Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Romney vouched for low price on Staples stock that traded 10 times higher a year later
Boston Globe ^ | 10/25/2012 6:23 PM | Callum Borchers

Posted on 10/25/2012 7:31:05 PM PDT by Red Steel

CANTON, Mass. — Mitt Romney testified under oath in 1991 that the ex-wife of Staples founder Tom Stemberg got a fair deal in the couple’s 1988 divorce, even though the company shares Maureen Sullivan Stemberg received were valued at a tenth of Staples’ 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 Staples’ value would soon skyrocket.

Romney’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 Globe’s request. Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully to amend the couple’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.

Sullivan Stemberg also kept the couple’s Dedham home, worth $690,000 at the time, and in February 1988 sold 175,000 shares of Staples stock at $2.25 per share to pay off the mortgage. She sold another 80,000 shares two months later, at $2.48 per share.

“In my opinion, that’s a good price to sell the securities at,” Romney, now the Republican nominee for president, testified in June 1991.

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: axelrod; bostonglobejoke; gloriaallred; obama; obamadesperate; octobersurprise
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last
Is this it? Waaaaaah and yawn Boston Globe, Gloria Allred, and Stemberg.
1 posted on 10/25/2012 7:31:06 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Uhhhh..............and?????????????? Idiots huh?

Helping keep mankind warm for 65 years.


2 posted on 10/25/2012 7:34:57 PM PDT by rktman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

It may be nothing, but just wait.... it’ll be the lead in story for most of the MSM tomorrow including “the view”....


3 posted on 10/25/2012 7:35:22 PM PDT by Sleeping Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

OMG! Romney made a poor stock pick!


4 posted on 10/25/2012 7:35:42 PM PDT by outofstyle (Down All the Days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
So let me get this straight. If she has held her 500,000 shares another year she would have had 10 times as much money. WTF is she complaining about? Under stating the value of the stock would reduce Tom Stemberg's wealth, but would have also made the amount of stock Mrs. Stemberg received appear as a lower value in the settlement.

She chose poorly and that is the breaks of stock trading. The reality is that she blew 80% of her settlement on dragging him back into court and the ensuing defamation lawsuit brought against her by Tom Stemberg and his new wife.

5 posted on 10/25/2012 7:38:04 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Well, obviously Romney was not wearing his Genie hat. You know, the one that confirmed that staples stock would rise in a year, so don’t sell you dumb t*at!


6 posted on 10/25/2012 7:38:33 PM PDT by KittenClaws (You may have to fight a battle more than once in order to win it." - Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofstyle

This is desperation at its finest. No big ideas here. No cocaine use. No DUI. No perjury charges on the books.


7 posted on 10/25/2012 7:40:00 PM PDT by ghannonf18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Stupid.


8 posted on 10/25/2012 7:40:49 PM PDT by comebacknewt (Newt (sigh) what could have been . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Anything to take the focus off the Libya scandal.


9 posted on 10/25/2012 7:41:15 PM PDT by dragonblustar (Allah Ain't So Akbar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Maybe she should have invested in cattle futures.


10 posted on 10/25/2012 7:41:42 PM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal The 16th Amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Who did she sell the stock to?

That’s the guy that made out.


11 posted on 10/25/2012 7:42:14 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I could be wrong, but would any kind of revelation to price, or advance knowledge of an increase in it’s valuation, be akin to insider trading??? I think Romney would be in deeper s**t if he actually did if he actually did make any kind of claim of an increase in value.


12 posted on 10/25/2012 7:42:56 PM PDT by ObozoMustGo2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Wasn’t the IPO price of Facebook’s stock raised several times before it even hit the first day of sale? And where is it today?


13 posted on 10/25/2012 7:46:08 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Obama likes to claim credit for getting Osama. Why hasn't he tried Khalid Sheikh Mohammed yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

look a squirrel


14 posted on 10/25/2012 7:47:03 PM PDT by italianquaker (The 47 pct need to pay their fair share)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofstyle

she should have bought cattle futures


15 posted on 10/25/2012 7:47:13 PM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

She walked away with 5 million. She had nothing to do with Staples value then, or it’s later success. Typical.
But revenge is coming. Woman fill law schools, medical schools, and top corporate positions.
More often than ever, they marry blue collar guys. When men start getting payouts just for sharing a bed with someone who earns exponentially more than them,,watch for a sudden change in the laws.


16 posted on 10/25/2012 7:48:01 PM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Pre-IPO stock is given a nominal value, which Mitt gave. I worked for a company that gave me pre-IPO options at a dollar a share.

This will be spun big time as an example of the War On Women and how Romney conspired to defraud this poor waif of millions.

Facts won’t matter in a coordinated media rollout by the Rats.


17 posted on 10/25/2012 7:48:47 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

How is it anyone else’s fault if she sold the stock early instead of holding onto it until the value went up?


18 posted on 10/25/2012 7:49:15 PM PDT by JediJones (Vote NO on Proposition Zero! Tuesday, November 6th!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: outofstyle
She sold in 1988, the company went public in 1989 and Romney testified in 1991. So his statement was not a stock pick.

She decided to sell a large block of a highly illiquid stock just months after the 1987 crash, rather than waiting until it was public, liquidly traded and in the midst of an eventual market recovery.

He was right - at that time, in those circumstances, she likely couldn't have done much better.

19 posted on 10/25/2012 7:49:40 PM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

This is an interesting contrast to an earlier story that showed the exact opposite. Don’t know if it is just spin or if the FR thread was being typically positive.


20 posted on 10/25/2012 7:50:53 PM PDT by paul544
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson