dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
419

donoreo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-30
North York, ON

donoreo

Premium Member

Poor Conrad Black: banned from boards by OSC

Conrad Black has been banned from being a director or officer of any public company in Ontario by the Ontario Securities Commission.

globalnews.ca/news/1854633/conrad-black-banned-as-director-officer-of-public-firms-in-ontario-osc/

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron

Premium Member

This shouldn't come as a surprise, you can't work for any financial institution in Canada, if you have any type of criminal record, and you are explicitly barred from these jobs if you have any fraud charges.

So it's unsurprising that an agency overseeing publicly traded companies would put up these kinds of roadblocks.

Thems the breaks.

Thane_Bitter
Inquire within
Premium Member
join:2005-01-20

Thane_Bitter to donoreo

Premium Member

to donoreo
Oh lord, the little lord is going to be pissed off at that!

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

He claims he doesn't care, he had no plans to become either.

Thane_Bitter
Inquire within
Premium Member
join:2005-01-20

Thane_Bitter

Premium Member

So he claims... does his wife still scribble out the occasional article for Maclean's magazine, it could prove amusing if she comments on this ruling.
jaberi
join:2010-08-13

jaberi

Member

oh well, Black can always partner up with the mogul Trump, and become his silent partner for his Canadian ventures.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to donoreo

Premium Member

to donoreo
When you wrote "banned from boards" I thought you meant that he couldn't post in online forums.

As for corporate boards---that's a moot point. Who would want him on a corporate board anyway?

donoreo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-30
North York, ON

donoreo

Premium Member

said by PX Eliezer1:

As for corporate boards---that's a moot point. Who would want him on a corporate board anyway?

I am sure there are many who would line up to ask him.

sm5w2
Premium Member
join:2004-10-13
St Thomas, ON

sm5w2 to donoreo

Premium Member

to donoreo
I believe the only thing he was "convicted" of was taking boxes of records or documents out of his office in NYC. I don't think he was actually convicted of any financial or corporate wrong-doing.

I hear Black being interviewed about his books and knowledge of politics and politicians every once in a while by John Batchelor. Batchelor has 3-hour radio inverview show 5 or 6 days a week in the evenings (starting 10 or 11 pm). I listen to it on 760 WJR Detroit. From these interviews, Black has a very strong command of the english language, is highly intelligent and has great recall ability. He's written many op-ed pieces from his country-club jail in Florida. He could (and I think, should) have a higher profile as a public figure weighing in with explanations and opinions of current events in Canada and internationally.

He's still well connected regardless the seemingly kangaroo court he (and Martha Stewart) was subjected to by the US over financial crimes. And the US has yet to charge anyone with financial crimes that decimated the US economy in 2007/2008 - who's effects still linger on as we experience this fictional recovery going on 6 years now.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

said by sm5w2:

And the US has yet to charge anyone with financial crimes that decimated the US economy in 2007/2008 - whose effects still linger on as we experience this fictional recovery going on 6 years now.

You are right, but that may change somewhat.
»www.washingtonpost.com/n ··· cutives/

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues

Premium Member

Foreign exchange manipulation wasn't the cause.

Sub prime loans packaged up has AAA rated debt was one
Selling "insurance" disguised as credit default swaps was another.

I've read a lot of books on this, the games they played and the downright fraud was beyond criminal, it bordered on treason(it wasn't only because it wasn't intentional, it was greed ).

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone to sm5w2

Premium Member

to sm5w2
said by sm5w2:

I believe the only thing he was "convicted" of was taking boxes of records or documents out of his office in NYC. I don't think he was actually convicted of any financial or corporate wrong-doing.

The general argument is that had this occurred in Canada or anywhere else in the world, it would not have been a crime. The fact that the SCC struck down most of the laws that were used to prosecute him on his appeal sort of speaks to that. The obstruction of justice charge was therefore based on a false pretense of his actions being criminal to begin with, but it stuck. The guy might be - hell, we all know he is a huge dick, but I still don't believe he did anything illegal by any sane definition of the term and shouldn't have spent a day in jail.

koira
Hey Siri Walk Me
Premium Member
join:2004-02-16

koira to sm5w2

Premium Member

to sm5w2
said by sm5w2:

From these interviews, Black has a very strong command of the english language, is highly intelligent and has great recall ability. He's written many op-ed pieces from his country-club jail in Florida. He could (and I think, should) have a higher profile as a public figure weighing in with explanations and opinions of current events in Canada and internationally.

Here's an example of his writing style from todays NP, worth reading IMHO

»news.nationalpost.com/20 ··· or-bill/

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

1 recommendation

Gone

Premium Member

He's a fantastic writer. Not many will ever dispute that. And then there's this:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· E4q_AMG0


Jeremy Paxman is a douchebag extraordinaire in his own right, so it's amusing watching these two go head-to-head. As far as I'm concerned, Black ripped him to shreds. And he made some absolutely fantastic points about the US justice system and how - love him or hate him - his entire prosecution was a sham.

Thane_Bitter
Inquire within
Premium Member
join:2005-01-20

Thane_Bitter

Premium Member

Thanks for posting this, it was interesting to see Black's interaction.
Expand your moderator at work
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to sm5w2

Premium Member

to sm5w2

Re: Poor Conrad Black: banned from boards by OSC

said by sm5w2:

I believe the only thing he was "convicted" of was taking boxes of records or documents out of his office in NYC Toronto. I don't think he was actually convicted of any financial or corporate wrong-doing.

Fixed it for you.

He claims the boxes contained personal items.
He told the Receiver that he was going to take personal items from his office, and heard nothing back from the Receiver - neither a yea or nay.

The prosecution offered no proof of what was in the boxes, yet the only charge that stuck at the end of the day after all the appeals was relating to this. It's called 'obstruction of justice'.

