Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
The Late Ken Lay of Enron fame; is presumed innocent afterall...
Topic Started: Oct 17 2006, 04:12 PM (822 Views)
kentcouncil
Fulla-Carp
Dave Spelvin
Oct 18 2006, 12:15 PM
Kent-

This appears to be the playbook for your argument:

Enron Explained (?)
In it, the author cites Ann Coulter as follow:
Quote:
 
So far, only columnist Ann Coulter has exposed the immorality of [the employees'] position: The employees wish that they had known to sell their stocks to some other sucker. They're not angry that Enron was running a scam. They're angry they weren't in on it. Whatever they knew, employees were in a better position to see the company's weaknesses than outside investors.

As usual, Coulter pours on the bad faith. The employees must be bad people because they were victimized by a fraud? How does she (if he's summarizing her argument correctly) know what the employees were thinking? If I were an employee, I'd be angry that my saving were gone and that my job was gone. Coulter is an oozing sore.

Then there's this about the freeze:
Quote:
 
The employees have one more complaint: There was a "lockdown" from October 26 through November 12, during which they were unable to trade shares in their 401(k)s, although their bosses could. A lot of bad news came out during that period. On October 31, it was announced, for example, that the SEC was conducting a major investigation. The stock price fell from $16.34 to $9.98.
So let me get this straight: The announcement of the SEC investigation occurred during the lockdown, so the employees couldn't divest. Sounds like they have quite a lot to complain about, and properly so. Management was selling off stock before that, as management will often do, and were even permitted to sell during the lockdown. But until the SEC investigation was made public, the employees didn't know that they were being lied to. They made the mistake of believing management, which had done so well for them in the past.

I think you're making excuses for management. These guys should be in jail and make full restitution. It's outrageous that Lay, who was found guilty, should be allowed to bequeath his ill-gotten booty (or ill-booten gotty, if you watch MASH) to his family. He came by this money fraudulently and he should be revived and thrown in the klink where he belongs.

Did I ever say the employees were bad people? Of course not. Were they unwise, and did they let greed overcome their own best interests? Yes.

I have an even lower opinion of Coulter than you do, by the way. But that's neither here nor there.

And once again, addressing the freeze (from October 29 to November 13): no one, including executives, were allowed to sell any shares they had in their 401(k) plans during the freeze (though they could sell any shares they held outside their plans). During the freeze, the stock price declined down to $9.98 from $13.81. The stock had declined from $80 in the preceeding months. On October 16, Enron announced third quarter losses of $618 million. The SEC inquiry was first announced by Enron on October 22, and the stock dropped 20% that day. My point is, the warning signs were all there, and had been there for months. If you wanted to sell your shares during the time period of the freeze, you had already missed the boat.

When did I make excuses for management?

What I did say, am saying, will continue to say, is that the investors in Enron, both employees and others, ignored basic investment principles when they tossed their hats into the ring. They were the victims of fraud, true enough, and if they want to sue Lay's estate, Skilling, Fastow, what's left of Arthur Andersen, and the investment banks (and Pai, who truly deserves to have something bad happen to him), well, good luck. But it was within their power to avoid what happened to them.

(Of course I watch M*A*S*H. The houseboy did it.)
It was a confusion of ideas between him and one of the lions he was hunting in Kenya that had caused A. B. Spottsworth to make the obituary column. He thought the lion was dead, and the lion thought it wasn't.

- P.G. Wodehouse
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Quote:
 
(Of course I watch M*A*S*H. The houseboy did it.)

:lol:

Thanks for clarifying your thoughts for me. And no, you don't have a lower opinion of Coulter than I do. On this we will have to disagree.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Phlebas
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
kentcouncil
Oct 18 2006, 10:13 AM


And once again, addressing the freeze (from October 29 to November 13): no one, including executives, were allowed to sell any shares they had in their 401(k) plans during the freeze (though they could sell any shares they held outside their plans).

Sorry to come back to this, but the fact remains, analysts were pimping the stock well into it's decline. You can't equate the billions of dollars in Enron stock that Lay owned with what an employee had in their 401(k) account. Lay couldn't care about his 401(k) account, he was selling the stock that was granted through options and regular compensation.

