Skip to main content

ZAGG CEO Sold Stock Three Days before His Resignation

Updated at 8:26 AM ET

On Friday, August 17, 2012, ZAGG Inc. (NASDAQ: ZAGG) surprised investors and announced that its co-founder Robert G. Pedersen II resigned from his posts as CEO and Chairman of the company. The press release did not mention any reason for his resignation. The announcement was made after the stock market closed.

However, on that very same day after the market closed Robert Pedersen filed a Form 4 with the Securities and Exchange Commission. It disclosed that he sold 515,000 shares at an average price of $8.2214 per share on August 14, just three days before ZAGG announced that he resigned from the company. Pedersen sold 512,240 of those shares to "to meet margin calls" and 2,760 shares were sold separately. He collected $4.234 million in gross proceeds from his sales of stock and it appears that most of that amount was used to satisfy margin calls.

Back on December 21, 2011, Pedersen sold 345,200 shares at an average price of $7.5248 per share and received proceeds totaling $2.598 million "to meet an immediate financial obligation." No mention was made of any stock pledges at that time. I'd love to know the reason behind that "immediate financial obligation."

A proxy report filed by ZAGG on April 27, 2012 does not mention any pledges of stock by Pedersen. Public companies must disclose stock pledges by insiders in proxy reports.

It would be interesting to know exactly when Pedersen pledged (margined) his shares as collateral for his margin loan and if the timing of his sale of stock had anything to do with his resignation. Furthermore, did Pedersen know that he was going to resign when he sold his shares on August 14?

Written by,

Sam E. Antar

Update

This morning, after this blog post was originally published, ZAGG filed an 8-K report with the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing it adopted a new policy prohibiting certain insiders from engaging in certain transactions including pledging their shares:

Policy regarding holding Company securities in Executive and Directors margin accounts
On August 16, 2012, the Board of Directors of the Registrant adopted a policy (the “Policy”) relating to short-term or speculative transactions in the Registrant’s securities by directors, officers, and 10% holders of the Registrant’s securities. Specifically, the policy states that such individuals are prohibited from engaging in short-term or speculative transactions involving the Registrant’s securities, such as publicly traded options, short sales, puts, and calls, hedging transactions and holding the Registrant’s securities in a margin account.

ZAGG's policy against margin loans was purportedly adopted two days after Pedersen sold his shares to satisfy a margin call and one day before it announced his resignation. The 8-K report made no reference to Pedersen's sale of stock to satisfy a margin call or disclose a reason for his resignation.

Disclosure

I am a convicted felon and a former CPA. As the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie, I helped my cousin Eddie Antar and other members of his family mastermind one of the largest securities frauds uncovered during the 1980's. I committed my crimes in cold-blood for fun and profit, and simply because I could. If it weren't for the heroic efforts of the FBI, SEC, Postal Inspector's Office, US Attorney's Office, and class action plaintiff's lawyers who investigated, prosecuted, and sued me, I would still be the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie today.

There is a saying, "It takes one to know one." Today, I work very closely with the FBI, IRS, SEC, Justice Department, and other federal and state law enforcement agencies in training them to identify and catch white-collar criminals. Often, I refer cases to them as an independent whistleblower. I teach white-collar crime classes for various government entities, professional organizations, businesses, and colleges and universities. I do not want or seek forgiveness for my vicious crimes from my victims. My past sins are unforgivable.

I do not own any ZAGG securities long or short.

Comments

debo said…
Don't you think the board urged Pedersen to resign after finding out that he had to dump shares to meet a margin call? Maybe he got in on the FB IPO and it finally squeezed him last week.

If it is true Pedersen sold because of a margin call, it seems likely that he had no intention of resigning when he sold. It would be too easy for the SEC to build a case against him in any other situation.

Assuming the margin call reason is true, there is nothing about this that signals problems with Zagg. i.e. Its not like the CEO was dumping because the company is tanking. It was personal reasons. It seems like this will be a good thing for Zagg. There will be some difficulty until it finds a permanent CEO, but my point is that Pedersen lacked experience and Zagg needs someone to take it to the next level.
debo said…
This comment has been removed by the author.

Popular Posts

Did a Clever SEC Bait Goldman Sachs into Compounding Its Legal Problems With the "Kiss of Death" Message?

