PDA

View Full Version : Ken Lay dies of heart attack


Bootlegged
07-05-2006, 09:05 AM
.

Saulbadguy
07-05-2006, 09:06 AM
Lucky.

ChiefsfaninPA
07-05-2006, 09:07 AM
I just knew that somehow he was going to avoid jail.

StcChief
07-05-2006, 09:09 AM
One more open slot... That will save tax payers.

Bwana
07-05-2006, 09:10 AM
That's to bad. I wanted to see him spend some time behind bars to pay for his part in screwing all those people.

ChiefsfaninPA
07-05-2006, 09:12 AM
I wonder if stress had anything to do with this?:hmmm:

Frazod
07-05-2006, 09:14 AM
That's to bad. I wanted to see him spend some time behind bars to pay for his part in screwing all those people.

Yeah, but the roasting in hell forever part kind of makes up for it. PBJ

the Talking Can
07-05-2006, 09:14 AM
karma






bitch

Bwana
07-05-2006, 09:17 AM
Yeah, but the roasting in hell forever part kind of makes up for it. PBJ

Point taken Tim. :)

Cochise
07-05-2006, 09:42 AM
We probably spent tens of millions of dollars trying to put him in prison, and now he won't get to enjoy any of it.

ChiefsfaninPA
07-05-2006, 09:46 AM
We probably spent tens of millions of dollars trying to put him in prison, and now he won't get to enjoy any of it.

It's the continual fleecing of America by Ken Lay.

Frazod
07-05-2006, 09:50 AM
There's an actual story on Drudge now.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/05/D8ILSUMG0.html

sedated
07-05-2006, 09:54 AM
it's a fake.

bush helped him escape the country

jlscorpio
07-05-2006, 10:15 AM
you gotta love divine justice...

Rooster
07-05-2006, 10:15 AM
It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy... :cuss:

noa
07-05-2006, 10:19 AM
I was hoping to see him in a prison jump suit, but I guess a casket will do the job. That man, along with Skilling, Fastow, and all of the financial advisers who helped, ruined so many people's retirements out of greed. No punishment would be good enough for what they did.

ChiTown
07-05-2006, 10:20 AM
karma






bitch

Actually, the d-bag got off pretty easy, imo................

Cochise
07-05-2006, 10:27 AM
I was hoping to see him in a prison jump suit, but I guess a casket will do the job. That man, along with Skilling, Fastow, and all of the financial advisers who helped, ruined so many people's retirements out of greed. No punishment would be good enough for what they did.

I feel sorry for these people who ostensibly lost a lot of money, but if Enron hadn't been doing all this shady accounting, what should these enormous retirement accounts have really been worth?

I mean, you can't accuse them of falsely inflating the stock price without acknwoledging that these retirement accounts were also falsely inflated. A big chunk of the money people lost was money that they never really had anyways.

I sympathize in that they were financially planning around all this money that they thought they were worth. But basing your financial strategy on only one stock is still extremely reckless. People who lost a percentage of their worth I feel bad for. But the people who the news media dredged up, claiming they had lost 95% of their portfolio because of the Enron stock collapse... well... duh.

A thief is a thief, but it doesn't mean you are blameless for letting him in.

banyon
07-05-2006, 10:37 AM
http://www.cornelschneider.ch/images/Geige03.jpg

Rain Man
07-05-2006, 10:40 AM
it's a fake.


He's probably in South America now in some big jungle estate, surrounded by stolen works of art and big fields of coca.

noa
07-05-2006, 10:40 AM
I feel sorry for these people who ostensibly lost a lot of money, but if Enron hadn't been doing all this shady accounting, what should these enormous retirement accounts have really been worth?

I mean, you can't accuse them of falsely inflating the stock price without acknwoledging that these retirement accounts were also falsely inflated. A big chunk of the money people lost was money that they never really had anyways.

I sympathize in that they were financially planning around all this money that they thought they were worth. But basing your financial strategy on only one stock is still extremely reckless. People who lost a percentage of their worth I feel bad for. But the people who the news media dredged up, claiming they had lost 95% of their portfolio because of the Enron stock collapse... well... duh.

