I think that to a large extent, the case against the upper levels at Enron goes well beyond what they did or din’t know. It’s what they should have known.
I didn't short Enron until after that confie call. I was flat, had sold out because a friend of mine who trades natural gas futures told me his father heard a few things which were "disconcerting." His father was a partner at V&E in Houston.
The way Skilling reacted when Grubman asked those questions was all it took for me to decide he was hiding something. At the time, I don't even Grubman knew how bad it was in there. I sure as hell did not.
If it was that easy to understand why do you suppose so many people got burned?[/quote]
Because ultimately greed can blind even smart people to the otherwise obvious.....
You found Skilling’s attitude to be offensive. Is it illegal to have an air of arrogance?
Were the leaders sympathetic figures? Of course not, but it is not illegal or even immoral to be a swaggering figure liviing large.[/quote]
Obviously not, or they would have locked you up and thrown away the key a looooooong time ago!
The whole “mark-to-market” accounting they were using for earnings lent itself to manipulation and fraud. It created a fantasy world that took on a life of its own after a while, where virtual revenues appeared out of thin air.
The company became a Gordian knot of accounting manipulation, and Skilling was responsible by condoning it all.
I’m not sure about Lay, though. It seems his guilt lies in condoning Skilling, and for practicing willful ignorance and plausible deniability. <!–
window.open = SymWinOpen;
if(SymReal != null)
if(SymRealOnLoad != null)
window.open = SymRealWinOpen;
SymReal = window.;
window. = Sym;
SymRealOnLoad = window.onload;
window.onload = SymOnLoad;
[quote=Starka]I think that to a large extent, the case against the upper levels at Enron goes well beyond what they did or din't know. It's what they should have known.[/quote]
That sounds fair to me, when speaking of the people the DOJ went after.
Who thinks 24 years was too harsh?
How is society served by this sentence? Will the fools who lost everything they had, or even those who just took a big hit, be made whole?
Mr. Skilling will be playing cards and watching TV in North Carolina rather than at home--society will be picking up his tab.
He is not a threat to society. It's not like he would be out raping people or car jacking or holding up convenience stores if he were at home with his family.
Nor is it likely that he would be able to get another job--so what's the point of forcing him to be away?
Why is it that liberals like you can't see that people go to prison to punish them?
If anyone wishes to watch an entertaining documentary I suggest Enron:The Smartest Guys in the Room,
It’s pretty good, I think it paints an excellent picture of what really took place at Enron.