Netflix CEO comments lead to civil action by SEC

Netflix Inc said securities regulators plan to take action against the company because of a Facebook post by Chief Executive Reed Hastings that violated public disclosure rules, even as Hastings dismissed the contention in a public letter to shareholders on Thursday.

Stupid of the CEO.



  • http://twitter.com/billyrazzle Billy Razzle

    Not his first stupid thing.

    • Moeskido

      Agreed.

  • http://www.aichon.com/ Brad

    I kinda think it’s silly of the SEC.

    It sounds like their issue is that he was playing favorites by releasing material information privately, rather than in public via a press release or a regulatory filing. But considering it was reported in everything from the LA Times to TechCrunch at the time (anyone can see the page, after all, and reporters actively follow it), I don’t see how this is functionally any different from a press release.

    Maybe that’s because I’m not a journalist myself, and I’m simply unaware of some function a press release serves that is not served by a public and widely-seen Facebook post? To be clear, that’s not sarcasm. I’m honestly curious if there’s something about a press release that makes it special.

    • http://twitter.com/standingpolicy Charles

      I agree with all of that and more to the point I don’t think it was even “material” information, what I’ve read says that their official filings made it clear that they were nearing a billion hours a month.

      • lucascott

        Nearing is NOT the same as reached.

    • lucascott

      Insider trading laws prohibiting giving out information that can effect stock trading to private groups. Period. Hastings was an idiot for thinking Facebook fails under the definition of ‘public’ for these rules. It should have been checked before posting.

  • http://darcyfitzpatrick.tumblr.com/ Darcy Fitzpatrick

    What’s stupid is that anyone thinks what he did was wrong.

    • lucascott

      There are rules, including ones about how you share information that can affect the trading of stocks. The information he posted is of the nature that could have an effect and he posted it on Facebook which has a large but still limited audience. If he was just repeating information they had shared in a fully public quarterly earnings report or press release then he’s fine. But if this was the first release of this information yes he could be in violation, even if the public press release came later in the day. He should have made sure the press release was out first.

  • http://bloodnok.net/ dennis bloodnok

    stupid of the sec, you mean? i like that the corrupt twonks pursue something stunned like a public facebook posting as if it’s a crime yet haven’t even charged let alone jailed a single bankster …..

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=20500620 Joseph Blake

    This is stupid of the SEC. I’m one of the biggest Obama voters around, but even I think this is a stupid application of regulation. I suspect someone at the SEC (wrongly) thinks it was only visible and therefore only known to the 250,000-odd people who “Liked” the page

    • lucascott

      No, someone at the SEC rightly understood that it was visible only to those that use Facebook. Which is not everyone in the country much less the world.

      The regulations define how this type of information is supposed to be released, what is ‘public’. Social media isn’t on that list. Perhaps it should be, but it wasn’t at the time of the offense and thus the reason for this investigation. Even the source says this isn’t a final judgement. They might decide he is at fault, they might decide that this shows that its time to change the definitions.

  • http://twitter.com/apple4ever Matthew Butch

    Stupid CEO? NO! Stupid SEC. What a waste of an agency. It needs to be abolished.

    • JDSoCal

      Exactly, a useless agency. Just go ask any investor or trader. How do you reach someone over there to file a complaint? Good luck.