The 401(k) accounts were frozen on Oct. 26th. Ken Lay sold more than 2 1/4 billion dollars worth of Enron stock that day - according to SEC filings. Also, this interesting article came out:

Quote:
 
Heard on the Street
Most Analysts Remain Plugged In to Enron
By Susanne Craig and Jonathan Weil
Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal
1386 words
26 October 2001
The Wall Street Journal
C1
English
(Copyright © 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
Enron: Rarely have so many analysts liked a stock they concede they know so little about.
In recent years, Wall Street researchers have been overwhelmingly -- critics would say blindly -- enthusiastic about Enron, even as they acknowledge not always understanding the complex financial transactions that accounted for its soaring profits. Now, Enron is reporting steep losses from some of its most complicated transactions, which many on Wall Street still can't figure out.
In a research note Wednesday, Goldman Sachs analyst David Fleischer conceded that scant corporate disclosure at the Houston energy trader makes it difficult to value the company. The company's "lack of disclosure and transparency," he says, is "a longstanding Enron hallmark."
So is this a stock to avoid, in his view? Hardly. Goldman on Wednesday did bump Enron off its "U.S. Select List," which consists of a few dozen top stock picks -- but Mr. Fleischer continued to keep the stock on the firm's larger but prestigious "Recommended List" of 200 or so favored stocks, where it has been since he joined Goldman in 1993.
"Just because I can't be specific in being able to create a simple model . . . doesn't mean that you write off that industry and say `I can't analyze it' or `I can't figure it out,' " says Mr. Fleischer, who owns an undisclosed number of Enron shares. "If that were the case, there would be an awful lot of industries we couldn't follow."
Enron's shares have dropped about 50% since last week.
"Every sell-side analyst we spoke to early in 2001 admitted that this was a black box," says Jim Chanos, principal of Kynikos Associates in New York, who has been selling Enron stock short -- trading it with an eye to profiting from its fall -- throughout this year. "It was really a trust-me story, when all the evidence was mounting that there was reason to question that level of trust."
True, no stock picker is immune from bad calls. And Wall Street analysts long have been criticized for their overwhelmingly bullish bias, particularly on stocks in hot sectors with lots of investment-banking deals to be had.
But Enron stands apart, precisely because so many of the analysts still recommending the stock have acknowledged that the company's disclosure practices are lacking. Which raises the question: How can an analyst recommend that others purchase a stock when key information about the company's operations is so often either unavailable or indecipherable?
Concerns about the way that Enron runs its business aren't new. Many of the issues now plaguing Enron's stock were first raised more than a year ago by bearish hedge-fund managers and independent accounting experts. Yet time and again, Wall Street analysts dismissed as unimportant many of the lingering questions about the company's various partnership transactions.
Besides those partnerships, Enron also has been dogged by concerns about the secretive valuation techniques it uses to record its assets and earnings.
Through it all, most analysts have stuck by this onetime stock-market darling, publicly dismissing questions about the firm's accounting practices and level of disclosure. As of yesterday, of the 17 analysts who following the stock, 10 had a "strong buy" or equivalent rating on the stock, according to Thomson Financial/First Call. Five others rated the stock a "buy," though not strongly.
Only Prudential Securities, which downgraded the stock this week, has a "sell" rating on Enron.
The bullish treatment is the latest and one of the most high-profile examples of Wall Street taking a glass half-full stance, despite what in retrospect seems to be ample warning that a less-enthusiastic approach was warranted.
Over the past year in the wake of the Nasdaq Composite Index's general collapse, analysts have been widely assailed for a lack of independence -- particularly those who, like Goldman's Mr. Fleischer, own shares in the companies they cover. Regulators have raised concerns that analysts have compromised themselves to help their firms land lucrative investment-banking fees and other revenue.
Enron has spread the wealth across many Wall Street firms. For instance, for one $865 million equity offering in 1999 led by `Credit Suisse First Boston, Enron retained seven co-managers, including Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch.
"Enron is a big company, and I don't think you're going to find a firm that hasn't been involved," says Credit Suisse First Boston analyst Curt Launer, who still rates the stock a "strong buy" with a $40 price target. "They pay a lot of investment-banking fees to Wall Street."
He adds, "We do our analysis every day based on the information we have. Are we here strictly to defend companies? That's ludicrous. We're here to provide information to investors. . . . Yes, I have the wrong recommendation on the stock. I don't think my analysis has been as wrong as the stock has performed."
Mr. Fleischer, whose firm also has served as an investment banker to Enron, calls his holding "a meaningful investment" that is "not small." But he disputes any suggestion that his objectivity is compromised. Mr. Fleischer says his clients "are happy to know" he has a stake in Enron, because it shows he puts his money where his mouth is.
In his research note Wednesday, Mr. Fleischer called for complete disclosures of Enron's off-balance sheet partnerships. Despite the resulting difficulty he acknowledged facing in developing financial models for the company, he wrote that he and many other investors historically "have given Enron the benefit of doubt because of its strong growth in earnings" and position as an industry leader.
"There's not information to really model this and be able to predict accurately where revenues are going to come from and where they're going to make their money, but every quarter they do," he says. "It's hard to get inside to know all the transactions, but they do deliver."
CSFB's Mr. Launer also has been a longtime defender of the company, occasionally issuing research reports to rebut critical stories about Enron in the financial press. On Monday, he wrote that he expects questions about Enron's partnerships and accounting disclosures to continue, but that he remains "confident in the businesses and operating growth prospects for [Enron] and an ultimate recovery in the share price."
"I know I'm wrong on the stock," Mr. Launer says. But he says that at these prices, he isn't ready to throw in the towel because he figures that even in a worst-case scenario -- under which he envisions Enron having to issue as much as $2 billion worth of shares, diluting current holders -- the stock doesn't have much further to fall.
Clearly, Messrs. Launer and Flesicher aren't alone. "Even in relative terms, analysts remain very bullish on this stock," says Chuck Hill, director of research at Thomson Financial/First Call. The average rating for a stock on Wall Street is 2.2, or slightly shy of a "buy" rating. Enron scores a 1.6. "This may turn into a classic case of locking the barn door after the bad news is out," Mr. Hill says.
In downgrading the stock this week, Prudential analyst Carol Coale bumped it to "sell" from "buy," with a brief stop at "hold." While she is the only analyst to recommend investors sell the stock, she openly concedes her recent downgrades come "too little, too late."
Ms. Coale says Enron has been difficult to cover for years. She says the company's disclosure practices fall far short of ideal, and senior executives are often evasive, even when presented with direct questions. For instance, she says three weeks ago she asked Enron management if the company was under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. They said "no," she says.
In light of the company's acknowledgment this week of an SEC "inquiry," she asked Enron about the previous denial. "They told me it is an inquiry, not an investigation," she says. An Enron spokeswoman says the company learned of the SEC's inquiry only last Wednesday.
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML

