Yet some people continue to believe things could, or would, have come out better, if only Woodford had kept his mouth shut.
In Woodford's shoes, would it have been better to stay hush? If Kikukawa said, "Pipe down, Mikey-san. Keep your nose out," was the right thing to crumple up the PWC report, click heels, salute, and go on drawing pay?
Was the only "destruction of value" the act of revelation of a deceitful destruction of value, which some continue to deny altogether?
There are more than those two alternatives; and you are forgetting that Woodford tried to roll the board and effectively seize control of the corporation.
I have considerable doubt that, had this proven a successful coup, Woodford would then have taken the same actions. (But then again, perhaps he would have. What were / are his goals?)
Well, if all the troubles are a fiction, it's time to buy some Oly stock and bonds. They're pretty cheap now.
It is far more lucrative if you knew something was about to occur and you shorted the stock before-hand. Nice to be able to double your investment within a couple of weeks.
Or perhaps Woodford really thought he could roll the entire board? We can only speculate, and it's unlikely that the whole truth will ever emerge.
Also go write some CDS swaps to insure creditors frightened by the nasty Woodford "rumors." Bet the ranch. Make a killing. And then, indeed, you'd have Woodford to thank.
What do you suppose Woodford and some associates may be doing?
The drip-feeding of possible dubious deals and corruption serves to keep the stock price depressed -- coincidence? If you time it right, you can perform the old robber-baron trick: sell high, push the stock down, buy low then repeat until you have amassed a nice pile of money. (Other people's money -- legitimate investors.)
If this is done in the US it likely isn't illegal, or at least could never be successfully proven. (Just because Woodford was an associate of people playing with Olympus shares would not constitute proof of wrong-doing, for example.)