A thief is a thief, but it doesn't mean you are blameless for letting him in.


Yes, I agree, their stocks were definitely over-inflated. However, once the stocks hit a certain point, the company frooze their employee's ability to cash in their stocks while the executives did just that. There was still a chance for the employees to get some value out of their retirement savings, but the company prevented them from doing that. Also, after the executives knew things were starting to turn for the worse, they were still telling all their employees to buy more stock and put all of their money back into the company at employee conferences, while the executives themselves were slowly withdrawing money and pulling out.

htismaqe
07-05-2006, 10:42 AM
Yes, I agree, their stocks were definitely over-inflated. However, once the stocks hit a certain point, the company frooze their employee's ability to cash in their stocks while the executives did just that. There was still a chance for the employees to get some value out of their retirement savings, but the company prevented them from doing that. Also, after the executives knew things were starting to turn for the worse, they were still telling all their employees to buy more stock and put all of their money back into the company at employee conferences, while the executives themselves were slowly withdrawing money and pulling out.

Yep.

Rain Man
07-05-2006, 10:44 AM
I feel sorry for these people who ostensibly lost a lot of money, but if Enron hadn't been doing all this shady accounting, what should these enormous retirement accounts have really been worth?

I mean, you can't accuse them of falsely inflating the stock price without acknwoledging that these retirement accounts were also falsely inflated. A big chunk of the money people lost was money that they never really had anyways.

I sympathize in that they were financially planning around all this money that they thought they were worth. But basing your financial strategy on only one stock is still extremely reckless. People who lost a percentage of their worth I feel bad for. But the people who the news media dredged up, claiming they had lost 95% of their portfolio because of the Enron stock collapse... well... duh.

A thief is a thief, but it doesn't mean you are blameless for letting him in.

I dunno if I agree with that. The people who lost most of their money are guilty of not diversifying their portfolio and getting a little greedy, but they should have a right to assume that the finances of the company they're investing in are not blatant lies. They were investing in a stock of a company that was showing great growth and performance.

ChiTown
07-05-2006, 10:48 AM
I dunno if I agree with that. The people who lost most of their money are guilty of not diversifying their portfolio and getting a little greedy, but they should have a right to assume that the finances of the company they're investing in are not blatant lies. They were investing in a stock of a company that was showing great growth and performance.

:clap:

My FIL (former Enron Employee - now retired) lost $2.5MM in stock and options that he could not access. He was re-investing bonus' and income into a company he believed in. Over-inflated value? You bet. However, they lost a lot more than just the value - they lost the entire nest egg as well.

Cochise
07-05-2006, 11:08 AM
:clap:

My FIL (former Enron Employee - now retired) lost $2.5MM in stock and options that he could not access. He was re-investing bonus' and income into a company he believed in. Over-inflated value? You bet. However, they lost a lot more than just the value - they lost the entire nest egg as well.

I'm not saying they weren't defrauded, I'm just saying that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket. Know what I mean?

the Talking Can
07-05-2006, 11:08 AM
http://www.cornelschneider.ch/images/Geige03.jpg
ROFL

beavis
07-05-2006, 11:14 AM
:clap:

My FIL (former Enron Employee - now retired) lost $2.5MM in stock and options that he could not access. He was re-investing bonus' and income into a company he believed in. Over-inflated value? You bet. However, they lost a lot more than just the value - they lost the entire nest egg as well.
How did they make his stock and options inaccessable? Usually, the terms of that are laid down when you buy the stock... you got me wondering if it's in the fine print in mine too.

ChiTown
07-05-2006, 11:20 AM
I'm not saying they weren't defrauded, I'm just saying that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket. Know what I mean?

Sure, but that's not the point, is it?

I don't know who you work for, but in the Oil & Gas Industry, it's pretty common to have bonus' and salary roll into stock. It wasn't everything my FIL had, but it was a damn good chunk. It wasn't like they had a good stock reading for 6-12 months and everyone started pouring their money into the company. This was a company that had been ticking up in a huge way since the early 90's. So, you can imagine the wealth that was built up over a 10+ yr period.