The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
If I was an ex-Enron employee and I'd lost my 401K and someone accused me of being greedy, I think I'd smack him in the teeth, to be honest.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
A couple years back we had a flood. A neighbor of mine had his hopuse totally destroyed in the flood and he didn't get anything because he had built in a known flood plain and he couldn't get flood insurance. He was labeled stupid for building where he did.

45 miles down the same river, in the same flood, there were several hundred homes flooded in a new housing addition. All of these people were compensated because it was declared a disaster area. They weren't stupid, they were poor victims, even though they knew they were building in a flood plain.

Stupid is stupid, whether building a house or investing, whether alone or in a group.

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Phlebas
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
I'm sure your neighbor wasn't consistently told by the insurance company, "No! It's safe! Stay there!" as the water was rising, or was not allowed to save any possessions from the flood, or.....

We could beat the analogy to death if we wanted.

Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML

The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Phlebas
Oct 19 2006, 09:21 AM
I'm sure your neighbor wasn't consistently told by the insurance company, "No! It's safe! Stay there!" as the water was rising, or was not allowed to save any possessions from the flood, or.....

We could beat the analogy to death if we wanted.

If I was in the house and the water was rising around it, no one need tell me that it wasn't safe.

I have worked for many companies, and the employees know before anyone when problems start arising.

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Daniel
Oct 17 2006, 10:53 PM
kentcouncil
Oct 17 2006, 07:58 PM
Why is Warren Buffett the most successful investor in history? Primarily because he does not let greed or wishful thinking affect his due diligence.

Right, and he's the second richest man in America and he gives his grandaughter nothing. 40 billion dollars and his grandaughter works as a maid. I'd say that's pretty greedy. Yes.

As for Enron- if people lose their retirements because of crimes committed by their employer it's their fault? No way.

One of the greatest gifts a parent can give a child is opportunity. In America, that usually means education, and the lessons of what hard work can accomplish.

As the black folks say, "Every pot needs to sit on its own bottom".
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Phlebas
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
lb1
Oct 19 2006, 10:03 AM

I have worked for many companies, and the employees know before anyone when problems start arising.


