Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Mitt Romney: Court Battle Over His Involvement in Bitter Divorce [View all]Cassotto
(2 posts)According to this article, Romney testified in 1988 that Staples stock was overvalued, saying I didnt place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the companys future. At the same time, he was working with Tom Stemberg and Goldman Sachs to take the company public, and the deal was completed in the Spring of 1989.
From the article.......
Staples went public through Goldman Sachs but three years after Romneys initial capital investment. Mitt Romney says hes prouder of this [Staples] investment than any other. (Mister PowerPoint Goes to Washington, Mathew Rees, December 1, 2006)
The issue here, if it is not already clear, is why a primary investor in a company that Romney was about to take public and of which he later says he is prouder than any other, he downplayed in a civil divorce case
As a witness for Tom Stemberg, Romney perhaps wanted to downplay the worth of Staples because if he did this then Maureen Sullivan-Stemberg stood to gain a whole lot less from Staples equity because Romney had just undervalued her ex-husbands primary asset in a fifty/fifty state. If Staples is not worth very much, if the judge can be convinced of that, then how much can he award in terms of shares?
More, if monies and property are communal in a marriage, why wasnt Staples split fifty-fifty and why was Romney testifying at all, other than the fact that Tom Stemberg, clearly one of Mitt Romneys best friends and who recently said of Romney, I have never met a better venture capitalist [than Mitt Romney]
I suspect he will be an equally good president. (Mr. PowerPoint Goes to Washington, Wide Awakes, syndicated).
[link:http://tantmieux.squarespace.com/cyrano-tant-mieux-articles-old/2008/2/5/a-fish-out-of-water-mitt-romney-the-wanna-be-president.html|