I've met Conrad a number of times over the years. He's a pompous ass, but he's brilliant and entertaining. Is he a criminal? Not sure that he is, but he sure has a sense of entitlement.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

The obstruction charge should have been quashed when the rest of the laws he was convicted under were struck down by the SCC.

And yeah, there are plenty of assholes in this world. But just because you're an asshole does not mean you are a criminal. His assessment of the US justice system is one of the most brutally honest that anyone anywhere has ever given.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to donoreo

Premium Member

to donoreo
I have not studied this case in detail, nor do I believe the US justice system is anything close to perfect....

But AFAICT he was convicted of things besides taking boxes of records.

“When he paid a noncompete (fee) to himself, not to compete with himself — chutzpah comes to mind,” said Herbert A. Denton, a shareholder activist who was involved in Mr. Black’s ouster and is now on the board of Sun-Times Media.

»www.nytimes.com/2007/07/ ··· tml?_r=0

Yes, I am aware that 2 of the 3 fraud charges were overturned on appeal.

---> The US is often criticized for not prosecuting powerful people accused of financial crimes. Yet here they DID prosecute yet get flayed for it.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

If they're going to prosecute powerful people for financial crimes, it would help if the things they were actually prosecuting were crimes. Things like management fees are paid all the time. I don't understand how paying a fee to yourself is illegal when the board of directors of the corporation approves it.

It was a smear job. Probably because they simply didn't like his arrogance.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

to PX Eliezer1
said by PX Eliezer1:

“When he paid a noncompete (fee) to himself, not to compete with himself — chutzpah comes to mind,” said Herbert A. Denton, a shareholder activist who was involved in Mr. Black’s ouster and is now on the board of Sun-Times Media.

The non-compete quote you posted is disengenious. He wasn't getting the fees to not compete with himself - they were to not compete with the interests of the corporation - a different legal entity entirely.

I'm not suggesting that this is commonplace, but certain persons are in positions to open businesses which MAY, at the periphery, compete with the interests of the 'employer'. Say you're working for a programming 'body shop'. Should you be enjoined from taking your own private customers after hours if there isn't a clause in your employment contract that forbids it? For greater certainty, for good & valuable consideration a payment ($1 - $10MM) might be made to you to induce you to not 'compete'. However, the US attorney decided to prosecute you even in the presence of said agreement.

Would I have such a clause in my employment agreement with my company - probably not. I'm not saying the non-compete agreement/ fees were fair or even justifiable, but they WERE voted on by the shareholders and approved.

Blame the shareholders for not holding him to account by defeating management proposals at the AGM's over the years.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but consider:

Canada is a sovereign country. They don't have to follow the US actions.

Yet last year he was stripped of the Order of Canada, and removed from the Privy Council.

And now, the Ontario Securities Commission bans him.

Presumably these organizations made up their own minds---they are not beholden to the US.

So his recent punishments were done by his (former) fellow Canadians.

Further proof and illustration of this:

The UK allowed him to keep his title, "Lord Black of Crossharbour". They did not feel obligated to follow the US lead.

TL/DR: If the US actions were wrong then the Canadian federal authorities, and the Ontario Securities Commission, were free to ignore them, just as the UK did. But they didn't, which tends to back up the US actions....

Please note, I'm not trying to argue this, just seeking logical consistency.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

said by PX Eliezer1:

Please note, I'm not trying to argue this, just seeking logical consistency.

Can't be done.
Both our governments are masters of illogical actions.

The OSC are a bunch of sock-puppets.
I've been involved in innumerable hearings with them over the years - as an observer, commentator, giving testimony. On many matters they take the expedient route rather than the thoughtful correct route.

"Oh, the US convicted him. Must be guilty even though our own laws back him up. Off with his head."
peterboro (banned)
Avatars are for posers
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON

peterboro (banned) to Gone

Member

to Gone
said by Gone:

The obstruction charge should have been quashed when the rest of the laws he was convicted under were struck down by the SCC.

Maybe for him but not the rest of us. If the court imposes a restriction or obligation before a conviction it will still result in a breach regardless of the disposition of the originating charge. Cops use this all the time to gets convictions and jail time on restrictive covenants knowing the original charges are going to be tossed anyway.
peterboro

peterboro (banned) to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:


The OSC are a bunch of sock-puppets.

I believe that phrase is trademarked for use in here by elwood. Best to get his permission or pay a royalty.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

said by peterboro:

said by MaynardKrebs:


The OSC are a bunch of sock-puppets.

I believe that phrase is trademarked for use in here by elwood. Best to get his permission or pay a royalty.

Elwood's earliest use of 'sock puppet' was on 2011-09-02
in this thread »Re: News: Ontario College support staff on strike

My earliest use was on 2010-02-01 in this now classic post
»Re: Are we there yet???
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

I've been involved in innumerable hearings with them over the years - as an observer, commentator, giving testimony....

Thanks for the perspective.
peterboro (banned)
Avatars are for posers
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON

peterboro (banned) to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

Elwood's earliest use of 'sock puppet' was on 2011-09-02
in this thread »Re: News: Ontario College support staff on strike

My earliest use was on 2010-02-01 in this now classic post
»Re: Are we there yet???

I stand corrected and bow to that most excellent of posts.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone to peterboro

Premium Member

to peterboro
said by peterboro:

Maybe for him but not the rest of us. If the court imposes a restriction or obligation before a conviction it will still result in a breach regardless of the disposition of the originating charge. Cops use this all the time to gets convictions and jail time on restrictive covenants knowing the original charges are going to be tossed anyway.

It is just as wrong to do it to anyone else as it is for them to do it to Conrad Black, which has been his entire rallying cry all along.