Church comments on SEC settlement

[Salvete]

members will read the article and move on.

Yes. Yes you will. You’re a dupe.

- Doc

I’m a dupe, too. I was once Mormon. Were you?

[drumdude]

Yes. Yes you will. You’re a dupe.

- Doc

I’m a dupe, too. I was once Mormon. Were you?

Check out RFM’s new idea for a class action lawsuit to claw back tithing based on the LDS church’s new admission of fraud. Fraud explicitly intended to prevent members from knowing how rich the church was. And thus prevent members from thinking their tithing was less needed.

I’ll gladly join the class action.

[Salvete]

I’m a dupe, too. I was once Mormon. Were you?

Check out RFM’s new idea for a class action lawsuit to claw back tithing based on the LDS church’s new admission of fraud. Fraud explicitly intended to prevent members from knowing how rich the church was. And thus prevent members from thinking their tithing was less needed.

I’ll gladly join the class action.

Hell no. RfM is Dehlin Jr., only in it for the fame/money.

[drumdude]

Check out RFM’s new idea for a class action lawsuit to claw back tithing based on the LDS church’s new admission of fraud. Fraud explicitly intended to prevent members from knowing how rich the church was. And thus prevent members from thinking their tithing was less needed.

I’ll gladly join the class action.

Hell no. RfM is Dehlin Jr., only in it for the fame/money.

LOL

And DCP is a respected scholar. Is today Opposite Day?

[Salvete]

Hell no. RfM is Dehlin Jr., only in it for the fame/money.

LOL

And DCP is a respected scholar. Is today Opposite Day?

Who said that? Is DCP also concocting crazy ideas like class action lawsuits?

[drumdude]

LOL

And DCP is a respected scholar. Is today Opposite Day?

Who said that? Is DCP also concocting crazy ideas like class action lawsuits?

You’d have to ask him, I’m not one of his regular commenters.

[Rivendale]

For my part, *I* will be “positively astounded” if DCP admits to or expresses disappointment about the Church’s obvious dishonesty. I see that he’s already checking off all the excuses he used when we found out, via IRS documents, that he had been brazenly lying about getting paid for his apologetic work. He said pretty much the exact same things: “tax rules are super confusing!” He even tried to blame the Maxwell Institute’s accountant! What, this accountant deliberately lied on the forms in order to make it seem like DCP was paid $20,000 in excess of what he actually got?

And was oblivious to the fact his platform was owned by his church.

[Dr Moore]

What many people don’t realize is the actual harm caused by the church’s actions. Market transparency is HUGE for large money managers.

Here is how I see it.

Ensign Peak owns something like 2000 stocks. That covers about 98-99% of the whole US stock market. Basically, you could say, they own a good size chunk of everything. Again, top 100 largest shareholder in the 10 biggest companies in America, and on down the line.

Here’s the problem and the harm.

Many large money managers are obsessed with knowing who else owns the stocks they own. Why? Well, voting rights for one. Staying power, for another. Knowing who else is among the top holders, what they stand for and how they will likely vote on all sorts of matters every year, is a very big deal. So is knowing if a stock is owned by fast money or long term money. Ensign Peak definitely has unique moral boundaries that are different from the market’s, and it appears to trade quite a bit too.

So here are two scenarios in which Ensign Peak and the church might be targets of legitimate class action based on market harm.

1: If a single annual proxy vote, or any other shareholder vote, went adverse to market expectations in the 22 years of Ensign Peak’s deception, and it can be argued that Ensign Peak’s vote made a difference, then any shareholders who lost money could argue harm based on Ensign Peak’s and the church’s deliberate deception. It doesn’t have to be a big company or big losses by one investor. Just enough to mobilize a class action. Attorneys will go after giants for far less.

2: If a single investor has reason to believe that Ensign Peak dumped a stock they held, and they lost money without the benefit of having known Ensign Peak was a holder, then again, it could be argued there was actual harm based on deliberate manipulation of market transparency law. This is a long shot, but often you’ll see stocks go down and insitutional market participants will ask around to learn if it’s a big seller. Large managers will even ask, are you selling? No, are you? No. Then who? Anyway, the point is, failure to disclose is manipulation of important market information that professionals absolutely use to do their day jobs and it is entirely possible Ensign Peak made trades that caused someone harm over those 22 years. All you need is one with the circumstantial evidence and a case could be made.

[drumdude]

Another day with zero mention from DCP, the church’s most prominent apologist, about the scandal.

Instead he posted a list of places he has eaten at.

[Moksha]

Do you strive to be shifty in all you do?