The organization tried to connect the dots by making correlations between directors who served on the boards of 51 implicated companies, including KLA and Juniper.The report named director Kenneth Levy as serving on both of the companies’ boards, implying that he may have spread the idea.
During new job negotiations, a person may have said, “‘I had an interesting options package that was oddly dated and now that I’m moving to another company, and I want my options at last week’s price,'” theorizes Fagel.
“It’s hard to say.” As for the theory that it was spread through directors, that could be valid as well, Fagel told “[In these investigations] you’ll have a director at one company sitting on the board of another company.
We are paying attention to that.” Fagel says the SEC’s investigations are not necessarily looking for links between the people working at implicated companies but are rather concentrating on the behaviors of each person and whether he or she has conducted fraud.
Since the backdating scandal began unfolding nearly two years ago, regulators and outsiders have been wondering why so many public companies — many of them in the technology industry — began issuing undisclosed, misdated stock options grants around the same time.
Was it spread through word of mouth between directors who served on different boards?