Author Topic: Can't believe he'll get away with this. Money Boo Boo vouched for a low price on (Read 4508 times)

Freeper · « **on:** October 25, 2012, 09:09:53 PM »

Quote

Laura PourMeADrink (13,565 posts)

Can't believe he'll get away with this. Money Boo Boo vouched for a low price on Staples

Mitt Romney vouched for low price on Staples stock that traded 10 times higher a year later

By Callum Borchers, Globe Correspondent

CANTON, Mass. â€” Mitt Romney testified under oath in 1991 that the ex-wife of Staples founder Tom Stemberg got a fair deal in the coupleâ€™s 1988 divorce, even though the company shares Maureen Sullivan Stemberg received were valued at a tenth of Staplesâ€™ stock price on the day of its initial public offering only a year later.

At the time the Stembergs split, Romney suggested, there was little indication that Staplesâ€™ value would soon skyrocket.

Romneyâ€™s testimony in a post-divorce lawsuit brought in 1990 by Sullivan Stemberg was unsealed on Thursday in Norfolk Probate and Family Court at the Globeâ€™s request. Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully to amend the coupleâ€™s financial agreement after Staples went public in 1989 and closed its first day of trading at $22.50 per share, 10 times the value she had received.

Stemberg left his wife in February 1987, and the divorce was finalized in July 1988. Before the official split, the couple negotiated an agreement in which Sullivan Stemberg got 500,000 shares of Staples stock, which Stemberg valued at $2.25 per share.

MORE
http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/10/25/mitt-romney-vouched-for-low-price-staples-stock-that-traded-times-higher-year-later/1xtJ1tgH9EisZBdsQ8nXPM/story.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021634941

Well golly, looks like 0bama can start unpacking his bags and stay another 4 years! This has legs, Romney is toast!!!!!11111111

I also like the super clever name for Romney, Money Boo Boo.

They are already unhinged and it isn't even election day yet.

Mr Mannn · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:11:44 PM »

Thats it? The whole devastating revelation?
We will rule forever.

Freeper · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:14:48 PM »

from another thread where the goons are thinking this will toast Romney's legs

Quote

McCamy Taylor (13,459 posts)
24. Revenge is a dish best served cold. She has waited for years to spring this one

on election eve. I wonder how many people knew this was coming. Mittens just lost the woman vote forever.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251171706

md11hydmec · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:16:50 PM »

I wonder if Allred is all red about being made a fool of? I can't believe she wasted time on this. oh wait, yes I can.

USA4ME · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:21:46 PM »

Quote from:

...the couple negotiated an agreement in which Sullivan Stemberg got 500,000 shares of Staples stock, which Stemberg valued at $2.25 per share.

So she got stock worth $1,125,000 and sold it. No one told her to sell it, she could have waited. But the price went up a year later and she's upset.

Isn't this the type of story the primitives would usually be commenting that this greedy woman is part of the 1% and has no room to be crying about anything? Yes, it is.

Once again, the hypocracy of the primitives shines through.

.

Ballygrl · « **Reply #5 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:25:47 PM »

You'd think if Mitt had all that inside info that he'd of gone to town buying tons of Staples stocks.

Freeper · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:26:29 PM »

Quote from: USA4ME on October 25, 2012, 09:21:46 PM

So she got stock worth $1,125,000 and sold it. No one told her to sell it, she could have waited. But the price went up a year later and she's upset.

Isn't this the type of story the primitives would usually be commenting that this greedy woman is part of the 1% and has no room to be crying about anything? Yes, it is.

Once again, the hypocracy of the primitives shines through.

.

If she held on to it and it lost value she would have bitched then too. Then we would be hearing from the DUmp how Romney forced her to hold it and lost her shirt.

This is another made up issue that only fools give a damn about.

Randy · « **Reply #7 on:** October 25, 2012, 09:42:52 PM »

The only bitch anyone could have in this non-scandal is if when she DUmbassed away. 250,000 shares @ $2.25 is if she'd sold it to Romney. But she didn't. So sorry, no story here.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2012, 10:00:15 PM »

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully...

