Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The California Energy Crisis - Information & Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel G. DeBusschere who wrote (797)	8/2/2001 5:33:15 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1715

Hi Dan, . But you have to keep the nasty stockholders happy or they will vote you out. How can the stockholders in PG&E vote Glynn out? He's cleverly constructed a "trust" that insulates him and his cronies from responsibility for the losses that all around them are suffering. His gloating while he destroys a formerly excellent and stable company is completely reprehensible. I'm afraid I simply cannot share Randy Newman's cynical viewpoint that "it's money that matters, in the ol' USA." Apparently you and Glynn take solace in this one-dimensional view of the world. I tend to think in term of communities, the commonwealth of the nation and the integration of the disparate aspects of the modern economy into a functioning whole. You all seem to be wreckers. Destroying for the sake of greed. I find that vulgar. And in a decent society, Glynn's callous and irresponsible words will come back to haunt him. He seems to be a latter day Ivan Boesky, trading on his insider knowledge and skimming a system he helped to break. What a scum-bucket. Best, Ray :)

To: Daniel G. DeBusschere who wrote (797)	8/2/2001 11:04:03 PM
From: portage	Respond to of 1715

Oh yeah, Glynn, LOL....I almost forgot about that shiny-headed doofus. He's the guy who said a few years ago that PG&E would take all the risk of price increases on the upside if they could capture the excess profits when the prices went down (which they did). But then he turns around, whines about gamed prices and the retail cap, while he's shoveling all the former profits to the ring-fenced parent, conveniently forgetting his earlier promise, no doubt. Let's all now bow down to the great captains of industry. Then along comes the patsy bankruptcy judge to not only approve the ring-fencing, but to authorize a doubling of salary bonus for Glynn and his head clowns so they can retain this "top talent" during the bankruptcy hearings. Seems like the rest of us are lucky to get a 10% bonus in a year when we actually do well. This guy makes hubris look like the corner beggar. UFB. This must be what the Roman Empire looked like just before it collapsed. Something tells me he'll be hung out to dry before this is all over. Maybe we should send Gray Davis a copy of these quotes and see how he deals with PG&E from here on out ........ could be time to confiscate some assets, heh heh. Dan, you're a regular fount of anti-deregulation supporting evidence. Seems to me, in a totally deregulated market, they'd all build capacity only up to the point where they could shoot prices to the roof while they game supply to at least 1% below demand (the Zeuspaul theorem). Then, all the windfall profits go out of state to play the game somewhere else, while the in-state infrastructure rots away, leaving even worse supply shortages. This dog ain't gonna hunt - the question is just how long it takes joe six pack to wake up to it.