--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vedic bonds? I don't think so! No reputable or > > disreputable financial institution is going to touch > > anything in the movement. They'll do their due > > diligence and very quickly conclude that the TMO and > > MMY are profoundly unstable and an exceedingly high > > financial risk. > > Ya never know. In some important respects, the > TMO does business pretty much the way that Enron > did, and until the bubble burst, Enron was the > darling of the investment banks. > > One of my favorite of Enron's scams (written up > in, I think, Fortune) was when they went to invest- > ment banks to get capital for a new joint venture > company they were planning with Blockbuster Video. > It sounded a bit dicey, but with the combination > of the Enron name and the Blockbuster name, the > banks loaned the new front company billions of > dollars in startup money. > > It turns out that Blockbuster had *never* agreed > to be part of the scheme, recognizing it as a > scam at first sight. But Enron told the banks > that Blockbuster was a solid partner anyway. 2-3 > weeks after the money had been transferred to the > new startup company, lo and behold! the company > had declared bankruptcy and none of the money > could be found; the banks lost every penny of > their investment That had been Enron's plan all > along. > > Compare and contrast to the TMO's history of > projects like Vedaland, the new "world's tallest > building," etc. Same business model -- get naive > people excited enough about a project to invest > money in it, have the project "fail," keep the > money. > > All I can say is, if this is how being in tune > with the "Laws Of Nature" works, I'll stick to > being adharmic.
Not really a good representation of the Enron Blockbuster joint venture*, but if your point is that Enron used smoke and mirrors to fool the investment community for some time -- before the weight of their distortions and schemes fell apart, and the TMO may try the same, perhaps there is a parallel. The problem is, Enron wasfor some years a succesful, powerful and "respected" company based on real assets and earnings, prior to its shenanigans. It had a track record of real earnings and "trust" among investors, upon which to take advantage. The TMO has neither. * 1) It was a joint venture between Blockbuster and Enron. Blockbuster most certainly agreed to be a part of the joint venture. After some time, they backed out. 2) Investment bankers don't typically make "loans" -- they invest venture capital for a piece of the ownership of the company or venture -- a claim on future earnings. 3) the investment banks do their own due dilligence -- and are usually quite hard nosed about it. They business plan for the venture projected huge returns -- and there was some sneaky accounting involved -- I forget the details. But the investment bankers were "taken" by their own incompetence in not digging deeper into the numbers. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
