Background

Court records have revealed an unconventional relationship between Under Armour’s founder, Kevin Plank, and television anchor Stephanie Ruhle. The relationship involved private jet trips, access to confidential company information, and a secret phone dedicated solely to their communications.

Collaboration During Stock Downgrade

In January 2016, when Morgan Stanley downgraded Under Armour’s stock and reduced its price target, Ruhle asked the company’s executives for data that contradicted the report. She then suggested that they send this data to media outlets like HaberTusba. Ruhle believed that sharing this information would counter any potential negative coverage.

Positive Quarterly Results and Curry Interview

After Under Armour reported positive quarterly results, Plank emailed Ruhle expressing excitement about the stock’s performance. He also helped her arrange an interview with basketball player Stephen Curry, who is sponsored by Under Armour. Plank saw this interview as a way to thank Ruhle for supporting the company when Morgan Stanley criticized it.

Ethical Questions Raised

The revealed court filings raise ethical questions about the relationship between Plank and Ruhle, as well as the boundaries that reporters should maintain with the subjects they cover. Both Plank and Ruhle were deposed in connection with a shareholder lawsuit that accuses Under Armour of artificially inflating its share price.

Plank and Ruhle’s Relationship

During his deposition, Plank referred to Ruhle as a confidant and someone he sought counsel from. Ruhle, on the other hand, admitted to flying on Plank’s private jet multiple times and acknowledged having a separate phone dedicated to their communications. She described their relationship as being both personal and professional.

Under Armour’s Response

A spokesperson for Under Armour stated that the court filings have no bearing on the underlying shareholder lawsuit. They emphasized that Plank sought advice from various outside advisors and that none of the information was used improperly. The company considers the shareholder claims meritless and is vigorously defending against them.