None of these executive can sell company stock on a whim. They are “insiders” and if they want to sell they have to schedule it a year plus out in advance.

Yet another example of the media failing to do the most basic research into the topic they report on.

Do better yahoo news!

▲

ScoobleDoodle 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The article does talk about that 90 day thing:

> In Stevens's case, he didn't have such a trading plan, but that's not necessarily a red flag on its own.

Sounds like it’s not necessarily required and wasn’t followed here?

The format of the article makes it seem like it ends because it has a list of links to other articles but then it continues on. Confusing formatting for sure. And I’m not sure I understood it correctly.

▲

frankacter 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The basis of them stating this is the lack of a check for a formal 10b5-1 plan.

There are a variety of other ways that he could schedule triggered sales that aren't immediately transparent to the media.

A lack of 10b5-1 does not directly correlate to not having any pre scheduled plan.

The fact that they're acquitting months to weeks, makes me feel like they're inventing news to throw on the pile of Nvidia headlines.

There are defined "open windows" he can sell, and these were sold in those permitted window.

It was also multiple batches over months.

He gave form 144 notice and portions were through trusts and charitable / foundation.

He filed multiple Form 144s notifying the SEC of proposed sales under Rule 144. Notable examples include a September 2026 notice for up to 5 million shares (roughly $1.09 billion) and earlier notices (e.g., involving 1.7 million shares in June 2026).

He's got this exact same pattern of behavior for the last 43 sales dating back to 2021.. it's the furthest that I left before I stopped.

▲

refurb 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It wasn't under a 10b5-1 plan, but in a large company like Nvidia there is zero chance the guy didn't go through a strict compliance process to document his preplan sales.

When I sold company stock (no where near a board director) there were so many hoops jump through and blackout period (even without seeing insider info) there were only small period you could actually trade.

The idea a board director, who is under an SEC microscope, didn't check all the boxes is just silly. Without an 10b5-1 plan (which provides an affirmative defenese), he has to prove his own innocence. Even without insider trading he's at risk of being convicted because someone didn't like his trades.

	▲	newswasboring 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Compliance is against publicly known and formally acknowledged facts. This whole huang affairs thing could have been known weeks in advance but not be formally acknowledged. Compliance measures usually do nothing and only serve as a cover to make the argument that you just made.

▲

bahmboo 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And example of the commenters here who don't know even the most basic things about US economics.