Mcafee backdating trial english dating sim games ds

An inconsistency in successive emails from Roberts–the first called January 15 the effective date, and the second called January 16 the effective date–supported these allegations.

The SEC also alleged that Roberts had acted “recklessly” in connection with the Matin Grant.

Both actions focused on the Promotion Grant, but not exclusively.

On May 16, 2006, the Center for Financial Research and Analysis (“CFRA”) published a report identifying seventeen companies that, judging by data showing that they had granted large numbers of options “at exercise prices and dates that matched exactly or were close to a 40-day low in the[ir] . Within days of the report’s publication, Mc Afee began an internal review of its stock option practices, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) opened an investigation the following week.

Roberts’ involvement in backdating the Promotion Grant came under scrutiny in 2006, during a nationwide probe into options backdating that implicated Mc Afee. stock price,” had likely engaged in widespread backdating. The report identified five suspicious Mc Afee option grants.

The Board’s Compensation Committee had met and approved that grant on January 15, 2002, when the stock closed at $27.19.

As Corporate Secretary, Roberts attended the meeting.

This effectively lowered the strike price on Roberts’ options by about $10 per share.

Davis changed the date of the grant from February 14 to April 14, when the stock price closed at .75. In the second situation, backdating results in an overstatement of earnings, which misleads investors. The propriety of backdating the Promotion Grant turns on whether Davis and Roberts had the authority to backdate Roberts’ options, and whether a compensation expense should have been recorded to account for the later-added benefit Roberts received. In the first situation, backdating augments the option’s value, which raises the cost of the option to the company without shareholders’ permission. 2011) (affirming defendant’s conviction for backdating stock options without authorization).The next day, the stock dipped to .43, and, according to the indictment and SEC complaint, Roberts unilaterally [**8] decided to re-price the options to that lower price.He then allegedly falsified the Board minutes to make it appear that the Board had voted to price the options as of the 16th, rather than the 15th. It becomes fraudulent where the company has not authorized the practice, or where the company does not report the backdating as a compensation expense.

Tags: , ,