Thanks for telling me what it's like to work for a company. :rolleyes:

No one is disputing whether the investors - of many types - made a mistake in buying Enron or not selling it sooner. History has judged that already. However, when the management, and stock analysts are telling the employees consistently as the price is going down, that it's still a good investment, they are also culpable.

Also, lots of the employees of Enron who lost money were workers (machinists, etc. ) at companies like Portland General, and other utility companies that Enron bought, and they had no clue about energy trading and other operations Enron was involved in. Apparently the auditors and the investment bankers didn't either, so what you said doesn’t wash.
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML

The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kentcouncil
Fulla-Carp
Phlebas
Oct 19 2006, 10:35 AM
Sorry to come back to this, but the fact remains, analysts were pimping the stock well into it's decline. You can't equate the billions of dollars in Enron stock that Lay owned with what an employee had in their 401(k) account. Lay couldn't care about his 401(k) account, he was selling the stock that was granted through options and regular compensation.


I'm not excusing the analysts or the investment bankers, and unforunately at the time most people didn't understand that the in-house analysts for investment banks and stockbrokers were essentially salespeople looking out for their own interests rather than those of investors. But no analyst forces you to buy the stock he or she pimps. YOU are the one who is ultimately responsible for your investment decisions. And the point still is that, no matter what analysts said, there were enough warning signs, including the glaring evidence of Enron's stock price decline over the preceeding months, for any investor to bail out in advance of Enron's collapse. If you hold on to a stock as it declines from $90 to $13, it is perfectly reasonable to question your strategy.

A good rule of thumb is that no more than 5% of the investments you choose for your retirement should consist of a single company's stock. There is more than enough free, good information available for people who want to invest wisely. Unfortunately, most people spend more time doing research for their next TV purchase than they do for their retirement fund.
It was a confusion of ideas between him and one of the lions he was hunting in Kenya that had caused A. B. Spottsworth to make the obituary column. He thought the lion was dead, and the lion thought it wasn't.

- P.G. Wodehouse
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kentcouncil
Fulla-Carp
John D'Oh
Oct 19 2006, 10:36 AM
If I was an ex-Enron employee and I'd lost my 401K and someone accused me of being greedy, I think I'd smack him in the teeth, to be honest.

Not only would I accuse you of being greedy, I would accuse you of being foolish and uninformed as well, to be honest. You have my condolences, but next time, do your homework, and treat your investments with the seriousness they deserve.

Look, it was the same with the tech and dot.com stocks. They were hyped into the stratosphere, analysts couldn't gush enough, we were all told it was the dawn of a new era where the old ways of valuating companies, the old economy in fact, no longer applied. Despite the fact that most of these companies never made a dime in profit and were badly run from the start, despite Greenspan's (admittedly cryptic) warnings, despite Warren Buffett's assertion that he didn't invest in these companies because he didn't understand how they made money (when the world's most successful investor, who has a winning track record extending back nearly 50 years and who is legendary for his ability to crunch a company's numbers, says something like this, you would think that would give most investors pause. Instead, he was derided for being a dinosaur.), people kept pouring money into the bubble, and then lost everything. The initial reaction was: "What happened?", followed quickly by: "Who do I sue?". Nonsense. When a person on the street comes up to you and asks for money, telling you he has a surefire way to make more money that makes absolutely no sense to you, and yet you give him your money, and you lose it... whose fault is it?
It was a confusion of ideas between him and one of the lions he was hunting in Kenya that had caused A. B. Spottsworth to make the obituary column. He thought the lion was dead, and the lion thought it wasn't.

- P.G. Wodehouse
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
So you're telling me that the Nigerian money isn't going to arrive?
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kentcouncil
Fulla-Carp
Oh no, Nigerian investments are safe. I'm waiting for my $30 million. Any day now.
It was a confusion of ideas between him and one of the lions he was hunting in Kenya that had caused A. B. Spottsworth to make the obituary column. He thought the lion was dead, and the lion thought it wasn't.

- P.G. Wodehouse
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
When I was 14 and 15 years old, I had a morning paper route. I always carried a couple extra copies in case I needed them or someone passing wanted to buy a copy. On my route was a guy (not a customer) who had been the CFO of a local company and had retired at 54 years old. I don’t know where he got the money to retire, but I assume that it was in part because of his investing in the stock market. I would pass his house on my way home at the end of my route and he would always be waiting on the porch and he would offer me a nickel (half price) for one of my extra copies so he could check the stock market page.