ChiTown
07-05-2006, 11:24 AM
How did they make his stock and options inaccessable? Usually, the terms of that are laid down when you buy the stock... you got me wondering if it's in the fine print in mine too.

Not inaccessable to the point where he couldn't physically get his money out. Sorry, I didn't mean to leave you with that impression. They told their mid level execs that, for the good of the company, they needed to keep their stock in the company, and not to excercise the options during certain times. Essentially, the value of the options were depleted or went dead. You know what happened to the value of the stock.

Cochise
07-05-2006, 11:25 AM
Sure, but that's not the point, is it?


I dunno. I thought it was the point.

It seems like an assumption of a lot of additional risk to sink millions into a single stock, no matter how good its past performance was.

The reason all this risk was taken was because of the promise that Enron might yield higher returns than safer investments. For higher potential of return you have to assume more risk. That's how it works.

noa
07-05-2006, 11:25 AM
How did they make his stock and options inaccessable? Usually, the terms of that are laid down when you buy the stock... you got me wondering if it's in the fine print in mine too.


Yeah, I'm not sure how they pulled that one off. I have a feeling its not something that can be done to just any stock. Maybe its just something that can be done to employees and the stock they have in their own company. I learned about it by watching "The Smartest Guys in the Room," which is a pointed attack on Lay, Skilling, and Fastow. It does a good job of documenting exactly what Enron did and how they screwed their employees. Obviously, I already forgot the some of the finer details, but I remember the main point, which was that Lay, Skilling, and Fastow were greedy people who didn't act alone...they were helped by major banks and financial advising companies. There's a lot of people to blame for the Enron disaster.

ChiTown
07-05-2006, 11:29 AM
I dunno. I thought it was the point. It seems like an assumption of a lot of additional risk to sink millions into a single stock, no matter how well its past performance was.

Risk, yes. But if you worked for the company, and you knew something was going down, you would have sold off immediately, and got a much out as you could. Most of these people either didn't have the knowledge, or didn't have the ability to get their money out like the top level guys did in their overnight sell offs.

Rain Man
07-05-2006, 11:29 AM
How did they make his stock and options inaccessable? Usually, the terms of that are laid down when you buy the stock... you got me wondering if it's in the fine print in mine too.

Way back when I worked at a big company, we could invest in a retirement plan and the company would match some contributions. The contributions were all matched with company stock, and I could be wrong, but I thought we weren't allowed to sell it for some specific time period.

In that case, any losses would not be investment losses, but rather lost "free money", which isn't as bad, but it's still bad.

htismaqe
07-05-2006, 11:30 AM
Sure, but that's not the point, is it?

I don't know who you work for, but in the Oil & Gas Industry, it's pretty common to have bonus' and salary roll into stock. It wasn't everything my FIL had, but it was a damn good chunk. It wasn't like they had a good stock reading for 6-12 months and everyone started pouring their money into the company. This was a company that had been ticking up in a huge way since the early 90's. So, you can imagine the wealth that was built up over a 10+ yr period.

Same thing happened here.

The guy that sits next to me had been investing in 401k and employee stock plan for SEVENTEEN YEARS, dating back to MCI/Teleconnect. Alot of times, instead of doling out cash bonuses, the company rolled the bonus into 401k or ESPP. At that time, the employee could only diversify their contribution to the 401k. I think this was common practice in the 90's for companies to "match" 401k contributions, but put the matching funds directly into company stock.

When Worldcom bought MCI, it was business as usual, until the scandal broke. He not only lost all of his Worldcom investment (4 years worth) but also ALL of his former MCI investment (13 years worth).

Cochise
07-05-2006, 11:32 AM
Risk, yes. But if you worked for the company, and you knew something was going down, you would have sold off immediately, and got a much out as you could. Most of these people either didn't have the knowledge, or didn't have the ability to get their money out like the top level guys did in their overnight sell offs.

