Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bottom999mottob 583 days ago
The point isn't about whether he should let the options expire - of course he shouldn't. The point is about accuracy in discussing Oracle's corporate governance.

You specifically claimed "Larry has a Blind Trust that sells his stock as they see best fit without his influence." The SEC filings directly contradict this:

1. This is a Revocable Trust, and while technically a blind trust can be revocable, the filings show this trust is actively managed with Ellison's involvement:

- The transactions were specifically timed around options expiration

- The sales were carefully structured in declining price blocks

- The trust uses Ellison's authority as Officer/10% Owner

- Forms are signed by his Attorney

2. These weren't discretionary sales by trustees "as they see best fit" - they were planned options exercises with a clear purpose and strategy.

I don't have an axe to grind. I'm just correcting a mischaracterization about how Larry manages his Oracle holdings. Accuracy matters when discussing corporate governance and SEC filings, especially for a company as significant as Oracle.

If this were a true blind trust they would've exercised the options at $40.47, immediately sell at market (~$143), and net ~$100 profit per share. Instead they did price stepping, and used Larry's Officer status under the pretense of independence.