Sorry, got the name ass backwards. I've never dined there but sure would like to one of these days.Originally Posted by Dirtydawg
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, got the name ass backwards. I've never dined there but sure would like to one of these days.
That's the part I find very difficult to accept. So many former employees have lost everything and now the only one's cashing in will be the attorneys.
I read on a financial website that it will be hard to touch any of his assets now that he is dead. I am not a law scholar, but maybe someone with a law background can enlighten us. As for the employees who chose to stay leveraged in Enron stock, it is hard to feel to terribly bad for them. They had a choice and they made it. If I didnt know how to handle money, I would have gone to a financial advisor.
I feel bad for the guys like brother in law who was promised a performance bonus a year before the "fall", and he performed well. He got his bonus within the preferential payment period, so he ended up having to settle and give up 1/4 (125,000) of it and pay 40,000 in lawyer fees, or else he would have probably ended up giving it all to the lawyers and back to Enron. That is the way the law is swayed though, to help big companies out. Enron owes their debtors back first, and not their employees that they promised money to. Now, there is something wrong with that BS. I dont care if it is the law and I dont care how much Cartek will scream about it being. It is dead wrong in my book.
dussdawg, I don't know 100% what went on with their stock, but wasnt it set up where pretty much the employees were strong armed into putting back into enron stock? They had the option to diversify(sp), but if they did it was so penal as not to make it worth while. I am not picking on you, but was wondering if that was how it worked. It very well could have been they were dumb( doesnt mean they should have lost everything though), but I remember hearing that there was a little more to the story as far as the stock stuff goes.
Ken Lay was worth more than $500 million at one point; it is now estimated that his worth at death is less than $10 million excluding any life insurance that may be out there.
He lost all the value in his stocks (more than $400 million at one point)...he was selling pursuant to a schedule filed with the SEC. Skilling left the company and was free to sell whenever. Skilling knew once the stock fell through $40/share that loan repayments would be triggered...now you know why he resigned at $45/share.
All of Lay's houses except his condo in Houston and a small house in Aspen were previously taken by the Feds. He had little cash due to the evaporation of his Enron stockholdings.
Most of the case against Lay was built around the testimony and information provided by Fastow. How credible was he? The Fed's sentencing recommendations will be based on their opinion of how "good" his testimony was in the Lay case. I don't know about you, but I'd hate to think that a confessed liar was taking the stand against me knowing that if he told some real whoppers he might get a lighter sentence!
Ken Lay and his family personally without press releases donated many millions of dollars to many different causes...Skilling and Fastow kept most, if not all, of theirs.
I wasn't on the jury but wish I had been; then I'd know for sure (at least in my mind) if Ken Lay was guilty. I will always believe he relied on people that knowingly and purposefully lied to him, and Skilling and Fastow were two of the biggest. Oh yeah, and so was Sharon Watkins...I guess that insider trading charges will never be filed against Time's Woman of the Year...WAFJ!
Last edited by CARTEK; 07-07-2006 at 08:49 AM.
I'm an asshole! What's your excuse?
I would have to ask my sister and brother in law (they both worked for Enron), but from the way they acted, I dont think anyone was forced to do anything. My sister lost her retirement there and said she didnt feel bad for herself or others because she/they chose to stay highly leveraged in Enron. Of course, she had only worked there for 3 years so she didnt lose a lot, but judging from her attitude about it, she didnt act like she or anybody else was strong-armed. I think people got caught riding a gravy train. Many companies offer good stock incentives, but you have the option to bow out of them after a specific period of time. I am sure there is some kind of law behind it, so legally, Enron could not force their workers to stay in the stock. Now, did they do some sort of behind the scene's strong arming? I doubt it. I think people just got caught up in being millionaires. I mean we are takling about people that were secretaries that were paper millionaires. Diversification just wasnt that big of thing then to individual investors, but it sure is now.
The only stipulations placed on stock grants and stock matches were that they had to be held one year. This did not affect an individual's portion, only that contributed by Enron. It was not a good practice then, and I know of no company that does it now.