Yes, there was insider trading and there were other crimes for which people should be held accountable. But the principle of a single stock being a very poor large-scale investing strategy for an individual has never changed.

htismaqe
07-05-2006, 11:33 AM
I dunno. I thought it was the point.

It seems like an assumption of a lot of additional risk to sink millions into a single stock, no matter how good its past performance was.

The reason all this risk was taken was because of the promise that Enron might yield higher returns than safer investments. For higher potential of return you have to assume more risk. That's how it works.

In a lot of cases, these people aren't "investing" anything. It's part of their base compensation.

Cochise
07-05-2006, 11:36 AM
In a lot of cases, these people aren't "investing" anything. It's part of their base compensation.

I remember hearing about that, but it's still the same principle IMO. In taking that position where there is compulsory investment in lieu of a cash salary, aren't you doing the same thing as if you got on etrade and manually bought the stock out of your own investment account?

ChiTown
07-05-2006, 11:36 AM
Yes, there was insider trading and there were other crimes for which people should be held accountable. But the principle of a single stock being a very poor large-scale investing strategy for an individual has never changed.

Can't argue that.

That said, there was a helluvalot of that sort of thing going on in the 90's. Enron employees weren't the only ones to get stung by that strategy.......

BucEyedPea
07-05-2006, 11:38 AM
Maybe if the govt didn't force Enron into giving stock options to their employees more would have been spared too. :hmmm:

Cochise
07-05-2006, 11:45 AM
Can't argue that.

That said, there was a helluvalot of that sort of thing going on in the 90's. Enron employees weren't the only ones to get stung by that strategy.......

Yeah, reminds me of a lot of how the 90s bubble turned out on a larger scale. I'm sure tons of people lost money having worked for stock only or with big investments in .com companies too.

Mr. Laz
07-05-2006, 11:45 AM
lucky fugger ..... death is easier than jail.

BucEyedPea
07-05-2006, 11:52 AM
Yeah, reminds me of a lot of how the 90s bubble turned out on a larger scale. I'm sure tons of people lost money having worked for stock only or with big investments in .com companies too.

I lost some money in a .com company and I shoulda listened to a friend of mine NOT to which was .coms weren't making any REAL money and it was ALL speculative. People tryin' to make money or get rich on paper isn't exactly all that ethical either.

Rain Man
07-05-2006, 11:55 AM
Yeah, reminds me of a lot of how the 90s bubble turned out on a larger scale. I'm sure tons of people lost money having worked for stock only or with big investments in .com companies too.

I know a marketing firm that worked for tech companies in the 90s, and their deal was that they would work for stock. It worked well for a while, but when the crash came it took the marketing company down with it.

sedated
07-05-2006, 11:58 AM
what's all this talk about stock?
didn't ken lay invent the potato chip?

I don't like lay's, anyway

I like guys

htismaqe
07-05-2006, 11:59 AM
I remember hearing about that, but it's still the same principle IMO. In taking that position where there is compulsory investment in lieu of a cash salary, aren't you doing the same thing as if you got on etrade and manually bought the stock out of your own investment account?

Your argument holds water for someone like me. I could just tell them no thanks and take a different job. In fact, I've done just that.

But your argument doesn't hold too well for people like the guy sitting next to me, who had been with the company for over a decade before this comp policy was forced upon him.

KCFalcon59
07-05-2006, 12:26 PM
I like guys

ewwww..... :Lin:


NTTAWWT.

Deberg_1990
07-05-2006, 05:43 PM
Poetic Justice

FAX
07-05-2006, 05:51 PM
Here lies the body of old Ken Lay.
Lay's layoff is lately in layers of clay.

FAX

Herzig
07-05-2006, 05:54 PM
I like guys

you homo

kcfanintitanhell
07-05-2006, 06:33 PM
He's probably in South America now in some big jungle estate, surrounded by stolen works of art and big fields of coca.

I just hope that it's an open casket funeral in Houston, or wherever, so everyone can see the body. If it's a closed casket funeral, I hope someone starts asking some questions about "Kenny boy".

Adept Havelock
07-05-2006, 06:43 PM
Too many french fries.