Give me a law they broke? Its not criminal to be a bad CEO. I don't understand the multiple comments saying people will be going to jail. You can't goto jail because you bankrupt your company as cfo or ceo.
8 replies (most recent on top)
CEO of Affiliated and the CFO served prison time. Over an 11.5 million overdraft.
Windstream lost 5.5 billion and the CEO can just walk away? Bank bail out in 2008 stopped Affiliated loan. Compare 5.5 billion plus millions more loss every quarter. While Windstream continued to increase the CEOS Salary and bonus up to the day before they filed bankruptcy. 2 million bonus goes to CEO plus his salary extended thru 2024.
Oh yes you can be prosecuted if the company goes Bankrupt. Check out what happened to Affiliated Foods. Ten years paying money out to bankruptcy attorneys. Windstream knowingly defrauded the banks and stock holders.
I’m not sure you can file charges unless you can prove they knowingly tried to deceive debt holders. I think it was a company desperate to find a solution to help the business.
Only an investigation will require them to open the books
The Full Time WIN stock pumper liometopum is on our board now taking up for TT.
Go read his kool aid comments of liometopum on Seeking Alpha. He would always comment on any article posted about WIn on seeking alpha. He always had an excuse when someone would state the obvious about WIN and BK.
He was pumping the stock telling all minions who would listen that the stock was headed to $10 a share.
Another low IQ basement bum. Trades $1 stocks in his mom’s basement.
Tony Thomas was the CFO when Uniti was spun off. hmmmmm
It would all depend on the CEO when CFO’s intent when structuring the leaseback deal.
They were either desperate id--ts or knew exactly they were defrauding investors by assembling the deal.
I think it’s the former.
Thanks for your input i greatly appreciate it.
It's a long shot in this case, but securities fraud is a criminal federal offense. It could be deemed that either the initial 2015 spin-off action and subsequent sale-leaseback was fraudulent to investors of both Windstream and CSAL at the time. Same case could be made with he 2017 debt exchange, which the judge determined violated different terms of the debt. Basically, it boils down to whether Windstream's executives knowingly misled investors, i.e. they had a reasonable knowledge of and expectation that legal action could be taken against their actions at some point in the future.