Life is good for the rats.
A former of the company that was prosecuted , turned full time snitch, has received a $17 million pay day, for providing assistance in advancing one of their cases.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is giving a $17 million award to a former company employee who gave information that helped advance an agency investigation.
“The information and assistance provided by this whistleblower enabled our enforcement staff to conserve time and resources and gather strong evidence supporting our case,” SEC enforcement chief Andrew Ceresney said in a statement Thursday announcing the award, the second-biggest ever in the agency’s five-year-old whistleblower program.
Whistleblowers are eligible for an award if they voluntarily provide the SEC with unique information that leads to a successful enforcement action. The awards can range from 10 to 30 percent of the money collected on sanctions beyond $1 million.
No word on what case this was in regards to. However, I am sure this former C-level clerk is now enjoying the fruits of his snitchery, lavishing himself with the millions of dollars that he earned for helping to prosecute and incarcerate some insider trading rascal.
God bless America.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
snitches get riches
A former employee of the SEC
Read the SEC news again.
The snitch was a former employee of the company being investigated by the SEC.
Exactly. This program has been around for a while and makes a lot of sense. The only way to get good evidence against many companies is with the help of insiders. Unfortunately, the type of insiders most likely to have access to the high-level dirt are the same type that would only come forward with proper financial incentives,
This program is so much more effective than any regulation, becuase it aligns someone’s financial interests with justice. Regulators themselves have little incentive for regulating, thanks to revolving doors.
I’m close to banning you Ott. It’s not that you said anything wrong. You were right. But I imagine you sitting there, with a smug shit eating grin on, typing horseshit into my comments section. It upsets me.
Ottnott doesn’t have a shit eating grin on his face. I am clairvoyant so I can see him now. He looks very serious. And he looks confused by your comment.
Please spare him. It helps us all when people write various things that are correct on your blog. People who write blogs, with numerous posts per day, like you do, can’t get everything correct in every post. Commenters like Ott can save you the cost of paying for an editor.
You all need to seek shade immediately.
Would you feel better about banning me if you knew that I originally typed “Reading fail”, but decided that you had just made a mistake and didn’t turn it into some crazy tirade?
Or maybe you would feel better about banning me if you knew that I’m genuinely concerned that you are letting confirmation bias guide your evaluation of information sources. I truly am. You have a distaste for BS that I really appreciate, but….[ahem, Alex Jones, etc., ahem].
My favorite financial blogs are Ritholtz’s The Big Picture and Bill McBride’s Calculated Risk. They both are very good at ignoring the noise and looking at the numbers. And, they both lack the color you bring to your blog. So, yours is probably my third favorite. I believe that you have a drive to understand the world around you, so I fire back at some of your poorly sourced comments. As I see it, you have been veering too often into a world of sources that use facts to misinform instead of to understand or explain.
It’s your blog. You don’t need a reason to ban. I think it is to your credit that you issued this explanation instead of just banning, so I offer my own explanation in return.
I’m for the little guy getting solid information. Back when Yahoo stock chat boards mattered, I was sued by a company that didn’t like what I was saying about their business. Turned out that I understood them so well that they thought I was a current or ex- employee, and they hoped to figure out who was doing it. I wasn’t. I just compared whet they said they were doing to what the SEC filings other sources said was going on.
So, no grin here at catching you at a mistake. I will freely admit to smugly providing factual info that contradicts some of the unsubstantiated claims by other blowhard readers. If that upsets you, you probably should ban me.
what’s wrong with a little bit of accountability and making sure you bring the A-game?
“My favorite financial blogs are Ritholtz’s The Big Picture…” – ON
That’s grounds for a BAN right there.
jeez ottnott… what a waste of time for not getting a little humor.
My clairvoyance tells me that Fly was not joking. But it is not right 100% of the time, so I am not sure here. It also makes sense that Fly might want to be clear to his readership about what displeases him so much that he would ban a person, so that commenters would have a clue as to what he expects.
my clairvoyance is not right 100%, I meant to type.
See, my clairvoyance was correct. Ott is a very serious person.