Ronn Blankenship wrote:
>
> At 03:28 PM 1/30/02, Julia wrote:
>
> >Speaking of which, I've been sort of surprised that no one has been
> >talking about the whole Enron mess here yet.
>
> What's to talk about? Greedy company executives get all they can and then
> leave the little guy holding the bag�again. And the ones responsible won't
> be going to jail as they should.
>
> >whose household's portfolio is a lot more diversified than that of many
> >former Enron employees
>
> Do you work for a company that requires that you purchase their stock for
> your retirement plan?
No. Actually, I don't work for a company.
Dan's company doesn't require him to have their stock in his 401(K). I
think he's got a number of options as to what mutual funds he can buy
into for that. He is able to buy company stock at a discount, though,
and does so. He also buys all sorts of other stocks, in different
sectors.
What we're finding interesting here is that Dan's father had stock in
Enron, which he unloaded over the summer. He gave as his reason that
there wasn't anything *to* the company to justify the stock price any
longer, that it was just a shell. If some Joe E. Engineer could see
that, why didn't the people who are paid to evaluate stocks and run
mutual funds see that?
Julia