As for diversification, it was in vogue in 2000...just as it was in 1990 and is today. One should always diversify their portfolio...even when they think they know everything about a company...just ask Lay!
I'm an asshole! What's your excuse?
That is what I thought. I understand that maybe some of the "paper millinaires" at Enron didnt understand financial markets, etc., but if I had millions and didnt know much about investing, I think I would have sought out financial advisory. I know it was horrible for those people, but it was their choice to keep riding a train that was going fast but falling off the rails at the same time.
Cartek.......
You aare right about the philanthropy of Lay. As a former resident of Cinco Ranch in Katy, I know that he personally funded most of the cost of building a new YMCA and Library in Cinco Ranch. there was very little fanfare and most people only found out about it when the sign went up calling it the "Ken Lay YMCA" Last trip I made down there to see my grandkids, I noticed they had taken his name off the sign.
I also feel that he may have been railroaded, but then again if he didn't know all that Fastow was doing he would have had to be very incompetent! I don't think he was stupidl I also recall that he had a reputation of being a very ruthless leader as his companies gobbled up others and sliced them up.
It's very easy for leaders of large companies to get too caught up in their own perceived importance and start relying on underlings to call the shots.
Guess, we'll never really know!!
"I also feel that he may have been railroaded, but then again if he didn't know all that Fastow was doing he would have had to be very incompetent! I don't think he was stupidl I also recall that he had a reputation of being a very ruthless leader as his companies gobbled up others and sliced them up." -- Bull Pup 60
In an organization as large as Enron was (more than 30,000 employees worldwide), it would have been difficult to uncover insititutionalized fraud. By that I mean, if people purposefully lied and actively sought to hide the fraud, it would not have been difficult in the late 1990's due to the overall lack of transparentcy. Today, it is a much different story.
I will believe that Lay and the Board were purposefully lied to by many people including Skilling, Fastow, Coppers, et al. Otherwise, I have no logical explanation as to why Lay lost more than any other single person (as much as $400,000,000) or board member Winokur lost more than $80,000,000; Winokur never sold a single share, and he was the only board member that was not part of the civil settlement...they could nothing he did wrong. BTW, Winokur was chair of the Finance Committee.
Now ask yourself: why did the Feds go after Lay?
I'm an asshole! What's your excuse?
It is hard to say whether Lay knew or not, but sometimes that doesnt matter. Many people will always say he should have known. I know my wife is about to get her Series 24 for NASD and SEC compliance, rules, regs. etc. boring. Anyway, she will have the right to sign off on applications and other things to do with stocks, mutual funds, etc. If something is filled out wrong and she signs off on it, she can be held personally liable by the client. It is scary. Since she signed off on it, she should have read all of it, but who is to say that the document wasnt tampered with afterwards or she just plain missed it after looking at thousands of lines of legalise. I am not saying this to defend Lay, but I can see how this can shrowded in doubt. If all he ever read was executive summaries, they could have been skimming around behind his back. Like Cartek said, with 30,000 employees and that much ground to cover, it is possible that he had no idea.
When did Ken Lay know?
We will never know. However, after working 3 1/2 years at that evil company, and meeting Mr. Lay just once along with the other crooks by his side, I bet he knew exactly what was up. He was a very bright man with a ton of vision. Yes he seemed nice to a fault, and in person as well, but most men with that much power just use that to their advantage. BTW, it took me 4 years to get rid of the stock. You could only sell 25% of it per year. Thank the good Lord I left in 1993 before the "you know what" hit the fan. FWIW and IMHO, there are still a few snakes at the top of EOG Resources as well. They all didn't scurry too far away.
That said, Ken Lay did a lot of good for a ton of folks and groups in this world. For his sake, I hope he was blind to a fault. I just happen to think he was too brilliant for that to happen.
If a person has a million dollars, why is he still chasing a buck?
Money always seems to want and seek more money. Never satisfied you know. Pure greed I guess.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
