Insider trading

Hypothesizes that the whole concept of “insider trading” is being overplayed. Is the “average” share purchaser disadvantaged? After analysing the case law, the legislation(and proposed legislation) and the financial theory of efficient markets, concludes that insider trading exists only in the strong market hypothesis and only when a fiduciary duty is established. This is not a zero‐sum game in which one wins and the other loses – everyone can win, some maybe more than others. No one is being cheated; there is no way to establish parity of information nor would most investors know how to use it if it could be established. It appears that we could be embarking on a counter‐productive campaign that will punish those who achieve what their profession requires, all the necessary information on which to make an investment decision; particularly if they achieve it first.