affect his financial planning and in particular BFC's budget - which we can do without right now!
 
It takes years for a case to be put together but he has been charged so they don't think they are wasting the prosecutors time. Irrespective very damaging to the credibility of his company and the likelihood of people wanting their money being used by it.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
It looks to me as if Sadler is named as a defendant and his bail set at 1million HKD, much more than La Rocca’s. So it seems to me that his involvement is much more than just a regulatory necessity. If the document in the op is genuine, then this looks pretty serious.

That said, innocent until proven guilty and insider trading in the U.K. is very difficult to prove. If the law is the same in HK then the SFC will have an uphill task. If securities/investors in the USA are involved then that’s a whole new ball game.

I’m actually quite concerned.
Click to expand...
Innocent until proven guilty is about right. As a detective said in our house in regard to corruption in Blackpool “What we know to be true and what we can prove in a court of law are two different things.”
 
Good job his name’s not Owen or Karl otherwise it would be pelters on here rather than
ho hum.

What always gets me about things like this is do you think people who get caught doing wrongdoing only did it once? That the one time they were caught was the only time they’d ever tried to pull a fast one? We may have our very own billions derivative reality show.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
It looks to me as if Sadler is named as a defendant and his bail set at 1million HKD, much more than La Rocca’s. So it seems to me that his involvement is much more than just a regulatory necessity. If the document in the op is genuine, then this looks pretty serious.

That said, innocent until proven guilty and insider trading in the U.K. is very difficult to prove. If the law is the same in HK then the SFC will have an uphill task. If securities/investors in the USA are involved then that’s a whole new ball game.

I’m actually quite concerned.
Click to expand...
Why are you concerned?

We can't do fcuk all about it and have to move on whatever happens to the owner.

Remember, that's what happened last time😉👍🏻
 
It's far from ideal but I'm firmly in the camp of innocent until proven guilty and won't be worrying about something that I can't change. This isn't new, I would wager a lot of hedge fund owners and employs come up against similar charges. As has been said, it's a bit or a murky world and as such I suspect most of these cases come to nothing.
 
Theoneandonly said:
Good job his name’s not Owen or Karl otherwise it would be pelters on here rather than
ho hum.

What always gets me about things like this is do you think people who get caught doing wrongdoing only did it once? That the one time they were caught was the only time they’d ever tried to pull a fast one? We may have our very own billions derivative reality show.
Click to expand...
Could i suggest a read for you?

 
Mexboroseasider said:
It looks to me as if Sadler is named as a defendant and his bail set at 1million HKD, much more than La Rocca’s. So it seems to me that his involvement is much more than just a regulatory necessity. If the document in the op is genuine, then this looks pretty serious.

That said, innocent until proven guilty and insider trading in the U.K. is very difficult to prove. If the law is the same in HK then the SFC will have an uphill task. If securities/investors in the USA are involved then that’s a whole new ball game.

I’m actually quite concerned.
Click to expand...
The CIO carries the regulatory and compliance burden for the whole fund. I wouldn't look at the relative bail values as an indication or more/less serious charges or levels of suspicion. The higher bail is more a function of Simon Sadler's seniority in the organisation (and he's pretty much the tip of the pyramid!).

The HK legal system is very similar to the UK, and the manner in which the SFC operates is very similar to London. For context, neither have the same aggressive reputation as Wall St/SEC/DoJ. But HK is a well run market. Insider trading is incredibly common across the world. A fund will take that into account when incorporating. The vast majority of insider trading investigations (worldwide!) result in a fine and extra scrutiny rather than a criminal conviction.
 
cside said:
The CIO carries the regulatory and compliance burden for the whole fund. I wouldn't look at the relative bail values as an indication or more/less serious charges or levels of suspicion. The higher bail is more a function of Simon Sadler's seniority in the organisation (and he's pretty much the tip of the pyramid!).

The HK legal system is very similar to the UK, and the manner in which the SFC operates is very similar to London. For context, neither have the same aggressive reputation as Wall St/SEC/DoJ. But HK is a well run market. Insider trading is incredibly common across the world. A fund will take that into account when incorporating. The vast majority of insider trading investigations (worldwide!) result in a fine and extra scrutiny rather than a criminal conviction.
Click to expand...
I was feeling relatively reassured until you mentioned the SEC.
 
seasideone said:
Just to be clear he is not Head of JP Morgan APAC, he is head of part of the trading team.

Although the point about why would JP Morgan appoint if they knew is valid.

Unless charges came out the blue and they didn’t know.
Click to expand...
Stand corrected.

If LaRocca had a hint of an investigation he would have been bound to reveal them as part of his recruitment process, or face immediate termination. It's generally 'okay' to have investigations ongoing, as long as you are fully transparent about this.

Your point about them coming as as a bolt from the blue could well be correct, but we will never know. Usually getting to court takes a year or more, so I'd assume this wasn't a big surprise.
 
cside said:
The CIO carries the regulatory and compliance burden for the whole fund. I wouldn't look at the relative bail values as an indication or more/less serious charges or levels of suspicion. The higher bail is more a function of Simon Sadler's seniority in the organisation (and he's pretty much the tip of the pyramid!).

The HK legal system is very similar to the UK, and the manner in which the SFC operates is very similar to London. For context, neither have the same aggressive reputation as Wall St/SEC/DoJ. But HK is a well run market. Insider trading is incredibly common across the world. A fund will take that into account when incorporating. The vast majority of insider trading investigations (worldwide!) result in a fine and extra scrutiny rather than a criminal conviction.
Click to expand...
And right there you define business as usual and why self serving crime perpetuates.
 
Can’t imagine this is uncommon (not necessarily actually doing it, but having your business practices called into question) given the nature of the industry. In reality it’s probably almost impossible to not commit insider trading. At the end of the day you invest based on intel.
 
LA1 Seasider said:
Can’t imagine this is uncommon (not necessarily actually doing it, but having your business practices called into question) given the nature of the industry. In reality it’s probably almost impossible to not commit insider trading. At the end of the day you invest based on intel.
Click to expand...
You’re right why bother having laws? Oh wait there are always victims and a cost to insider trading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top