It is, only if you make up an example quite unlike the one at hand. If an exec of a firm gets charged with fraud, it's not a piece of information you'd ignore when doing business with that firm, even if the fraud charges are regarding another venture. Suppose you're negotiating a deal with some company and in the process they tell you 'Oh, a couple of our key executives were just charged with fraud. But, really, this has nothing to do with us'. Your business partner mumbles 'Hmm, I'm not so sure about this...'. Do you reply 'Oh, quit being pedantic!'? Probably not.
If your Chief Financial Officer is indicted for money laundering, it is a bit of a problem. Even if the charges are related to a completely separate company.
If these guys are as upstanding as Obie suggests they should resign as officers of Hashrocket immediately to avoid tainting hashrocket further.
The damage that has already been done can't be avoided but no need to risk further damage.
Distance is key here. Silent investor, maybe. Officer of the company, no way.
The bad bit here is that bankrolling legit companies like hashrocket from cash made with this scammy 'service' makes the money laundering claims more believable.
Comments
If the people named in the complaint are executives of Hashrocket, then it has something to do with Hashrocket, however indirectly.
This seems pretty pedantic. If a VP at Google gets arrested for domestic violence, that hardly means that it "has something to do with Google".
It is, only if you make up an example quite unlike the one at hand. If an exec of a firm gets charged with fraud, it's not a piece of information you'd ignore when doing business with that firm, even if the fraud charges are regarding another venture. Suppose you're negotiating a deal with some company and in the process they tell you 'Oh, a couple of our key executives were just charged with fraud. But, really, this has nothing to do with us'. Your business partner mumbles 'Hmm, I'm not so sure about this...'. Do you reply 'Oh, quit being pedantic!'? Probably not.
I concede the point :)
If your Chief Financial Officer is indicted for money laundering, it is a bit of a problem. Even if the charges are related to a completely separate company.
It even is a problem if the charges do not stick.
If these guys are as upstanding as Obie suggests they should resign as officers of Hashrocket immediately to avoid tainting hashrocket further.
The damage that has already been done can't be avoided but no need to risk further damage.
Distance is key here. Silent investor, maybe. Officer of the company, no way.
The bad bit here is that bankrolling legit companies like hashrocket from cash made with this scammy 'service' makes the money laundering claims more believable.