Get it?

DumbAss Tanker · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2012, 10:06:18 PM »

A year later, eh? Good luck with that one, moonbats.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2012, 10:13:56 PM »

Quote from: DumbAss Tanker on October 25, 2012, 10:06:18 PM

A year later, eh? Good luck with that one, moonbats.

Hey now!

Don't forget Romney gave some guy's wife cancer 6 years after dude stopped working at the company Romney bought.

Totally true story.

BigTex · « **Reply #11 on:** October 25, 2012, 10:42:35 PM »

oh no a primitive dares to speak the truth

Quote

onenote (20,896 posts)
25. Having skimmed the actual testimony,

it seems that most everything in the TMZ story is inaccurate, or at least unrelated to what is in the testimony

dandi · « **Reply #12 on:** October 25, 2012, 11:02:25 PM »

Why would the court depend on a statement from Romney anyway? Don't divorce lawyers have their own bean counters who serve as expert witnesses in determining the worth of spousal assets?

From what I've read, this has been litigated and re-litigated and Ms. Stemberg keeps losing. Nothing new or earth-shaking here.

Doc Savage · « **Reply #13 on:** October 25, 2012, 11:05:58 PM »

I hope he adds 2 more to the unemployment line, one to chicago and 1 to Deleware.

Jasonw560 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 25, 2012, 11:09:10 PM »

Allred is a laughing stock to everyone but the hardcore leftists.

WinOne4TheGipper · « **Reply #15 on:** October 25, 2012, 11:24:10 PM »

All this points to the fact that the 47% video was supposed to be the October Surprise. They had to release that early just to keep their heads above water. This was a desperation move that turned out to be a dud.

98ZJUSMC · « **Reply #16 on:** October 26, 2012, 01:19:27 AM »

Quote

Laura PourMeADrink (13,565 posts)

Can't believe he'll get away with this. Money Boo Boo vouched for a low price on Staples

Mitt Romney vouched for low price on Staples stock that traded 10 times higher a year later

By Callum Borchers, Globe Correspondent

CANTON, Mass. â€” Mitt Romney testified under oath in 1991 that the ex-wife of Staples founder Tom Stemberg got a fair deal in the coupleâ€™s 1988 divorce, even though the company shares Maureen Sullivan Stemberg received were valued at a tenth of Staplesâ€™ stock price on the day of its initial public offering only a year later.

At the time the Stembergs split, Romney suggested, there was little indication that Staplesâ€™ value would soon skyrocket.

Romneyâ€™s testimony in a post-divorce lawsuit brought in 1990 by Sullivan Stemberg was unsealed on Thursday in Norfolk Probate and Family Court at the Globeâ€™s request. Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully to amend the coupleâ€™s financial agreement after Staples went public in 1989 and closed its first day of trading at $22.50 per share, 10 times the value she had received.

Stemberg left his wife in February 1987, and the divorce was finalized in July 1988. Before the official split, the couple negotiated an agreement in which Sullivan Stemberg got 500,000 shares of Staples stock, which Stemberg valued at $2.25 per share.

MORE
http://www.boston.com/pol...9EisZBdsQ8nXPM/story.html

jeeeeezzz......Yep. Rmoney told the judge his crystal ball was broken and low-balled Staples stock.

Christ, these people are sTUpId.

98ZJUSMC · « **Reply #17 on:** October 26, 2012, 01:25:48 AM »

Quote from: Randy on October 25, 2012, 09:42:52 PM

The only bitch anyone could have in this non-scandal is if when she DUmbassed away. 250,000 shares @ $2.25 is if she'd sold it to Romney. But she didn't. So sorry, no story here.

Good point. A big nothingburger. The ex comes off looking like a petulant, whining dope and Romney comes off looking honest. In fact, I would bet that this "revelation" would improve his standing with more than few women.

The really good part is, All Red looks really dumb here.

