Because the customer in question raises questions of the CEO's judgement, plus the possibility of knowledge that the target was violating sanctions. We don't know. That's why it's a bad situation for the stock.

The stock seems to be responding more heavily to the potential loss of Jensen than it does to the potential continuation of Jensen given new knowledge.

It also seems like there’s a high potential for half of Jensen’s position to be granted in a subsequent divorce decree, meaning there could be enormous selling pressure in the next several years.

Doesn't he only own like 3% of the stock? His wife would get 1.5% of the company and I see no reason for her to liquidate all of it right away.

[delayed]

He didn’t come clean on his own accord - he was faced with irrefutable evidence and admitted it.

How can you trust anything he says after this?

Why should regulators or other customers believe any promises made by him?

His credibility is shot - the day to day stock prices changes are irrelevant.

Morality is not a straight line, once someone has cheated they sort of accepted it for themselves after feeling guilty but that doesn't transfer to other places where someones morals are challenged.

He’s a dork with 100’s of billions, testing the rules. A bit like a teenager given infinite resources.

Imo that’s danger zone shit for the company, whether you’re offended by the morality bits or not.

You mean the short trader who wrote a report and pushed it is the good guy?

Maybe he will donate his proceeds to charity...

Yes. We should keep all bad things hidden. In the name of shareholder value.

He's baggin baddies, and blowing up stock prices. I honestly don't see the problem. Bought more NVDA, this dip is just free money.

You should never trust any CEO in first place, don’t know why everyone is trying to treat this guy as a school teacher.

Relationships and stock price are built on trust. An affair, a relationship with a customer/subordinate, and an attempted cover-up are all breaches of that trust.

> Why is an affair with a customer grounds for announcing a resignation that caused an instant 10% stock price drop?

OP said

>A CEO admitting to an affair with a customer *after previously denying it*, seems like a sufficient reason for removal

It's not the crime. It's the cover up.

In this case Jensen either 1) lied to the board about the affair, 2) directed the Nvidia PR to publish a materially false statement about it, or 3) both.

From a company governance standpoint it's incredibly hard to trust Jensen when he's either lying to you, using the company to protect his personal life, or (again) both.

Admitting to the affair with a customer is a nothingburger. Directing the company to release a false statement about it, and that customer turns out to be a Chinese asset if a BIG fucking deal.

Lying about it served no one's interest but Jensen's, and ended up hurting the company significantly.

Because it potentially gives the affair partner a lever to bypass internal company controls.