[fnayr]

I have seen that. It doesn't look good for him no doubt. But that equates to less than a billion right? The stock drop alone in the past few days cost him much more than that ($5 billion from one article I read).

So given that he's probably not an idiot, it looks really bad to sell if he thinks it's going to drop, and the money he made from selling is far outweighed by the drop from the controversies, it doesn't seem likely to me that it was because "he knew it was going to drop."

I don't like the guy but my feeling is it was unlucky timing.

[rsuelzer]

This stock is still well above where it was a few months ago. I sold my FB at 140 because I felt it was overvalued. I wouldn't blame Zuck for thinking his company was overvalued at its current price.

[pbalau]

As with the intel ceo case, as fb employees we have particular windows when we can sell shares. I don't think Zuck is extempted from this.

[tanderson92]

The intel ceo case is incriminating because the intel ceo dumped as much stock as contractually allowed by Intel, with the plans to do so being filed well after Intel was informed of the security flaw. It's not incriminating solely because he sold stock (in fact he regularly sold stock that was granted to him, but never this much so quickly).