Updated: At 3:48 AM ET 04/20/2010 on bottom

The Kiss of Death

In filing its lawsuit against Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) on a Friday, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent what I call the "kiss of death" message to the embattled company. In other words, the SEC wanted to stick it to Goldman Sachs and Fabrice Tourre, the Executive Director of Goldman Sachs International, who is also a defendant in the complaint. While the SEC as a practice does inform target companies and individuals of an impending enforcement action, it does not always tell them exactly when such an action will be filed.

Apparently, the SEC filed its lawsuit without giving Goldman Sachs the heads up that it was planning to file it that day. Business Insider observed that Goldman Sachs was clearly unprepared to respond to the complaint as news of the lawsuit dominated the headlines all day. Goldman issued a short denial around noon and issued an extensive denial late in the afternoon, after most people had …

Overstock.com CEO Patrick Byrne Sleeps With a Gun

In numerous blog posts in the past, and in widespread media coverage, evidence has accumulated for years that Overstock.com CEO (NASDAQ: OSTK) Patrick Byrne has shown signs of being mentally unbalanced and paranoid.

Byrne has blamed his company's financial woes on an unnamed "Sith Lord." He hired paid goons to stalk his real and imagined adversaries and to write lengthy conspiracy theories on the Internet. Byrne has close ties with Bo Gritz. The Anti-Defamation League lists Bo Gritz as a far-right extremist with “extensive connections to both white supremacists and anti-government groups and leaders.”

Patrick Byrne's infamous temper tantrums when he doesn’t get want he wants are well documented too. He made obscene and misogynistic comments to a female reporter. He suggested that she gave “blowjobs” to Goldman Sachs traders. He suggested that a male reporter “Sucks It Likes He’s Paying the Rent.” An independent research analyst was told that “You deserve to be whippe…

Nature's Sunshine Products, Willbros Group, Cal Dive International, and BSQUARE Violate S.E.C. Rules on Calculating EBITDA

Nature’s Sunshine Products (NASDAQ: NATR), Willbros Group (NYSE: WG), Cal Dive International (NYSE: DVR), and BSQUARE (NASDAQ: BSQR) have recently issued earnings reports which include a calculation of EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) that apparently does not comply with Securities and Exchange Commission interpretations for Regulation G governing such non-GAAP financial measures. In each case, their erroneous EBITDA calculations have enabled them to significantly distort their financial performance by erroneously reporting a positive EBITDA, when they should have reported a negative EBITDA in the latest quarter.

How EBITDA is supposed to be calculated under Regulation G

According to the S.E.C. Compliance & Disclosure Interpretations, EBITDA is defined under Regulation G as net income (not operating income) before net interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. See below:

Question 103.01Question: Exchange Act Release No. 47226 describes E…

InterOil, John Thomas Financial, and Clarion Finanz: Anatomy of a Stock Market Manipulation Scheme

In this blog post, I will provide evidence of what I believe is a stock market manipulation scheme involving InterOil (NYSE: IOC), John Thomas Financial, and Clarion Finanz AG. I believe that InterOil with the assistance of Clarion Finanz concealed John Thomas Financial’s involvement in helping it raise $95 million through a private placement of convertible debt securities.

Clarion Finanz acted as a buffer between InterOil and John Thomas Financial to help InterOil hide John Thomas Financial's role in raising funds. Afterwards, InterOil filed false and misleading reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission in an effort to conceal John Thomas Financial’s role in helping the company raise $95 million in convertible debt.

Carl Caserta, who in 1991 was barred by the Securities and Exchange Commission from “association with any broker, dealer, or investment advisor” played a role in helping InterOil use John Thomas Financial to obtain funds from investors. InterOil, John Thoma…

Class Action Complaint against Amedisys uses Sarbanes-Oxley Act Corporate Governance Provisions to Battle Alleged Corporate Malfeasance

Updated at bottom of article

Last week, Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP filed a class action lawsuit against Amedisys (NASDAQ: AMED) charging the company, its CEO William F. Borne and its CFO Dale E. Redman with securities fraud.  In the next few days, Bernstein Liebhard LLP and Finkelstein Thompson LLP filed similar class action lawsuits against the company. The lawsuits allege that Amedisys abused Medicare's reimbursement system for at-home therapy care based on a compelling analysis of company revenues in an April 27 Wall Street Journal article.

In addition, the lawsuits innovatively utilize a provision under Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 which provides a back-door way for investors to force ethical corporate governance and sue public companies for malfeasance. That provision requires Senior Financial Officers, such as the CEO and CFO of public companies, to abide by a strict code of ethics which broadly defines corporate malfeasance and effectively makes…