The market has reacted this way for a reason - Nvidia share prices fell a lot over the past few days.

If the espionage probe was serious (and it was known about in intelligence circles going back as much as a year), it would be handle much differently, with charges brought agains him or his company being sanctioned.

Many people could just say the exact opposite of your sentence, i.e. "not a disqualification" and "can still be trusted". Furthermore, These people could supply many historical examples of leaders who did similar things and went on to remain great/effective leaders of the things they were charged to lead.

It may not be a fact per se, but in the United States it is widely agreed upon that romantic relationships with subordinates is a big no-no from an ethics perspective (due to power dynamics and high potential for abuse), in addition to being a serious liability for the company.

With a sane administration that hadn't possibly looked the other way due to emoluments (allegedly), maybe. Who knows what the response will be from the current mob (gentle pun intended).

My pet theory about why it was leaked is because the very serious reports were sent to the White House and they then did absolutely nothing about it. Just because this, wildly corrupt, current administration has not brought charges does not mean it won't happen in the future.

If someone holds NVDA, nothing out of their mouth about NVDA matters to me. Even if they're stating a fact, cool, I can find those from someone else. The one exception is if they're willing to double down right now.

There is no doubt that his sexscapades were stupid, but at the same time there is only one question that should matter for the board. Will the shareholders make more money with him or without?

Sure, but his selling into China might be criminal. Or would you also excuse criminal behavior that's profitable?

But do they know more material information that we would all agree makes this not a hysterical witch hunt I don’t think we can be so confident about that.

Even if their information comes from American security personnel that should still be taken with the grain of salt.

We all remember Iraq, don’t we?

Supreme Court disagrees that a company is required “only required to maximize shareholder value”, do you have any evidence to support your claim?

[0]https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/13-354.ht...

I think "can we trust this person to act in the best interests of this company?" is a more accurate question

I don't think these scandals are in NVidias best interest, and the hits the share value have taken seem to support that

"He created so much shareholder value."

"Unlike Elon he shared the wealth with the company."

"The US is worse off without him."

I'm sorry but a patsy who is this gullible, or a CCP-friendly traitor that is this slimy (the jury is still out), should not be in this position of power.

Cool for all he accomplished so far. This isn't a situation that deserves a second chance.

I don’t care one whit who he sells chips to, or who he’s fucking when he’s not selling those chips.

That isn’t immoral, it’s normal and reasonable.

If you want Exhibit A for the moral corruption of Silicon Valley’s culture, this is it. And it’s not tied to shareholdings. It’s the quasi-monarchic strain of worship that has been poisoning Valley culture for at least a decade now.

Meanwhile we have a felon in the white house (sexual assault)

Ah yes. Being gay disqualified you from security clearance. Why? Because if you are gay, then you can be blackmailed. Why? Because you might lose your security clearance.