En este tema, nos metemos más a fondo dentro de la bolsa, donde siendo el título de mi blog, lo más razonable sería que le dedicara un post a los problemas que existen dentro, para dar a conocer sus desajustes y así estar más preparado a la hora de entrar en este mundo de las finanzas.
Para variar empezaremos explicando que es y en que consiste el insider trading.
Básicamente es usar información que legalmente no se debe poseer con el fin de eliminar los riesgos que pueda haber en el mercado de valores y así obtener grandes beneficios.
En la mayoría de los países esta acción es ilegal y con razón, pero ¿quiénes son los que se ven perjudicados con esta acción? La respuesta: los accionistas. Con el insider trading se quiebra la relación de fidelidad que tenían con directivos y otros, sintiendo que es injusto invertir, al no tener la misma información que poseen los demás.
Hablando de información privilegiada, nos referimos a cualquier información que provenga de un emisor, siempre que sea:
· Relativa a éste, a sus negocios o a uno o varios por él emitidos o garantizados.
· No divulgados al mercado.
· Su conocimiento público es capaz de influir en liquidez, el precio o la cotización de los valores emitidos.
Por lo que, las personas que poseen este tipo de información no deben revelarla, ni recomendar la realización de alguna operación, ni valerse directa o indirectamente en beneficio propio.
¿Cuáles serían las soluciones a este problema?
Se tendría que mentalizar a los que poseen esa información, formarlos de un modo moral, para que no usen esa información en beneficio propio, por el mero hecho de que no está bien.
Tendrían que existir más controles dentro de las empresas, que las regulen y controlen, para estar al tanto de cualquier uso indebido de una información privilegiada.
Para lograr solucionar este problema, deberá haber un autocontrol en las bolsas como también de los intermediarios.
Como vemos cualquier solución que se mencione, están de la mano con la moral, por lo que es muy difícil regularlo. Por lo tanto concluyo que:
La única solución moral y legal consiste en abstenerse de negociar, o bien informar públicamente, pero el problema está en que informar públicamente, puede traer consigo un daño muy grande a las empresas.
Me gustaría ahora llegando al final de este post que vieran una película muy buena que trata exactamente de este tema. Se llama “Wall street”. Si les gustaría entender este tema de un modo más entretenido, véanla.
Aquí les dejo el link para que vean el tráiler en youtube:
Por último y para terminar, os dejo un artículo muy interesante de otra posible solución para el insider trading: LEGALIZARLO
The Solution To Insider Trading Problem? Legalize It
As the latest insider-trading scandal unfolds, with the Justice Department busting former SAC Capital portfolio manager Donald Longeuileand others for trading on information obtained from company employees, it’s time to ask a provocative question: What’s wrong with that?
Henry Manne, dean emeritus of the George Mason School of Law, famously broached the subject with his 1966 book “Insider Trading and the Stock Market.” In it, the University of Chicago grad and follower of the Austrian School of economics suggested that the most important thing with markets is to get the price right. Insiders know more about a company than anybody else, so why not let them trade on what they know?
Such trading would drive the price up or down to the correct level and avoid the crash-and-burn scenarios that occur when an Enron or Worldcom finally ‘fesses up to what at least a few insiders knew all along. Remember, there are plenty of civil and criminal laws to enforce actual accounting fraud as well as the release of false information to investors.
In the latest scandal, the Securities and Exchange Commission is relying on wiretaps and stoolies to uncover traders who bribed or otherwise induced company insiders to give them information that could move the stock. The SEC seems to have a particular grudge against intermediaries who set up conference calls between hedge fund managers and corporate insiders.
Manne thinks it would make more sense to let the insiders trade on what they know, and cut out the hedge-fund managers and their procurers entirely.
“You have to step back and ask why is it all these strangers to the corporation are engaged in something called insider trading,” asks the 82-year-old, who’s now living in very active retirement in Florida. “It’s because the SEC has terrified most insiders — the higher-ranking people who have access to information — so other people are getting the information out instead.”
To understand Manne’s thinking, you have to understand the Austrian economists including Joseph Schumpeter, who famously — and incorrectly — predicted the death of capitalism partly because corporate structures would strangle the very entrepreneurial spirit that created them. Schumpeter got that wrong, Manne says, but he diagnosed a serious problem that insider trading could fix. Corporate employees have very little incentive to engage in entrepreneurial capitalism because their efforts will just be absorbed by the corporation. If they could trade on what they know, Manne says, they might be more energetic and creative.
You can create a culture of innovation by allowing everybody to engage in insider trading. Secretaries, elevator boys, they are the ones feeding information to the hedge funds today. The guy on the assembly line who notices they’ve just added another shift. Top management doesn’t even know what the results of that are but this guy knows something. If you tell this guy on the assembly line he can’t talk to anyone, that information doesn’t get out. But who wants that inefficient a market?
Lawyers at the SEC would argue the markets depend on information getting out in an orderly way. Otherwise investors will turn away from what they believe to be a rigged game, in which they are always selling or buying stock to insiders who know more than they do. Which is, of course, exactly what is going on.
“Total up the value of new, significant news in the market,” Manne says. “It’s trillions of dollars. People don’t let trillions of dollars rush by them like a shadow. They’re going to find some way to get it. And if you don’t let the good guys use it, the bad guys will.”
What about executives who learn a piece of bad news, say when the sales manager tells them a major customer just canceled his order? Isn’t that unfair to allow the executive to sell his stock to unwitting investors?
Manne laughs. In his world, he says, “I think the sales manager would have sold first.”
But seriously, he says, existing fraud laws prohibit executives from giving investors false information. So if the executive told investors everything was rosy when he knew about the big order cancellation, that would be against the law. Allowing him to trade on the information — assuming he can beat the sales manager to his broker — merely adds valuable pricing information to the market. Small consolation to the investor who bought the executive’s shares without knowing the whole picture, but Manne offers brutal Austrian logic in response.
“He was in there knowing he didn’t know everything,” Manne says. “In fact, having one additional buyer or seller helps him, doesn’t hurt him.”
Manne hasn’t sold the SEC or the public at large on his theories since he first broached them in the 1960s but he isn’t giving up. He notes that despite decades of enforcement the SEC probably hasn’t done much to stem insider trading, while most other nations don’t even bother to control it. The SEC hasn’t even properly defined what “material” information is, as opposed to the mosaic of information that analysts assemble from snippets of non-public, but non-material information.
“You can’t analyze a company unless you have some information and the SEC has never told us how to make that distinction,” Manne says.
As for the latest scandal, Manne predicts the SEC will face a stiff challenge to some of its allegations of insider trading.
“Obviously a lot of those experts did not have material, inside information,” he says. “They had other information that was useful to analysts in building their picture. My god, you dont want to stop that going on!”
“There’s no way to get all the information in all the people’s hands at the same time,” he concludes.
Bibliografía:
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario