He is not a 'product' of Nike. He endorses Nike and Nike is one of his sponsors. Big difference there.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Won Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Jerry Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> He doesn't owe you _any_ explanation. >> >> If you truly hold a ticket to the event, you can talk to the event >> sponsors, >> or you can ask for your ticket money back (which they are already >> offering). >> >> But then, of course, you cannot go. >> >> As far as being an equity holder at Nike, again, they owe you nothing. They >> need to file their federal and state tax forms, and as a shareholder, you >> might get a more detailed statement, but that is it. No explanation needed >> or required. or expected. >> >> >> > Investors are in the business of making informed decisions. Tiger Woods is > a human being but he is also a product. He is probably Nike's most > important product. I need to know if this product is flawed. Nike's > failure to shed light on the details may erode investor confidence in the > product. Company's by law are required to release all material information > that may impact their stock. This is a one of the first questions they > asked me when I took my series 7 to trade professionally. > > I don't understand how some of you can blast companies for doing shady > things but give Nike a pass on something that is clearly spelled out by the > SEC. > > http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/nyse/2009/34-59823.pdf > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:308779 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
