I think it goes back to that footnote in the form (I wish I could find it again) that effectively referred to insider knowledge as the reason for sale. That would make the reason for sale public, they told us, so my guess it is legal though I, like you, am not happy at all. The were really optimistic in their last forward guidance and the stark contrast translates to lost credibility in my eyes.
three things I don't ever want to hear on this board again..
1. Analysts who make upgrades must have talked to management and know the results are going to be good
2. 10b5-1 sales are automatic and don't portend anything about the health of the company
3. PKT gives conservative guidance
carrot in front of the donkey just long enough for them to dump shares.....we're the donkey in this scenario....such bs and absolutely the last time I hold shares of a company where any executive is dumping shares, 10b5-1 or not.....
ezndat - The one that gets me is the 10b5-1. When I initially came across the recent insider sales my alarms went off, especially when I saw a footnote effectively referring to insider knowledge as the basis for the sales. I tripped myself up, by not selling, when I followed up on comments that 10b5-1's ... it appeared that they do in fact involve pre-planned, scheduled sales. While I take responsibility for my own decisions, I did find specific message board comments about this topic to be flippant (sound authoritative and knowledgeable but really devoid of knowledge) and it appears my initial instincts were right on. The combination of the supposed scheduling aspects of 10b5-1's, which implies relatively advanced time commitments to me, and the timeframe that all this unfolds doesn't reconcile for me. If the advanced "scheduling" of sales can actually involve days instead of months, than anyone who implied longer term planning should think twice before offering their inputs,