Unity executives sold thousands of shares in the weeks leading up to last night’s hugely controversial announcement it will soon charge developers when one of their games is downloaded.

The company has subsequently softened its stance slightly on a couple of aspects - but fury across the industry remains.

Behind the scenes, CEO John Riccitiello shifted 2000 shares last week on 6th September, as noted by Yahoo Finance, which noted this move was part of a trend over the past year where the exec has sold more than 50,000 shares in total and bought none.

  • the_gmg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    It is right in the SEC filling which anyone can look up. The 2000 shares sold were by the CEOs wife, which is why they are marked as indirect.

    $80k is rich people walking around money when compared to ~$100 million. It was part of an automated selling plan and not suspicious in any way.

    There’s an old Peter Lynch quote about many reasons to sell but only one to buy.

    • Ender of Games@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      More confusing accounting that I’ve never learned, and probably never will.

      At first I thought it was because of direct/indirect ownership. But what is the point of “5. Amount of Securities Beneficially Owned Following Reported Transaction(s) (Instr. 3 and 4)” being 3mil with no transaction, but the 2000 stock transaction showing they owned none? I see nothing on the form or in the definition showing that direct or indirect ownership show be reported differently. They are all owned by the ‘reporting person’. But clearly this is all me just not being able to read how they filled it out.

      I agree $80k is nothing to $100mil, I do believe that if they have 3mil of securities, then it doesn’t matter, no matter how high or low the securities are worth. I disagree with the idea that automation makes it not suspicious, though. If the stocks were all automatically sold off, then the company devalues itself afterwards, it has the same intent and outcome as any other insider trading.

      • the_gmg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Ok, so the report is on the person (CEO in this case). Only directors and certain executive levels are required to report.

        Table I shows ‘non-derivative securities’ (regular stock). The CEO holds in their own name 3 million+ shares. No transaction was reported for those, but they have to be listed.

        The CEO’s spouse aquired 2000 shares at a cost of $1.425 each. After this transaction, they had 2000 shares total (column 5).

        They then sold those shares for $40 each. After, they weren’t holding any stock, so column 5 shows 0.

        The CEO financially benefits from this, so the transactions are listed on their form, as (I) for indirect. If the spouse also had a position within Unity which required reporting this would be listed on their own SEC form as well.