Overstock.com (OSTK) puts shareholder dollars to good use: hiring lobbyist

Posted Sep 17th 2007 7:31PM by Zac Bissonnette
Filed under: Scandals

Ok, so Overstock.com, Inc. (NASDAQ: OSTK) can't seem to make any money, and even it's once torrid sales growth has gone negative.

But that didn't stop the company from spending $120,000 lobbying the federal government in the first half of 2007, presumably on behalf of CEO Patrick Byrne's anti-naked short selling jihad. In the past, Byrne has referred to his high profile, highly-delusional campaign against the "scandal" as his "mitzvah".

But now I have to ask:

Mr. Byrne: Since when is paying Washington lobbyists $120,000 of your shareholders' money considered a mitzvah?

If I were a shareholder, I'd be wondering why my money was being used for Patrick Byrne's mitzvah instead of for my practical purposes such as, say, creating a profitable business.

For my coverage of the Overstock freak show, check out Gary Weiss and Sam Antar's blogs

Tags: OSTK, Overstock.com, Patrick Byrne, PatrickByrne, short selling, ShortSelling

Print this

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

9-19-2007 @ 4:08PM

John Allen said...

Zac Bissonette-

How many other companies have you written this about? Is there an unwritten law that says if your company isn't profitable than don't hire lobbyists? Can only profitable companies lobby? Is it fun for you to write things about unprofitable companies that others write negative articles about? I'm a shareholder and am glad Dr. Byrne chose to lobby on my behalf to ascertain and curtail abusive stock lending practices.

Overstock has been illegally shorted and as a result has suffered much more dilution than would have occured otherwise.

If you are not an overstock.com shareholder than shouldn't you ask shareholders how they feel about

9-19-2007 @ 4:09PM

John Allen said...

Dr. Bryne spending however much on lobbying? In fact since Dr. Byrne is the largest shareholder shouldn't you ask him how he feels about his decision to spend on lobbying? Shouldn't the company act in the largest shareholder's best interest?