Wineslob · « **Reply #18 on:** October 26, 2012, 09:12:45 AM »

Quote

TMZ story is inaccurate

Ummm, no shit?

Texacon · « **Reply #19 on:** October 26, 2012, 09:35:04 AM »

Uhm, they do realize that Honey Boo Boo endorsed O'bama right?

Heh. On another thread they are making fun of O'bama being endorsed by Colin Powell yet Romney was endorsed by the Naked Cowboy. Funny how I missed the thread about Honey Boo Boo.

KC

DumbAss Tanker · « **Reply #20 on:** October 26, 2012, 10:26:28 AM »

Quote from: Texacon on October 26, 2012, 09:35:04 AM

Uhm, they do realize that Honey Boo Boo endorsed O'bama right?

Heh. On another thread they are making fun of O'bama being endorsed by Colin Powell yet Romney was endorsed by the Naked Cowboy. Funny how I missed the thread about Honey Boo Boo.

KC

Powell has clearly decided to vote for the Black(er) guy, not policy, accountability, or potential. Why anyone still thinks he's a Republican astounds me. Of course, like Obama, he was over-promoted, over-mentored, and overwatched to become something beyond his actual capabilities in an nonformal version of affirmative action, so he does have that in common with The One.

98ZJUSMC · « **Reply #21 on:** October 26, 2012, 10:41:08 AM »

Quote from: DumbAss Tanker on October 26, 2012, 10:26:28 AM

Powell has clearly decided to vote for the Black(er) guy, not policy, accountability, or potential. Why anyone still thinks he's a Republican astounds me. Of course, like Obama, he was over-promoted, over-mentored, and overwatched to become something beyond his actual capabilities in an nonformal version of affirmative action, so he does have that in common with The One.

Yep.

I'll bet he doesn't exchange Christmas Cards with Stormin' Norman, either. Anything over a Battalion Commander and he was above his max pay grade.

Reading excerpts from his Vietnam experience leaves one with the feeling they were a ......tad embellished.

Just sayin'

Texacon · « **Reply #22 on:** October 26, 2012, 11:13:24 AM »

Quote from: DumbAss Tanker on October 26, 2012, 10:26:28 AM

Powell has clearly decided to vote for the Black(er) guy, not policy, accountability, or potential. Why anyone still thinks he's a Republican astounds me. Of course, like Obama, he was over-promoted, over-mentored, and overwatched to become something beyond his actual capabilities in an nonformal version of affirmative action, so he does have that in common with The One.

I agree 100% with what you posted. I never really liked Powell.

KC

franksolich · « **Reply #23 on:** October 26, 2012, 12:53:19 PM »

Quote from: DumbAss Tanker on October 26, 2012, 10:26:28 AM

Of course, like Obama, he was over-promoted, over-mentored, and overwatched to become something beyond his actual capabilities in an nonformal version of affirmative action, so he does have that in common with The One.

Was he only mediocre as a general?

I always had a high estimation of his strategic talents, but of course I'm a professional civilian, and so really don't know.

I liked Colin, but after he left the Bush administration, he seemed to be undergoing the usual and standard mental deterioration those older people in high-stress jobs seem to have, and so wrote him off as someone who isn't what he used to be.

Carl · « **Reply #24 on:** October 26, 2012, 01:05:47 PM »

Somebody smarter then me help out here please.

It was my understanding that the reason you take a company public is to get an influx of capital to expand.
IPO of public shares is underwritten by an investment bank who believes your assets and business plan are worth X amount of dollars now and in the future.
The share price is determined by the amount essentially lent against the number offered.

Sometimes they miss (Facebook,the new GM) and overvalue,GM might not count there with the government involvement pushing and throwing money at it,others not.

To me it is an apples and oranges thing as far as a valuation of private shares of ownership and public ones.
Please correct me where I am wrong.

News:

Author Topic: Can't believe he'll get away with this. Money Boo Boo vouched for a low price on (Read 4508 times)