Whistleblowers feel $10,000,000 insufficient

[haha]

Three people will divide $31.7 million from settlement of a case against Schering-Plough.

"As part of the settlement, Alcorn, Manning and G. Raymond Pironti Jr. will divide nearly $31.7 million from the damages that Schering-Plough will pay under a Civil War-era law that rewards private citizens for exposing attempts to defraud the federal government.

The whistle-blowers do not consider it a windfall, noting they probably will never be hired in the pharmaceutical industry.

"I've got to reinvent myself," Pironti, 36, said from Florida in a teleconference at Mullin's Montclair office."

I feel deeply for this poor guy, 36 years old and probably not welcome in the pharmaceutical industry anymore. Oh well, I guess he'll just struggle along with his $10 million, and do his stiff-upper-lipped best.

Where do these half-wits come from?

Whole story at http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/040730/drug_...blowers_2.html

[Zipper]

I guess you would have to ask Schering-Plough?

[sgeeeee]

Three people will divide $31.7 million from settlement of a case against Schering-Plough.

. . .

Where do these half-wits come from?

Why begrudge 3 people who risked their careers to expose over $300M in fraud?

The CEO who was responsible for the fraud walked away with a $50M package.

[haha]

Why begrudge 3 people who risked their careers to expose over $300M in fraud? * *

The CEO who was responsible for the fraud walked away with a $50M package. *

I think you may have misunderstood my meaning. I actually have Schering -Plough stock; I know what a loser and money pit Richard Kogen is. That $50 million is an affront to everything reasonable.

I was only referring to G. Raymond Pironti, Jr.'s rather feeble assertion that this is no windfall, and that he will never again have the opportunity to work in the pharmaceutical industry. (Sob, sob!)

$10,000,000 no windfall??

Now that you have got me thinking about it more deeply though, I have lost money on this deal, hence I think I will dislike Mr. Pironti after all. Thank you for pointing out the personal implications that I had missed. Formerly I was losing some money as a taxpayer, and gaining some as a shareholder beneficiary of their fraud. Now I get a little of that back as a taxpayer, minus the generous cut to Mr. Pironti, his colleagues, and their attorneys. But Schering is out the cash.

The original news article complained about how the burden of this fraud was falling on the poor Medicaid recipients. Now I agree that they are poor, but it is a fact that Medicaid is taxpayer supported, not user supported. So the financial loss was to me and other people who actually pay tax, not to the recipients of the drugs that were overpriced.