Originally posted by HeroBando
View Post
The reason why I think this case will be dismissed is because
1. It's only less than 1%. Nearly every portfolio plan has some sort of percent designated to growth/risky investments
2. The idea itself is not crazy and was very solid, but the execution has been awful.
3. Pbc has no direct connection to investors,, it would be like if I invested money with a broker, and he bought Apple stock, the stock is mismanaged and crashed and me blaming Apple instead of the broker
Really the only person that really could get in some trouble is the guy that worked for waddell n Reed, handled the initial investment, and then took a job with pbc.. That looks bad, but isn't totally illegal. Investors will have to prove this was a conspiracy and not that pbc liked the guy while dealing with him and decided to recruit him.. This happens all the time in business. Just look at all the bankers that go to work for the SEC, or all the coaches that switch teams. Employees get poached all the time, and it's not illegal. Pbc can claim that, and investors will have a really hard time proving a conspiracy unless they have a smoking gun like emails, etc
Comment