Kevin T. wrote: > > > > > > Now there's a new twist. How, exactly, did Ken > > > Lay bilk his employees? > > >
Matt Grimaldi wrote: > > The argument would probably go along the lines: > > (snip argument list) Kevin T. wrote: > Right. My point would be that > > a) the employees were not limited to only Enron stock > b) they only ones who lost 90% would be ones who bought all > of their shares right at the end. "Hey look at all the > money everyone is making, I better shift all my funds > to stocks!" > c) in the same vein, they certainly weren't unhappy when > the stock price was going up. I agree that there should be a limit to how much the employees get to complain about losing money, as they did assume risk when buying the stock and their case is being stated at its extreme limits, almost to the point of hype. However, that doesn't let the people (mis)managing the 401k fund and the businesses that they invested in, such as Enron itself, off the hook either. They botched their duty to provide competent stewardship of other people's money, acting in a way that certainly could be described as suspicious. > And unfortunatly 'options' are the way to go. How many > Microsoft millionares are there, people who got stock at > [less than a] dollar and were able to sell it later > for 50 to 100 times that? Other companies see that, and > the employees, and want the same thing. Stock options are a valid incentive inducement, but should not be "off the balance sheets" as they are today. Also, people should be more aware of what it means to have stock options, how to use them, and what the risks are. Perhaps there should be a "fundamentals of finance" class as part of basic education. A class to discuss these things, as well as loans (credit cards, auto loans, mortgages, etc.) and the various savings and investment tools, such as money markets, stock trading, CDs, foreign currency exchange, etc.) that are around, how they work, and what the risks and rewards are for each of them. > Hey it sucks for me too. My money is all in one basket and > has lost almost half of it's value, and I don't have the > money now to buy, to dollar cost average my losses. But > I'm not looking to get rich quick either. I'll be glad > (and lucky) to get a 6% gain this year. We have 6 years > of 22% gains and people start thinking it's forever. They certainly were talking like it was forever, even some of the experts tried to explain that the "old rules" just didn't apply any more. The funny thing that seems to have been swept under the rug about Enron stock was how in the late 1990's, even the experts were saying "Well, there's some tricky and creative accounting going on, and we don't really understand what they're doing, but the stock just keeps getting more valuable. What the hell, invest!" -- Matt ROU Why haven't they even indicted any Enron execs yet?
