On the “Watch List”:
• The Heinz deal probe. The FBI has joined the Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into possible insider trading in the $28 billion takeover of the H.J. Heinz Co. by Berkshire Hathaway and 3G Capital. Somebody parlayed $90,000 worth of “call options” into a $1.7 million payday. The incident is raising eyebrows higher than usual because the folks at Heinz touted how hush-hush and super-secret the lead-up to the deal was. Who's all involved? Stay tuned.
• Squeezing PNC. The Pittsburgh banking giant has made quite the name for itself in conservation circles. But a group of eco-wackos has finagled a bogus resolution into proxy materials being sent to shareholders in advance of PNC's annual meeting on April 23. It asks PNC to say how its lending practices contribute to “climate change.” The group's goal, of course, is to halt commerce and industry as we know it and bully those such as PNC who might have the audacity to help underwrite such dastardly things as jobs and growth. PNC shareholders should reject this nonsense — overwhelmingly.
• Pittsburgh & the 2024 Olympics. The erstwhile Steel City is one of 35 American cities to receive a letter from the U.S. Olympic Committee attempting to gauge interest in making a bid for the 2024 Summer Games. Says Allegheny County Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald, “It's definitely something we should take a look at.” Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl says the idea should not be dismissed outright. But given the multigazillion-dollar shellacking taxpayers would take, we have one question for both: Are you guys nuts?
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.