When this guy was 57 he invested in a new start up company and got a great return. It was so good that he cashed in all of his other investments, his retirement, and even mortgaged his home, to invest in this company. He was so sure of this that he convinced friends and relatives to invest also. Two years later he had lost everything and the company was bankrupt. He got up one morning, showered, shaved, put on his best suit, and went out in the back yard and hung himself in an apple tree. I found him on my way home from my paper route.

Everyone pitied him and said that poor old Ray was a victim and was taken advantage of. Ray was a cheap greedy a**hole and he was a victim of his own actions. People have to take responsibility for their actions; no one forces them to invest even if the experts are telling them it is a good thing. Greed is a vice and it has destroyed many people.
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dave Spelvin
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Do you think the SEC should be abolished? After all, if people should take personal responsibility for the risks they take, then why do we need the government interfering with a pure market? Won't the market be a better place when there's no oversight? Sure, there'll be scum out there, but fraud will be punished by the drop in stock price when stockholders stay away from dirty companies, after, of course, the criminals have sold out and moved to a private island somewhere. Those who invest in the fraudulent companies, well, tough luck. They should have diversified. Hopefully at least some of their shares will have some actual value. Hardcore, unbridled capitalism at its finest.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Phlebas
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
I don't have a problem with capitalism. I do, however, think it's funny that many people on the one hand expect that we should go for the "American Dream," by working, investing, and becoming prosperous; but call us greedy ***holes, when that's what we try to do.

People do get suckered, and in many cases it's their own fault. My point is the scam artists shouldn't get a free ride.
Random FML: Today, I was fired by my boss in front of my coworkers. It would have been nice if I could have left the building before they started celebrating. FML

The founding of the bulk of the world's nation states post 1914 is based on self-defined nationalisms. The bulk of those national movements involve territory that was ethnically mixed. The foundation of many of those nation states involved population movements in the aftermath. When the only one that is repeatedly held up as unjust and unjustifiable is the Zionist project, the term anti-semitism may very well be appropriate. - P*D


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lb1
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Phlebas
Oct 19 2006, 12:38 PM
I don't have a problem with capitalism. I do, however, think it's funny that many people on the one hand expect that we should go for the "American Dream," by working, investing, and becoming prosperous; but call us greedy ***holes, when that's what we try to do.

People do get suckered, and in many cases it's their own fault. My point is the scam artists shouldn't get a free ride.

Your greedy when you make investments you can't afford to lose, and an a**hole when you whine about losing it and try to blame someone besides yourself.

lb
My position is simple: you jumped to an unwarranted conclusion and slung mud on an issue where none was deserved. Quirt 03/08/09
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
lb1
Oct 19 2006, 02:54 PM
Your greedy when you make investments you can't afford to lose, and an a**hole when you whine about losing it and try to blame someone besides yourself.

lb

Let me make sure I have this right:

Ken Lay manages to bamboozle the best minds on Wall Street while he steals the company blind - that makes him a hero.

The guy who scrubbed the floors in the corporate palace for 30 years, all the while socking away part of his paycheck for retirement, only to find it all gone when it was too late to start over - he's greedy.

Yeah, right.
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
I'm sorry, I missed the part where someone described Ken Lay as a hero.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
JBryan
Oct 19 2006, 07:13 PM
I'm sorry, I missed the part where someone described Ken Lay as a hero.

Didja miss the second part too?
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
No, I got that. I was puzzled by the part my post should have clearly indicated.
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
JBryan
Oct 19 2006, 07:37 PM
No, I got that. I was puzzled by the part my post should have clearly indicated.

He was smart enough to get all the money - unlike his greedy investors.

Wouldn't you say that makes him a hero?
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JBryan
Member Avatar
I am the grey one
So, it is you who is making the case for him being a hero?
"Any man who would make an X rated movie should be forced to take his daughter to see it". - John Wayne


There is a line we cross when we go from "I will believe it when I see it" to "I will see it when I believe it".


Henry II: I marvel at you after all these years. Still like a democratic drawbridge: going down for everybody.

Eleanor: At my age there's not much traffic anymore.

From The Lion in Winter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Thanks, JB, I was going to make the same query but got distracted by UFC Unleashed.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Daniel\
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Steve Miller
Oct 19 2006, 06:05 PM
The guy who scrubbed the floors in the corporate palace for 30 years, all the while socking away part of his paycheck for retirement, only to find it all gone when it was too late to start over - he's greedy.

I know. Right?

That guy is a Loser. L for short.

He was greedy AND stupid.

:yawn:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2