This website requires Javascript to function properly. Please go to the setting of your web browser and enable Javascript for this website.

Ad by

最优利率和cashback可以申请特批，好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询，Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。

Ad by

最优利率和cashback可以申请特批，好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询，Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。

As of right now, there is no evidence indicating there is anything wrong with the accounting that was done, the unaffliated partnership only pertains to about 20% of the restatement

slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎)

first thing, enron failed because it was in the trading business, this company had lost its credibility over the years, no one wanted to trade with it anymore, that's why it failed

the idea is that, I will sell you my house which is worth 100 dollars for 100 dollars, and I agree to buy it back for a 100 dollars tomorrow, is there a transaction to be recorded? No, therefore it is not going on to the statements

another question, I will sell you my partnership which is worth 100 dollars for a 100 dollars, and I am granting you the option to buy it back if the house price goes down to 1 dollar, is there a transaction to be recorded? again,the answer is no,

that was the accounting involved, and it is not illegal, people got greedy, should've sold the stocks when it hit 80 bux

(#360773@0)
Last Updated: 2002-2-6
This post has been archived. It cannot be replied.

Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

枫下茶话 / 法律 / 同志们, 如果有谁在follow Enron的案子, 本猪有内部消息跟大家分析 -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-6 (#360726@0)

讲吧讲吧。 -suis(颠三倒四); 2002-2-6 (#360729@0)
请，很感兴趣。 -janeft(jane); 2002-2-6 (#360732@0)

我是说如果您有问题主席可以回答... -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-6 (#360740@0)

美国不接纳 IASC的理由之一是它不如USGap的监督能力强，为什么US SEC 在这么长的时间里都没有发现Enron的这种大胆而原里并不太复杂的欺骗手法？ -janeft(jane); 2002-2-6 (#360745@0)

The misconception comes from that people not understanding enough PAT accounting to make a judgement, the off b/s financing is not illegal, fact is, they are -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-6 {759} (#360760@0)
very common within the governence of GAAP, Enron didn't not failed on the off b/s financing, it failed because of a faulted business model, The is investigating the part where enron "misled" the investors, the accounting is not the focus here

As with regards to the Fifth, you have to know the contest we are in, this is not a trial, the federal grand jury is conducting an investigation, Per the fifth, I have to right to not answer any question which answers can be used against me. When it comes to a trial, then ken lay would still use the same Fifth under a different context, there is very little you can get from him.

for example, when it comes to a trial, Ken Lay is being asked, did you kill cliff baxter, he has the right not to answer

再请教你：Fifth Amendment是怎么回事？如果Lay 坚持使用Fifth Amendment, 而Enron又shred了证具，调查者还能有什么办法吗? -janeft(jane); 2002-2-6 (#360746@0)

第5修正案的禁止双重审判，强迫自供，无合法程序剥夺生命，自由和财产的权利 -heian(㊣黑暗天使); 2002-2-6 {107} (#360764@0)
但是如果没有卷入任何犯罪行为，控方为了搜集证据而询问而不是控告，被问讯方没有条件使用第5修正案。

我的理解

比如如果你是知情人，但是没有参与犯罪（假设杀人）。控方在询问你的时候（你宣誓后）：他杀人没有？你不能说谎，同时你不能使用第5修正案。 -heian(㊣黑暗天使); 2002-2-6 (#360769@0)

本来挺关心的，可是每个教授都要就次故弄玄虚的讲一讲，现在我是彻底迷糊了。欢迎你用中文西方的观点再讲一讲。 -tropicalfish(霸王恐龙); 2002-2-6 {246} (#360755@0)
学会计的真可怜啊。下星期1个ASSIGNMENT2个PROJECT还有MIDTERM，再下星期还有那么多量的作业，和又一个MIDTERM。明天毕业了，薪水少的可怜。熬到PARTNER，还要被逼着作假帐。出了事，自己都得兜着。等到您主席这级别的，整个一活雷锋，下班还要给大家免费上课。：P

As of right now, there is no evidence indicating there is anything wrong with the accounting that was done, the unaffliated partnership only pertains to about 20% of the restatement -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-6 {796} (#360773@0)
first thing, enron failed because it was in the trading business, this company had lost its credibility over the years, no one wanted to trade with it anymore, that's why it failed

the idea is that, I will sell you my house which is worth 100 dollars for 100 dollars, and I agree to buy it back for a 100 dollars tomorrow, is there a transaction to be recorded? No, therefore it is not going on to the statements

another question, I will sell you my partnership which is worth 100 dollars for a 100 dollars, and I am granting you the option to buy it back if the house price goes down to 1 dollar, is there a transaction to be recorded? again,the answer is no,

that was the accounting involved, and it is not illegal, people got greedy, should've sold the stocks when it hit 80 bux

anyway, they should have disclosed it. -tropicalfish(霸王恐龙); 2002-2-6 (#360883@0)

you haven't read a word I said have you -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-6 (#360892@0)

I mean it is not obliaged for them to disclose it. but, as a responsible accountant, they should have done that. right. there are always some loopholes. -tropicalfish(霸王恐龙); 2002-2-6 (#360900@0)
oh -tropicalfish(霸王恐龙); 2002-2-7 {47} (#360981@0)
没被我气死吧。做作业，脑子作木了。sorry sorry:P

请问：安达信会不会成为集体诉讼的被告？ -bingle(bingle); 2002-2-7 (#360928@0)

Without a doubt, if you are at the scene of the accident, you are gonna pay, the misunderstanding is that people think class-action is a big deal, that's nothing to worry about, money at this point is not the issue... -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-7 (#361132@0)

这里面有没有能让我们大伙儿赚点钱的机会? -eglington(eglington); 2002-2-7 (#360941@0)

还是蛋同志脑袋清醒, 干畜生的就是高 -slimpiggy(瘦猪犹如插翅虎); 2002-2-7 (#361131@0)

@Calgary

As of right now, there is no evidence indicating there is anything wrong with the accounting that was done, the unaffliated partnership only pertains to about 20% of the restatement

Replies, comments and Discussions:

More Topics