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.

Non-Tech : Derivatives: Darth Vader's Revenge -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ahda who wrote (1029)	12/2/2001 1:21:43 PM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2794

Hi Darleen, nice to see you again as well. I guess a lot of it depends where all the losses hit. As I just posted on the currency thread it appears a lot of the short dated debt wound up in Japan. For some reason I wasn't surprised. As to the audit from what I've seen and heard it really shouldn't have been that difficult to spot. The questionable aspects of the partnerships were neither obscure nor hidden. It should have been spotted and disclosed. As to the deal itself, I don't think it says anything one way or the other about any systemic riskd in the system. This was not a complex risky deal structure that got in trouble. It was a structure used simply, it appears, to obscure and prevent the reporting of straightforward bad business decisions. Bad decisions that most other businesses in this sector have already fessed up to. Using partnerships in this manner is to my opinion fraudulent and will lead to serious legal recourse from the SEC. But I don't think it points to similar business risks out there.