Who is the victim in insider trading? It seems victimless,

Every other stock holder who doesn't have the insider information

>>1564102
The people who buy at the top, the people who miss out,the lone wolfs you know

>>1564104
who's "everyone" how do you quantify this?

>>1564113
If you inside trade stock T. Literally every investor of stock T is victim because you are making trades they potentially would have made at the same time with the same available information

>>1564102
If the markets aren't seen as fair, nobody will invest in them.

>>1564102
Shareholders dummy

>>1564113
You're a fucking idiot

>>1565000
Watch the Louis Theroux documentary about people that had acquired brain injuries, I'm certain that you have a problem with application of intelligence

>>1564102
Insider trading is a huge incentive for unethical behavior, including *not* informing investors of critical information in a timely manner. By outlawing it, you are more closely aligning the interests of those 'in-the-know' with the equity stakeholders.

>>1565026
The stakeholders you fucking spastic

>>1564118

not really investors, just traders who plan to sell at a profit as soon as price reaches or overshoots the new value based on the new info. There are people who sit around all day waiting for news to get in first and make a quick buck. insider trading steals from them.

>>1565000
It's a criminal offense shithead

>>156502
Yeah, he agreed to buy them based on different information. Would you buy a Note7 now that they're exploding? Would it be ethical to sell them if only you were aware of the problem?

>>1565042
And yet you're the one projecting

>>1565092
Who's a clever little troll? Why it's you! Good dog fido, what's your next trick is it fetching a ball or licking your own asshole?
Gee whiz Billy you really triggered those Jews over on /biz/ today you're my hero, want to fuck my 10/10 sister?

There's your (you) now fuck off

>>1565134
Fuck off you retard

>>1565214
You're a fucking joke of a poster, and a faggot.

I'm going to be the 3rd different anon to answer your shitty question:

The victim of insider trading is every other person in the market for stocks. By making transactions in the market using information that no other person has access to, you are denying buyers and sellers the information they need to make rational decisions. Doing so erodes trust in not only the stock in particular, but in the entire market as well. It's short-term gain at the cost of long-term market stability, it's motivated by nothing but greed, and society has decided that the overall health of the market is more important than any one investor's personal gain/loss in a particular stock.

Now fuck off and never return.

It is a legitimate question. Edge fags need to leave.

The victims are the banks.

They are selling a stock lower than the actual value of the stock that the buyer knows.

>>1565134
everyone who would of made the same deal if they had known that information, they are having an opportunity cost, and everyone who shorted that stock

>>1565253
It's a shit question that 5 seconds on Google would answer.

Banks don't sell stocks anymore, they "make markets" and match sellers to buyers.

>>1565300
Protip: investment banks underwrite initial shares which, under the usual firm commitment agreement, places the inventory risk with the underwriting bank who is in charge of selling the shares to the public.

Lrn2finance

Ya niggas posting in a roll bread.

>>1565214
you're a joke. everyone who is hurt is every single person that *would have* bought that stock, at that time, had they had the same information that the insider did. but they didn't buy, because they didn't have the insider information not yet available.

fucking idiot.

>>1565341
If by "every single person" you happen to mean "every single person who already owns at least one share" then you're right.

>>1565351
Not really. Denying someone positive information of a stock is basically denying them the opportunity cost of investing.

>>1565358
Insider trading can be done by someone within a firm or corporation that acts on information not yet made public. Like someone who works at Apple trading ahead of the news on earnings reports that aren't supposed to be released for a few days. The person can not legally make the information public before it is supposed to be publicized therefore there is no denial of positive information in this case. I know that specific example isn't always the case, so I'm not saying you're wrong, I just think insider trading victims have to be studied and specified on a case-by-case basis.

>>1565332
Irrelevant.

This is about insider trading not IPOs. Go back to school and learn how to read you fucktard.

>>1565365
It's almost impossible to not know about the internal operations of your company before the public does. There's nothing illegal about this.

However, when you act on such knowledge to purposely make advantageous (or disadvantageous) business decisions, you are breaking the law and most moderns codes of business ethics.

I agree that the complexity of these scenarios means that it's sometimes hard to judge, but there's a point where you need to call a spade a spade.

>>1565365
I don't think you will ever understand. Go draw some pictures with crayons instead.

>>1565369
Are you implying that one could not trade insider information of an IPO?

Obvious roll bread is obvious

>>1565026

The seller is the loser in your scenario. Given that he had access to the same material, non-public information that you did, he would not have sold at the current market price, as he would have known it to be undervalued.

You're essentially taking advantage of investors in the marketplace who are playing at a significant informational disadvantage

>>1565051
What are you talking about? It all depends on the trade in question. There's many possible outcomes that could hurt both the investor and speculator.

>be CEO
>short the company
>intentionally run it into the ground
>cash in

>>1565441
>be CEO
>run company into the ground
>not get tried in court and sent to prison for conspiracy, securities fraud, false statement, insider trading, etc.

Pick only two nignog

>>1564121
Correct answer. These laws exist mainly to protect the integrity of the markets themselves

>>1564102
Where the fuck do you think the profits come from? Spontaneous creation out of the ether?

>>1564102
Shareholders, other people trading in that stock (or not trading in that stock when they would have) and the market itself.

Shareholders can provide incentive for a company to crack-down on it but the real reason for prosecuting it is that confidence in the market is the illusion that holds up the whole house of cards and widespread inside trading is very damaging to market confidence since why should anyone buy a stock if insiders are just going to fuck you.

Of course insider trading is very widespread already but the SEC etc get to pretend it's not by cracking down on anything that doesn't maintain the polite fiction.

From a certain perspective, all trading is inside trading, it's just a matter of degree.

>>1564102
You're actually doing a service by helping the price more accurately reflect reality. By sending a price signal you are in a way making your inside information available for everyone to see.

>>1565253
Are you fucking retarded. Banks don't buy stocks. They loan money. It's fucking safer because theyre the least liable. They don't make as much money as a stockholder but they get paid first if a company has to liquidate. Stockholders get paid last; stocks are the highest risk investment in a company. Why would a bank with trillions of dollars risk that when they can make secure as fuck loans that make them billions.

>>1567312
>loans
>secure as fuck

>>1564102
If one person is making money another person is losing money. If an insider dumps his stocks and the value drops, the shareholders are the victims.

>>1565068
... I kinda do because I would like to think of it as a special grenade feature for my phone.

>>1567452
Yes.

Lets just assume insider trading was legal then for the sake of argument.

Imagine if it was legal and what outcome would happen in the overall market if every business could take advantage of insider trading.

>>1564102

It creates "false value" in the stocks. They would inflate to Godzilla proportions and the crash would be worse than the great depression. Inflation would be so bad people would be wiping their ass with currency.